cv fib


i have successfully interviewed at an asset management firm and have gotten a job offer and start date.

except there is one problem, my CV states i got a 2:1, i did not, i got a 2:2 - and they are asking for certificates on my first day

now i know what i did was plain wrong and not smart, but hear me out, the simple reason why i put a 2:1 on my CV is simply to get interview experience, with a 2:2 i dont even get a second look - i figured that eventually when i did get an interview based on my real grades i would have some solid interview experience to perform well

my dilemma comes from the fact that this is such a great opportunity i am loathed to give it up.

i performed really well on my interview and the feedback i got was they were very impressed - they also offered me a pretty generous wage, so i know they like me.

i also know that the one of the strongest factors in getting the job was based on previous experience - not my degree which they hardly asked me about, if at all, therefore in one sense it feels like it was less of a deception.

however having said that i am not comfortable with lying or deceiving, i dont mean to sound arrogant but i have excelled in my current job and i know i can do well in this new job.

can anyone please advice on a way to handle this or the sensible thing to do?

one of the options i am considering is to tell my recruitment agent the truth and see if the company still want me, however i still feel a little uncomfortable with this, any ideas, i have been stressing about this for a week and cant think about anything else!!


Well I have a 2:1. Would you mind referring me. I will generously contribute 10% of my salary to you every month!!


To help,

People like you make me sick, you have conned your way into that job and robbed someone more deserving of you, an opportunity of a job. you obviously didnt work hard in your degree and thats why you came out with a 2.2 and have only yourself to blame. Personally i hope the company find out and sue you for the time wasted. I just feel sorry for the honest people who didnt lie and cheat. As for not being able to think about anything else, good. I hope the rest of your career is with Mcdonalds.


To Gradrecuiter,

I totally disagree with you im affraid. Do you not see the fundamental problem with this? As for it being a mistake what a load of rubbish it states in his original post it was intentional, a mistake would be an accident or something. Did this guy not think after he started going through all the stages and final interviews that there was a possibility of actually getting the job? Only a complete idiot wouldnt think of the consequenses, when he started going through the stages he should have bowed out and let someone more deserving (ie didnt lie cheat etc) get the job. After going through a lengthy and challenging process myself, it angers me to think people were not being truthful and trying to con their way to success. Yeah this site is for helping people but its also a place to discuss and debate topics and therefore, what im doing. On a personal level how would you feel if it was you that was overlooked for a position because someone lied.


some points to clarify;

-i have no intention of taking the job through deception, i was only asking about options, i have not actually “taken” the job
-i have a current job, to take a 5050 gamble and find myself unemployed and very embarrassed is clearly not worth it
-“coming clean” is also something i am not comfortable with, at the end of the day i want a job where i feel i can work with nothing hanging over my head, i dont want my colleagues thinking that i am dishonest, i might be in a great job but i would not feel right

thanks for the advice grad recruiter, my caps lock is dodgy

my biggest dilemma is that they did in fact like me quite a bit, and i dont think my degree classification is actually vital to the job

however having said that “coming clean” represents a risk and then a personal conflict which i would not be able to get my head around

NUFC - why i got a 2:2 is a different issue altogether, i dont suppose you care but as things are i am not at mcdonald’s and you sound unemployed…


To Help,

The situation seems extremely clear - you have one of two options. The first option would be to admit your dishonesty to your prospective employer. I would imagine that the outcome from this would be that they would withdraw their offer as (1) you will have demonstrated that you are untrustworthy even before taking up the appointment; and (2) presumably (as it is a job in asset management) you do not satisfy their entry requirements with a 2:2 degree. Option number two would be to decline the job offer and allow a properly qualified candidate the chance of employment with the company.

I disagree completely with your assertions that lying about your academic qualifications is “less of a deception” because you were not asked very much about your degree during the recruitment process and that you don’t think your degree classification is vital for the job. There is a good and valid reason for requiring applicants to meet certain academic criteria; the attainment of at least a 2:1 provides employers with some assurance as to your intellectual abilities. The fact that you were not asked very much about your degree is irrelevant; satisfying the requirement of at least a 2:1 degree signals that you have a certain level of critical reasoning ability, the capacity to think independently, numeracy skills etc etc.

I also think you need to inform your recruitment agent of the academic qualifications that you do have else you are wasting their time as they will be matching you to jobs that you are not qualified for.

It is also alarming to hear you say that “coming clean represents a risk and then a personal conflict” which you would not be able to get your “head around”; it certainly gives the impression that you deliberately lied to secure employment and that, if given a chance, you would continue to deceive your prospective employer. In addition, justifying your dishonesty by saying that it was to gain interview experience is not persuasive; you could gain interview experience by applying for jobs that do not require the minimum of a 2:1 i.e. jobs that you may in fact be qualified for.

Finally, I agree completely with NuFc4EvEr; the point of this forum is to facilitate discussion as well as to provide help and advice. I also think it is fairly obvious that NuFcEvEr has managed to secure a job in asset management but is just frustrated by applicants who make the recruitment process more challenging and arduous than it needs to be because they choose to lie about their credentials. (To NuFc4EvEr: my apologies for the unoriginal username!)

I sincerely hope you have learned your lesson and will be honest with potential employers in the future.


It looks like your deception is likely to come out sooner rather then later so I think you have two options.

Option 1:

Tell the relevant parties that you lied and explain why. I think it is probable that they will withdraw their offer based on the fact that you have lied and wasted their time to get interview experience.

Option 2: What I would do.

Reject the job offer explaining this is because of your 2.2 and even though you are are more then qualified to do the job as explained in your interview etc you cannot in good conscience continue with the recruitment process.
This way you maintain some integrity and if your lucky and they did indeed choose you based on personality and experience they might still consider you for the role. If you were close to a 2.1 I would also highlight this.

This is a high risk strategy but as a budding asset manager you’ll know with risk comes reward. It may also be possible that they wont mind your lie that much it’s not like you applied to say law firm where integrity essential. Maybe they’ll see it as a sign of ambition though this is probably a long shot!

As for the great 2.2 debate:
I also think the commenter above is wrong to say a 2.2 means that you lack the capacity to do the job. I don’t think say a 58% average means you are less able to critically reason then a 60%. Also not all degrees are created equal so if the job doesn’t specify a degree type just class a 2.2 in Economics or Maths definitely makes you more qualified then a 2.1 in History or a 1st class BA in Silversmithing!

I do think a 2.2 may however indicate an aversion to hard work so make sure you’ve told them lots about how hard you work in your current job.


To Bluth

I appreciate your comments. However, you appear to have misuderstood my posting. My point was not that the dishonest individual lacks the capacity to do an asset management job (although the academic qualifications and the complete lack of honesty and integrity would tend to indicate that that is the case). Rather, my point was that degree classification is relevant; particular classes of degree signal levels of ability (and propensity for hard work as you correctly point out). In addition, it is incorrect to view the separation between a 2:2 and 2:1 as a mere 2% (to use your 58% example) as the internal and external examiners have made the professional judgement that, overall, the candidate displays the knowledge and abilities of a 2:2 student - and, therefore, overall, is of a distinctly lower calibre than a 2:1 or 1st class student.

In addition, the degree classifications of established universities are designed to lend comparability across different disciplines. Of course, the nature of disciplines vary and, in some cases, quite considerably - such that a mathematics degree undoubtedly signals numerical competency in a way that a history degree does not. However, university marking schemes are designed to signal that a 1st class student in any discipline displays a certain level of ability in a way that a 2:1 student in any discipline does not.

Finally, established universities award degrees in academic disciplines only! It is the former polytechnics that tend to offer degrees in non-academic subjects such as silversmithing. This point explains the emphasis that many employers place on institution and the preference that they exhibit for individuals who have graduated from the established universities.


I agree that classes of degree signal levels of ability but I don’t think degrees are as comparable as you suggest how would you compare Physics to an Art subject for example. There are definitely hard degrees and easy ones so I think it is unfair to dismiss those who may have got a 2.2 in a difficult subject as of lower intelligence or calibre then someone who got a 2.1 in a less demanding one. You can say that in good universities all degrees are academic but I don’t think any student would say all subjects are equally difficult.

My other point was that while some jobs specify a certain type of degree others only require a 2.1 in any discipline. In these cases I don’t think the 2.1 is a good indicator of ability as the 2.1 could be in ANYTHING where as the 2.2 could be relevant to the job and hence more useful. In these situations I think the 2.1 requirement is there more to limit to number of applications.

Finally I think your point about 2.2 students being generally of lower calibre then a 2.1 student (no matter how close they came) is flawed. To take my case as an example I barely passed an economic history course in my degree so to this examiner (a history tutor) I was a poor student. I did however do well in all my other business and economics modules and scored 2.1 average overall. Now say I had scored a 60 on the dot in all my commercial modules and then my single bad history shore dragged me down to a 2.2 by your reasoning am a student of distinctly lower calibre based on the opinion of one History tutor when my degree was economics! This is an extreme example but I know other students who have done well in their core modules failed silly optional courses that little to do with their degree or chosen profession and ended up with a 2.2.


just a few other points

-the whole dilemma is not that i tried to fib my way through, but i have just received a great opportunity and am finding it hard to give up

-this was not a whole round of interviews, it was just the one.

-in reference to just telling the company that i have a 2:" i said it -

“represents a risk and then a personal conflict which i would not be able to get my head around”

what i meant by that is that i dont like what i have done and even with the slim chance they did still decide to go with me i would have a persistent unease at the back of my head over my initial actions, hence the conflict.

-my 2:2 is another story altogether i did a highly numerical degree and there was a whole load going on in my life at that time. looking back i am surprised i even got through uni, if anyone wants me to elaborate then they can pm me.

with the above in mind its clear to my mind that theres not much i can do, i just needed to vent, thanks for your responses, all of them.


Let us know what you decide and how it goes by the way. I’m sure we’re all interested to know.