I would say this is misleading for a number of people: Graduate students. I suspect this reflects society deeming it okay not to completely have your act together in high school. What someone does at 15 to earn admittance to Harvard isn't as good a predictor of ability/ethic/etc, I imagine, as what one does at age 20 to get into a good graduate school.
The article actually points this out:
In some career fields, such as law, it is typical for premier companies to recruit graduates from top-tier schools, said Claude Balthazard, director of HR excellence at the Human Resources Professionals Association of Ontario.
Law, of course, being a graduate distinction. For further proof, check out the institutions where professors at MIT/Harvard obtained their doctorates in the economics department. Fairly homogeneous.
I don't really have a problem with this. I figure by the time you're halfway through undergrad you're an adult and should be ready to try and excel at the tournament to secure a spot at the best school possible.
What I would like to see is this same question asked to people who make tenure-track hiring decisions at universities instead of CFOs. I suspect 'very important' would become the predominant category.