Pages

  • Sharebar

Anyone read this article in the WSJ (Goldman Seeks to Improve Working Conditions for Junior Staffers)?

Any thoughts about whether this is some bad PR-crap claiming that analists will work less hours but in reality will still work 100 hours a week or is this sincere? Also, is only Goldman looking to change working conditions or does this apply to more IB's? It seems kinda hard to image that analysts would now all of a sudden have a lot of free weekends.


Goldman Seeks to Improve Working Conditions for Junior Staffers
Program Seeks to Cut Weekend Work, Streamline Functions

Maybe you don't have to work seven days a week to succeed at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. GS -0.39%

The New York banking company said it has spent the past year working to improve the work-life balance of most-junior employees, known on Wall Street as analysts, by reducing their hours and other measures.

The moves come as banks across the industry struggle to keep young workers who increasingly are favoring the better hours at hedge funds and private-equity firms and the lavish perks at technology startups over Wall Street's grinding analyst programs.

"Banks over the last couple of years, especially the [biggest], are frustrated that they cannot retain people," said Matan Feldman, founder and managing partner of Wall Street Prep Inc., a training program for investment bankers.


Goldman long has been viewed as a fast track to wealth and a wellspring of talent. Some of its top executives began their careers in its much-copied analyst program, which started in 1982. Since then, the programs have become synonymous with grueling work loads, late nights and depressingly frequent orders for takeout food.

But earlier this year, Goldman formed a task force made up of senior staff from different businesses within the firm to improve quality of life and promote career-development opportunities for junior employees. It has implemented the task force's suggestions.

This isn't the first time banks have faced a war for talent. In the dot-com boom in the early 2000s, college graduates increasingly turned to technology jobs over investment banking. Banks pumped up their salaries and made lifestyle concessions, such as free dinners and car service home, for analysts staying late.

But this time banks, which are under public and regulatory pressure to keep pay down, can't merely boost compensation to lure young people.

One of Goldman's goals is to find ways to help young employees finish their work during the regular five-day workweek and avoid all-nighters. Weekend work should be reserved for "critical client activity," the task force found.

For example, when a more-senior analyst commissions a client presentation, the task force has advised asking for a short outline rather than a full presentation that could run 100 pages or more.

Goldman also created new technology that makes it easier for senior bankers to let analysts know what kind of information they need. In an attempt to minimize email traffic, the technology lets senior bankers input specific requests through a portal that can be accessed by the analyst anywhere. This allows senior bankers to be more explicit in their requests, ensuring the junior analysts have a shot at getting the information right the first time, a Goldman spokesman said.

The task force came on the heels of Goldman's decision last year to do away with the two-year contracts for most analysts hired out of college. Instead, the firm said it would hire recent college graduates as full-time employees.

Goldman hired 332 analysts to begin work in 2014, up 14% from 2013, the spokesman said. He added that the firm is betting that hiring more analysts will spread the work among a wider group of people.

"The goal is for our analysts to want to be here for a career," said David Solomon, co-head of Goldman's investment-banking division. "We want them to be challenged, but also to operate at a pace where they're going to stay here and learn important skills that are going to stick."

Goldman Chairman and Chief Executive Lloyd Blankfein told a group of departing summer interns during a question-and-answer session this month that they would do well to "lighten up," according to a video on its website. "People at the age of the people in this room could also relax a little bit, too," he said.

Scott Rostan, founder and CEO of industry-training firm Training The Street Inc., said that unlike in the 1990s, when Wall Street analysts rarely quit their posts, junior staffers today are far less likely to finish their full two-year terms. He said some banks are seeing between 60% and 80% of analysts bolt before their two years are up.

"Lifestyle is very important, especially for millennials now," said Mr. Rostan. "Behind the scenes, [banks] are all somewhat on different levels how we retain our talent. They're not sure how to do it because the common lever in the past was pay, but they can't do that."

1

The WSO Advantage - Investment Banking

Financial Modeling Training

IB Templates, M&A, LBO, Valuation + Learn More.

IB Interview Prep Pack

30,000+ sold & REAL questions Learn More.

Resume Help from Actual IB Pros

Land More IB Interviews. Learn More.

Find Your Perfect IB Mentor

Realistic IB Mock Interviews. Learn More.

Comments (140)

  • SmokeyG's picture

    They are on a PR binge. They've been giving out huge charity donations (see Dealbook), and now they are improving analyst conditions except for "critical clients" (Who isn't critical at GS?). These are both very marketable developments.

    Still, this might give analysts a free weekend once in awhile. Pretty neat.

  • orangebull's picture

    332 analysts? Is that IBD in NY?

  • Black Jack's picture

    I'm confused about the notion of cutting or limiting weekend work. I suppose by shortening the size of decks in theory less time would be spent, but at the end of the day if client asks during Friday afternoon call for x,y, and z by Monday morning call, then weekend work is just inevitable. Weekend work is imposed on analysts by the clients (who know that they will put in 25 hrs over a weekend to get it finished) rather than internally by senior people who are disorganized/incompetent (though this can happen as well). Sure, there might be ways to cut some (read less than 10%) of weekend work through processes discussed above, but as long as the client mindset is that of "if I give them a demand and a deadline they will meet it," the lifestyle isn't going to change much. If you want to boost analyst lifestyle/more eliminate weekday face-time. Of course, a lot of this is perpetuated by the analysts themselves, so would be a difficult thing to remove. The best groups (in my mind) are groups where, if you finish your work by 8pm, you go home and nobody is bothered by it because they know that you'll undoubtedly be there sometime later in the week until 2am.

  • notthehospitalER's picture

    IB at GS (or any other bank) is not becoming a M-F job. Not unless analysts start working near 20 hours a day, and even then they'd probably still have to do some work on weekends- as an above poster said, it's about the deadlines in large part.

  • IlliniProgrammer's picture

    I don't buy it for a minute.

    GS has always been claiming that they are trying to make life better for the IBD analysts and cutting hours. OK, they weren't claiming this in 2008, but they've been claiming this since at least '09 and '10- since they've cut analyst pay. Fool us once, shame on you. Fool us twice, shame on us. Fool us three or four times, we're stupid college students.

    I've never heard any of these cuts in schedules or hours materializing.

    I think the GS IBD job is about as miserable as it's always been. I've talked with a lot of rank and file people who've worked there.

    I think college students are relatively easy to mislead.

    I think this stuff catches up with you eventually. But it's up to us; our communication process, and our decision-making process- to make sure it catches up with GS rather than us getting burnt.

    I think that if I meet a GS summer intern who says GS has actually cut hours- that he and other analysts are working 80 hours/week, I will change my tune. Actually, if I find any BB bank where rank-and-file IBD employees who work there claim they never pull more than 70-80 hours/week for more than a couple weeks/year, I will become a big cheerleader for said bank's IBD department.

    I don't think that's going to happen at GS when their SALES AND TRADING employees are largely working 80 hour weeks.

    GS is a very smart bank. They are also a somewhat cynical bank (admittedly, like most banks). They know they have you sold on working there, because they generally do have slightly smarter people than just about every other firm (yes, there are many exceptions on a group by group basis) They have you sold on the fact that people who go to GS tend to earn more money over the course of a career (even though there is a GS discount for analysts). They don't have you sold on the fact that you won't wind up in some sort of horror story about pulling 100 hour weeks. So every year, they run this marketing campaign about how senior execs are trying to find ways to cut back analysts' 100 hour/week schedules. These claimed schedule reductions never materialize, and then you get screwed on bonus to boot, because you work for GS and take the GS discount.

    Pro tip: ignore the GS marketing campaign and go work for JPM. (I have never worked for JPM. I don't have any sort of stake in JPM's success. I don't even own their stock. I do know that they are probably the fairest and least cynical of all of the top ~3-5 banks) Believe them when they tell you that you are working a 90 hour week, that there will be some misery as an analyst. At least it's not some 100 hour bait and switch. Suck it up, this is what you signed up for- if you don't like it, you can always get a master's degree and become a quant and earn 40% less for 40% less time. Once you've made VP or MD and have become cynical, THEN leave for GS and promise undergrads (suckers) 75 hour weeks and $160K first year comp.

    Every year, GS rolls out the same (predictable) "life is getting easier for analysts" marketing campaign. Every year over the past couple, it's never materialized.

  • bschoolhopeful's picture

    Waiting for @APAE to eloquently chime in on this one. Surely he'll mention the Saturday blackout period as evidence of this reduced weekend work policy and go on to say that it just means your weekdays are more fucked.

  • bschoolhopeful's picture

    Also, it's spelled ANALYSTS. Freudian slip?

  • In reply to IlliniProgrammer
    youjustgotlittup's picture

    IlliniProgrammer:

    I don't buy it for a minute.

    GS has always been claiming that they are trying to make life better for the IBD analysts and cutting hours. OK, they weren't claiming this in 2008, but they've been claiming this since at least '09 and '10- since they've cut analyst pay. Fool us once, shame on you. Fool us twice, shame on us. Fool us three or four times, we're stupid college students.

    I've never heard any of these cuts in schedules or hours materializing.

    I think the GS IBD job is about as miserable as it's always been. I've talked with a lot of rank and file people who've worked there.

    I think college students are relatively easy to mislead.

    I think this stuff catches up with you eventually. But it's up to us; our communication process, and our decision-making process- to make sure it catches up with GS rather than us getting burnt.

    I think that if I meet a GS summer intern who says GS has actually cut hours- that he and other analysts are working 80 hours/week, I will change my tune. Actually, if I find any BB bank where rank-and-file IBD employees who work there claim they never pull more than 70-80 hours/week for more than a couple weeks/year, I will become a big cheerleader for said bank's IBD department.

    I don't think that's going to happen at GS when their SALES AND TRADING employees are largely working 80 hour weeks.

    GS is a very smart bank. They are also a somewhat cynical bank (admittedly, like most banks). They know they have you sold on working there, because they generally do have slightly smarter people than just about every other firm (yes, there are many exceptions on a group by group basis) They have you sold on the fact that people who go to GS tend to earn more money over the course of a career (even though there is a GS discount for analysts). They don't have you sold on the fact that you won't wind up in some sort of horror story about pulling 100 hour weeks. So every year, they run this marketing campaign about how senior execs are trying to find ways to cut back analysts' 100 hour/week schedules. These claimed schedule reductions never materialize, and then you get screwed on bonus to boot, because you work for GS and take the GS discount.

    Pro tip: ignore the GS marketing campaign and go work for JPM. (I have never worked for JPM. I don't have any sort of stake in JPM's success. I don't even own their stock. I do know that they are probably the fairest and least cynical of all of the top ~3-5 banks) Believe them when they tell you that you are working a 90 hour week, that there will be some misery as an analyst. At least it's not some 100 hour bait and switch. Suck it up, this is what you signed up for- if you don't like it, you can always get a master's degree and become a quant and earn 40% less for 40% less time. Once you've made VP or MD and have become cynical, THEN leave for GS and promise undergrads (suckers) 75 hour weeks and $160K first year comp.

    Every year, GS rolls out the same (predictable) "life is getting easier for analysts" marketing campaign. Every year over the past couple, it's never materialized.

    Great post, thanks. I was already somewhat sceptical about this, considering that it seems unlikely that Goldman will start telling their clients that they'll just have to wait a few days longer because the analysts are enjoying their weekends.

  • rpc's picture

    Did 70-80 hour weeks as a SA in S&T this summer, not buying into this whatsoever.

  • In reply to BTbanker
    Black Jack's picture

    BTbanker:

    orangebull:

    332 analysts? Is that IBD in NY?

    How big do you think the company is? They only hire like 50 each year for NYC IBD.

    This is just blatantly incorrect

The WSO Advantage - Investment Banking

Financial Modeling Training

IB Templates, M&A, LBO, Valuation + Learn More.

IB Interview Prep Pack

30,000+ sold & REAL questions Learn More.

Resume Help from Actual IB Pros

Land More IB Interviews. Learn More.

Find Your Perfect IB Mentor

Realistic IB Mock Interviews. Learn More.

  • FormerHornetDriver's picture

    They have the 'critical client' escape clause, which means this is all a bunch of BS

    The only way this works is if all the MDs in a particular group go out of their way to respect it. I have seen this work and I have seen this not work. In smaller groups, particularly those in regional offices, it is possible to keep this under control. The reason being that their are fewer MDs to pile on 'critical client' qualifying work. In larger groups, this is almost impossible to police unless the group head is really serious about it. 'Problem Child' senior bankers will not respect it unless they are actively brought in line by the group head.

  • In reply to Edmundo Braverman
    duffmt6's picture

    Edmundo Braverman:

    Get ready for the pay cuts.

    This was the first thought that crossed my mind.

    "For I am a sinner in the hands of an angry God. Bloody Mary full of vodka, blessed are you among cocktails. Pray for me now and at the hour of my death, which I hope is soon. Amen."

  • In reply to BTbanker
    Whiskey5's picture

    BTbanker:

    orangebull:

    332 analysts? Is that IBD in NY?

    How big do you think the company is? They only hire like 50 each year for NYC IBD.

    you must be fucking retarded

  • IlliniProgrammer's picture

    I think the honest to god solution here would be that an MD must be present in the office while analysts are working on his project. If it's that critical of a client, the MD needs to pull an all-nighter too.

    Oh well, when I see GS analysts with the time to post rebuttals to me, I will start to believe GS. However, I have a feeling this is part of their annual marketing campaign to get FT hires to sign.

  • meabric's picture

    Heard they were piloting this a while back, obviously depends on group culture more than anything. Little late for FT recruiting PR though, as the top / sweatshop groups where it would matter have been full for a bit now.

  • hankyfootball's picture

    holy cow! GS brand AND reasonable hours? Sounds too good to be...oh.

  • miscer's picture

    There is absolutely no way they hired 332 ibd analysts for one office. I would believe this number if it was worldwide and if you're lumping all cap markets and some of the obscure product groups in there as well.

  • heister's picture

    What they really need to do is get their company culture back on track. I've recently spoken to Pre IPO partners and all of them say they don't even recognize the company anymore. I am guessing there would be similar sentiments from other people who were senior at the big IBs before the 90s.

    Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays

    Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne

  • In reply to hankyfootball
    torchic's picture

    turnyasystemup:

    holy cow! GS brand AND reasonable hours? Sounds too good to be...oh.


    LOL

    speed boost blaze

  • In reply to heister
    torchic's picture

    heister:

    What they really need to do is get their company culture back on track. I've recently spoken to Pre IPO partners and all of them say they don't even recognize the company anymore. I am guessing there would be similar sentiments from other people who were senior at the big IBs before the 90s.

    Interesting point...but that can be said of all BBs - obviously banking has changed a lot - back in the day it was actually the go-to place to work if you wanted easy hours: banking was heavily regulated so there wasn't that much risk to take.

    speed boost blaze

  • In reply to heister
    OfficerGodzilla's picture

    Pre-IPO partners crying about loss of culture?
    Let them wipe away their tears with their millions.

  • cphbravo96's picture

    I'll throw my two cents in. As a first year MBA student, I've been spending a lot of time getting to know the various IBs, NYC BBs included. Granted this is all anecdotal, but I've spoken with a number of people, primarily associates, that feel there is a bit of a culture shift occurring on Wall Street. I spoke with one associate at a BB IB in NYC and he explicitly told me that he doesn't plan to stay at the bank much longer and that he is looking forward to transitioning back into his previous industry working in an operations role. I asked him if he's generally so blunt about his plans and he stated that he doesn't shout them from the rooftops, but that people senior to him know that he's not going to make banking his career. He also stated that senior members within the bank recognize that things are changing and that they are essentially okay with luring folks in the door (at the post-MBA associate level, at least) with the thought they might not stay long term. I guess the thought there is to get them in the job and hope they might just stick it out...as opposed to passing on that 'talent'.

    I also had the chance to meet with GS and their associate panel mentioned the non-essential hours thing. I'll be meeting with them again in another week and see what else people have to say about it.

    In my opinion, retaining talent is the problem GS and the IB industry faces as a whole. They have paid money for one of two reasons in the past, either your (a) a top talent and they want you or (b) you're above average intelligence and willing to bust your balls (read: Type A). I think the impasse is that you can only hope to reel in type A's so much. As the 'top talent' leaves Wall Street to pursue opportunities in industry or with tech companies, etc. Wall Street just ends up with more above-average people that want to work hard and/or have something to prove. The way I see it, hiring a few more people and trying to distribute the workload, and pay, among them isn't going to make these people happy. Once you take away the compensation incentive, then people start to leave the street in droves because...from what I can see...few people find the work fulfilling and they often have/had other options at places they might like just as well doing things they might find a bit more interesting. If you eliminate the 'out-sized' pay, you just give people less incentive to sacrifice...that is to say, few people will likely find working 70 hours on Wall Street much better than just working 60 or 65 at Google/Apple/Microsoft/Exxon/Etc.

    Part of me thinks that if GS does something, it's very likely only a matter of time before other IBs follow suit. I certainly could be wrong, and I sort of wish I am, but only time will tell.

    Regards

    "The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant, it's just that they know so much that isn't so."
    - Ronald Reagan

  • NorthSider's picture

    Obviously, you have to start with the caveat that IB is a client-facing industry and that weekends will never be totally off-limits ("essential clients clause"). But that's true of pretty much all high-paying jobs.

    That said, this is the natural step in Goldman's progression towards trying to retain talent at the junior levels. I don't see why people find this so unbelievable. GS has been hinting in this direction for a couple years now, starting with the cessation of the two-year analyst program, rules against recruiting, etc. and the response has largely been, "Well, you can't grind your analysts out with punishing 100-hour weeks and expect them to want to stay!!" Consequently, their attempts at retention haven't been very successful, and many first years continued to recruit despite the new policies.

    This step is an attempt to address that retort, and it's actually fairly easy to enforce with badge IDs, computer logins, etc. Cultural paradigm shifts aren't ever going to be easy, and there can be no doubt that a lot of senior people will take these new directives with a grain of salt. But this is enforceable if Goldman takes the initiative to cajole its senior officers into abiding by this policy.

    Moreover, it's not an unreasonable request: I know several high-dealflow groups across the street that rarely-if-ever have analysts pulling 100-hour weeks. A great deal of IB work is avoidable and unnecessary, deriving from endless turns of a unimportant book.

    The only snag is precisely what @cphbravo96 brings up above - the work is still unfulfilling for a lot of people, which is going to drive a fair bit of attrition in and of itself. That said, a great deal of corporate work is rote. It's not as though consulting or corpdev is existentially meaningful work vis a vis IB. A lot of the high-paying alternatives to IB are in the same category, they just lack the notorious sweatshop hours. It's hard for me to believe that, if you can convert IB into a 60-70 hour consistent gig, you won't see a considerable uptick in retention.

    Whether or not GS actually follows through is an entirely different question, but this is completely reasonable to me.

    "For all the tribulations in our lives, for all the troubles that remain in the world, the decline of violence is an accomplishment we can savor, and an impetus to cherish the forces of civilization and enlightenment that made it possible."

  • Holl_Banker's picture

    Let's be honest about something. People go into IB and finance in general for money. If the money goes, so do the people. It's not that hard. GS can't be that stupid to cut paychecks, because people would leave in droves.

  • dutchduke's picture

    One step closer to becoming one of those insufferable big corporations...pay going down. Might as well go to GE and countdown retirement

  • IBNazi's picture

    Sounds like an excuse to lower the salaries. I would be interested in seeing how the other banks react to this (in terms of lowering their salaries, too).

    Once I did bad and that I heard ever. Twice I did good and that I heard never.

  • In reply to OfficerGodzilla
    heister's picture

    The bank actually used to do right by their customers, if you want an idea about what happened to the company read the book why I left Goldman Sachs. From what I have heard from my dad's friends it's very accurate of the culture decline at Goldman.

    Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays

    Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne

  • In reply to bschoolhopeful
    APAE's picture

    bschoolhopeful:

    Waiting for @APAE to eloquently chime in on this one. Surely he'll mention the Saturday blackout period as evidence of this reduced weekend work policy and go on to say that it just means your weekdays are more fucked.

    Classic.

    Yes, the 36-hour protected window is a thing. Originally exclusive to Healthcare, it has recently been adopted by CRG as well. It isn't division-wide yet (nor will it ever likely be). I wouldn't say that it automatically correlates to your weekdays being worse, if I insinuated that somewhere else then I apologize.

    Per the comments regarding class size, 150 would be a fair number to ballpark it for the IBD analyst class each year. I think 135 is a closer number. I would be surprised if it were 332 analysts (undergrad hires) across the whole firm in New York, but that's the only way I can see that number working.

    I do believe that there is an undeniable correlation between compensation and retention. Bitch all you will, at the junior level too many people care exclusively about how much they get paid. People don't have the mentality of "I'll start here, cut my teeth, and position myself for where I want to be down the road," it's more of a "fuck you, pay me, pay me, PAY ME" mentality.

    As a result, they sacrifice health, relationships, sleep, and sanity for work ... because they expect it to show up at the end of the year. It's lamentable, because at most it makes a difference of $3-5k post-tax. The threshold between middle-bucket and bottom-bucket analyst is really hard to cross. The threshold to be top-bucket is as well. Killing yourself for the bonus is like wearing a backpack full of bricks while treading water for an hour; the task itself is already hard enough without the self-imposed burden.

    If people really cared about their quality of life, they'd push back. That's not to say that they don't care about quality of life. The proof is in the pudding, however; they care more about the money than anything, and we see the results.

    On top of that, there's the classic 'red badge of courage' syndrome where people will sadomasochistically tilt their work-life balance unnecessarily. You wouldn't believe it, but there are people there too early and too late for no reason. On top of that, everyone will inflate their hours when bitching to their friends from college over drinks at the bar. 85 hours that week somehow becomes 100; everyone has to see how big your dick is because 'oh my God, Brian's getting killed at work, what a stud' somehow makes sense.

    Long story short, the nature of the job isn't going to change any time soon, nor is basic human nature (avarice, greed, and materialism). Hours aren't likely to improve materially. The smart guys will continue to get their work done promptly and properly and get the fuck out of the office.

    Most people do things to add days to their life. I do things to add life to my days.

    Browse my blog as a WSO contributing author

  • WildColonialBoy's picture

    End the need for Face Time. We have all experienced flat patches or the need for a post deal cool off period. Would be nice for MD's to respect that - tell analysts/associates to get out of the office - play golf for a morning, we all have phones and if something needs to be crunched can get to the office/laptop quickly

    We are absolutely kidding ourselves if 60+ hour weeks are going to end. Imagine telling a client, sorry we won't have the LBO model updated until close of business tomorrow, our analysts need a rest. Investment Banking is about grunt work, if I wanted a 9-5 I'd have gone to an accounting firm.

    Consultants at Bain, BCG and McKinsey easily do 60+ hour weeks

    You're born, you take shit. You get out in the world, you take more shit. You climb a little higher, you take less shit. Till one day you're up in the rarefied atmosphere and you've forgotten what shit even looks like. Welcome to the layer cake son.

  • xqtrack's picture

    I saw this and thought back to my analyst days and sighed (mostly with relief that I'm not at that place anymore...)

    But seriously: I agree that most likely, this is just PR bullshit. However, Goldman being Goldman (and there is no doubt in my mind, having now interacted with several parts of their franchise as a client, they are definitely a cut above most of their competitors) - I think there could be something here. GS has always prided itself on being long term greedy...and if you are running an investment banking department, you have a real issue right now, which is that your pipeline of long term talent looks totally fucked.

    The single biggest reason is that, with exceptions, in general it's true that most of the future finance rockstars these days enter into Wall Street at the analyst level. I used to work in a top bb ibd group; the MDs were very smart (mostly), the analysts were very smart (mostly), and the associates through VPs were functional idiots (mostly)...And nowadays, all those analysts are leaving to go to hedge funds and private equity (and some of them aren't even coming in the door, going instead to work at Google). Out of my class (2009), I think there is maybe 1 analyst left in IBD who stayed on to the associate level; the other 100 or so are gone.

    GS seems to have realized this with changing their bonus calendar and trying to ban some exit opp recruiting, but obviously those kind of policies have minimal effects. But if they were actually able to make this a job that didn't suck so much -- I would bet money that there would be more people who would stay.

    Back in the 80s and 90s, PE/HF jobs just weren't that common or easy to get, so retention wasn't a huge issue (this is still the case in markets like Asia and Europe too from what I hear). Some people are saying this is just a ruse for college students -- and likely it is; but if so, then Goldman won't be able to stop their problem of kids leaving before their 2 years are up, and not sticking around after to become a part of the franchise. But it wouldn't surprise me if they actually try to make a real change here...

  • Mzz's picture

    I'll throw in my opinion as well: I actually liked IB (for the most part) but could not stand the hours/culture. I might have considered staying longer if the hours were somehow reduced -- even if it meant less pay. If I had to do it all again today, I would probably still pick GS over Google coming out of college.

  • West2East's picture

    Shoot, as a summer associate I was averaging 110 hour weeks... I was sending summer analysts home even. Where is the love for the mba associates who have NO IDEA what we are doing? haha.

  • In reply to heister
    duffmt6's picture

    heister:

    The bank actually used to do right by their customers, if you want an idea about what happened to the company read the book why I left Goldman Sachs. From what I have heard from my dad's friends it's very accurate of the culture decline at Goldman.

    Heister you be trollin'

    "For I am a sinner in the hands of an angry God. Bloody Mary full of vodka, blessed are you among cocktails. Pray for me now and at the hour of my death, which I hope is soon. Amen."

  • In reply to West2East
    torchic's picture

    West2East:

    Shoot, as a summer associate I was averaging 110 hour weeks... I was sending summer analysts home even. Where is the love for the mba associates who have NO IDEA what we are doing? haha.

    Yes because they obviously staff summers with other summers. You just wasted 3 seconds I'll never get back .

    This scrub probably picks bulbasaur and has an all-grass type team complete with 4 bellsprouts and a tangela.

    speed boost blaze

  • In reply to duffmt6
    heister's picture

    Well by doing right by their customer I mean they didn't openly shout on the trading floors about putting their customers in bad trades just so the bank could take the winning side of the trade. No one said banks were ever truly ethical places.

    Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays

    Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne

  • In reply to torchic
    BlkWallSt's picture

    My firm for a fact staffed summers with other summers too. Many of the summer analysts had projects they were staffed on with summer associates.

    I also wasted 3 seconds I'll never get back on your second remark.

  • Consuming Goods's picture

    In my opinion, everyone knows the hours before they go in, so that's less of an issue.

    The system to help with communication is a great idea, but we'll have to see if it works. I know there have been a number of times that I put together a pitch where we ended up pruning out a ton of information that wasn't necessary, but the reverse could happen as well. Having a well constructed 200 bullet outline of a pitch could end up creating a ton more work, if you end up throwing out 50 of those points the next day.

    It's not the company. It's the credibility. My credibility. I can't just sit on the bench and let other people play the game. Not my game. Not with their rules. - Henry Kravis, Barbarians at the Gate

  • In reply to BlkWallSt
    LHDan's picture

    DWalk248:

    My firm for a fact staffed summers with other summers too. Many of the summer analysts had projects they were staffed on with summer associates.

    I also wasted 3 seconds I'll never get back on your second remark.

    Same with mine. It is actually quite common.

    As for the original topic, it's likely just lip service as most have said. Weekend work will never go away, but there are ways to make it better such as killing facetime and cutting unnecessary turns of the book.

  • krauser's picture

    Goldman is having trouble attracting talent? Wtf? And their reply is to cut hours and pay? Double wtf? I don't get it. Aren't monkeys dying to get into this place? Put the email from someone at Goldman here and he'll get a 1000 CV's no problem.

  • In reply to krauser
    wlst1's picture

    krauser:

    Goldman is having trouble attracting talent? Wtf? And their reply is to cut hours and pay? Double wtf? I don't get it. Aren't monkeys dying to get into this place? Put the email from someone at Goldman here and he'll get a 1000 CV's no problem.


    They have no trouble attracting talent. They have a problem retaining said talent.
  • heister's picture

    I have been thinking about this today. I think the problem isn't just in the hours or pay at any IB. I think the bigger issue might be generational. A lot of kids these days want to do something they feel is really beneficial what ever that might be. I know kids have always felt this way but the generations growing up today have connectivity resources that didn't exist even 10 years ago. In the past banking has been able to attract not only the brightest kids but also the most determined, real grinders. People who started working at banks in the late 90s early 00s most likely at some point in their college careers had to do projects that required actual research in a library using actual books. There has been such a massive shift in how information is accessed, disseminated, and used that the banking pitchbook model seems antiquated by any rational persons view. When you can go on Google and research any topic, and correlate them into a high quality and source-able paper in a fraction of the time it took to look things up in books, you realize how technology has revolutionized the world. The world wide web is younger than construction time of some of the great buildings of the ancient world. It has gone from basic text only information pages to live high definition video medium that can be broadcast around the world to anyone whom has a connection, be it in their homes, or wirelessly on a cellular or wi fi network. By comparison banking looks like an old world profession where things in comparison take eons to change. More people are beginning to realize that life is in fact short so why spend it doing something you hate.

    Follow the shit your fellow monkeys say @shitWSOsays

    Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid - John Wayne

Pages