We tell the kids not to worry if they’re not “cool” at school. A common reassurance is that the nerds shall inherit, if not the Earth, then at least the good jobs. But it turns out we lie.
So warns a new study of the career outcomes of 400,000 athletes and non-athletes attending Ivy League colleges in America from 1970 to 2021 – where prior athletic achievement is, ludicrously, often grounds for admission.
The researchers find that being a jock at university means you’re more likely to go into finance or business-related careers, more likely to do an MBA (but not a PhD) and attain more senior positions. Put it all together and they earn 3.4% more during their working lives than non-athletes from the same college who work in the same industry.
The authors show this can’t all be put down to athletes’ socioeconomic advantages – while posh kids are more likely to play certain sports, these effects on career paths aren’t just happening to those playing squash or lacrosse. Interestingly, this divergence takes time to build, only emerging five-plus years after graduation and growing as much as 25 years after university.
Their uncontroversial conclusion is that non-academic human capital, what we normally think of as softer social skills, plays a growing role through our careers. And the research shows athletes’ LinkedIn profiles fit this pattern, with much more emphasis on management and strategy skills. More controversially, they suggest this may justify admitting people to top universities on the basis of athletic ability, as a route to helping them develop this human capital. Which is nuts. That’s what Sunday league teams, not very highly rationed places at university, are for.