head hunter vs. direct application

Does anyone here have any experience applying through headhunters vs. directly or through connections? I will start applying for FT positions at the end of the summer. This is for quantitative roles (focus HF,PT). Have been contacted by some HHs recently. As far as I understand it, they get a commission as a certain percentage of starting salary - wondering if this discourages some firms from going through them. Any insight into what types of firms the good HHs usually represent would be appreciated.

 

Headhunters in the US do not charge their candidates, they charge the hiring company. This is important to remember: the company is the client, not you.

On the other hand, it is 100% better to be brought in to a firm by a good headhunter than go in alone. A lot of companies treat direct inbound resumes as spam from marginal candidates desperate to leave their current jobs, and get so many they don't pay attention. A good headhunter will pitch you, get you noticed, and get you an interview. If a company has brought the headhunter into the hiring engagement, they will virtually never care about paying the contingency fee. What you don't want, however, is for a less reputable headhunter with weak client relationships to go blasting your resume all over Wall Street. This will not give you any benefit and will make it harder for a good headhunter to introduce you to those firms.

When you meet with a headhunter, remember that their #1 concern is that you are a relevant candidate who will show well with the client and will very likely accept an offer if one is given to you. Generally it's best to express an interest in one particular industry with any given headhunter (don't say hedge funds or private equity, for instance, pick one). Don't grumble about your current role, but do express a strong interest in exploring new opportunities. You can leverage a headhunter as an intermediary in negotiations, but remember that they represent the interests of the other side, so you have to know when to cut out the headhunter and manage the process.

 

Thanks guys. This is for campus hire out of grad school rather than experienced. Headhunters tend to be less common in that case, but not unheard of for quant positions. I've found it pretty difficult to get reliable/consistent information on which headhunters are reputable and which ones suck.

 

Couple of ways to try and vet a headhunter. If they have an exclusive on the engagement that's a good thing (but not critical). Also, ask them to tell you about the team you'll be working with. The good headhunters know the hiring manager personally, and can tell you about them. The lesser headhunters are only getting postings from HR, and have no real connection to be able to sell you to the actual decision-maker.

 

it would be extremely rare for a headhunter to work with a fresh college grad (they rarely work with fresh MBA grads, especially for finance positions in this market). start/continue networking, get an internship with a smaller shop

 
Socal:
it would be extremely rare for a headhunter to work with a fresh college grad (they rarely work with fresh MBA grads, especially for finance positions in this market). start/continue networking, get an internship with a smaller shop

Thanks for your reply. Okay, I will scratch the headhunters off my list.

It seems the advice I keep hearing consistently here is: - network - get an internship at a smaller firm or some other job to get your foot in the door and work your way up

So, I will look more into these routes. Thanks again for the help.

 

Alumni, fuck head hunters, they are not to be trusted.

"After you work on Wall Street it’s a choice, would you rather work at McDonalds or on the sell-side? I would choose McDonalds over the sell-side.” - David Tepper
 

What Oreo said... Also, it's cheaper for the company if they don't have to pay the head hunter fee. Also the alumni can talk to HR and definitely get you an interview if he's senior up. Head hunters don't have nearly the same pull at a shop. If the head hunter has been getting you interviews though and already introduced you to the opportunity I might not burn that bridge. maybe you're the one person for whom head hunters work really well and if you are then you want to keep them happy.

 

Networking is always going to be important, its relevance to your career trajectory will never fade away. It's never to early to start.

"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."
 

Speaking from personal experience, networking is a huge part of the recruiting process (A cold email got me the intro to the job I'm in today). There were at least five different instances where a networking call/email got me on the interview list for a fund. The people I connected with either didn't use a recruiter or they instructed the recruiter to put me on the list. On a funny side note, a certain "prestige whore" recruiting firm once emailed me back saying that they mainly worked with BB firms and wouldn't have time to speak with me/show me any opportunities. Three months later, they called and emailed me several times to schedule a first round interview with one of their clients. I had a rather fun time calling the recruiting firm out about that one!

 

Networking is always important, dude. HR will always prefer to find an amazing candidate in their lap rather than pay a small fortune to a HH. That said, some firms deal exclusively with the standard analyst cattle drive. But really, why subject yourself to another level of screening if you don't have to?

Please don't quote Patrick Bateman.
 
Consulting01803:
Is networking through LinkedIn the usual method, cold-calling, etc.? What has worked for you guys in the past?

Highest response rate is if you know someone in common, and ask if when you contact your target you can mention their name or ask them to introduce you directly (depending how close you are). Email then follow up with a call. Then come alumni databases/linkedin and use an email to contact them. That InMail shit is spotty. Personally, I found that by sending an email first you "warm" the call a bit. I know I would kind of be pissed off if someone just called me at the office, out of the blue, with an elevator pitch. Especially if it's a bad moment.

Please don't quote Patrick Bateman.
 

Yes, you definitely should. The headhunters are just one way to get in the door. Alums at different funds may be part of the recruiting process (so you can circumvent an HH directly). At the end of the day, it's the fund that's making the decision whether to hire you or not. The more people you can get to vouch for you, the better.

 

Definitely a good idea to go the networking route. I'm at the end of a process right now that started with me reaching out to network about 7 months ago. My contact told me then that they'll be raising a fund soon, and will be looking to bring in an Analyst once they hit a certain hurdle in the raise.

At this point, they're talking to my references, and haven't even advertised the position (hopefully they never have to)!

 

The more people in your corner the better. At some point, many of the candidates look the same, especially at the junior level. Sometimes the difference is just someone saying "that dude seems pretty cool".

 

I would say that what you know is wrong. Networking is not a mediocre strategy to get into IB. When I was involved in the recruiting process, the first resumes I pulled were those applicants who had reached out and had strong credentials. If you weren't quite as strong but had made a good impression and demonstrated interest in my firm, I'd often make case for you over some other applicant who might be objectively stronger but had not reached out.

As for PE recruiting, I would say that it's a lot more variable. With some firms, it doesn't matter how much you've networked - you HAVE to go through the headhunters. On the other hand, many other PE firms recruit 100% through referrals (don't have to pay the headhunters), so you can get in through networking or sometimes through a senior banker pulling for you.

So in short, yes networking helps, but maybe more so at some firms over others. At the very least, it can't hurt, so go for it!

 

It really depends. Networking helps if you're not in a group that historically gets a lot of PE interviews, or if there is a particular PE firm you're really interested in.

If you're in a really crappy group, you'll need to network not only with PE firms but headhunters as well.

If you're at a BX/GS TMT/MS M&A type group, you'll get most of the interviews anyways, so networking becomes less useful. If there's a particular firm that's your absolute top choice you just have to let the right headhunter know.

 

I have met with all of the main HHs, is that what you mean by networking with the HHs? I have not been asking for specific firms from the HHs though is that too aggressive? Also, is it worth it to cold e-mail or LinkedIn alumni at the PE shops I'm interested in?

 
confused23:

I have met with all of the main HHs, is that what you mean by networking with the HHs? I have not been asking for specific firms from the HHs though is that too aggressive? Also, is it worth it to cold e-mail or LinkedIn alumni at the PE shops I'm interested in?

Also curious. Is it helpful to email alums in PE shops I'm intersted in, or is this not generally done?

 

Im just a college senior but heres my opinion: Don't use a recruiter or the online applications. Emailing/calling for unadvertised or advertised positions seems to be the best avenue for getting job offers.

Although I've never used a recruiter I have heard mostly negative feedback about how they are just useless, waste of money, and don't live up to their promises. Website applications are a black hole and who knows if your resume will ever see the light of day.

 

How about in terms of exit opps post-consulting? Is there any advantage to using a headhunter/recruiting firm? If so, what are some of the better firms you've heard of and their advantages?

 
Lawson:

How about in terms of exit opps post-consulting? Is there any advantage to using a headhunter/recruiting firm? If so, what are some of the better firms you've heard of and their advantages?

I personally did not use recruiting firms, though I have heard good things about Egon, Heidrick, etc. My reason was that I had a strong enough network from McK in the places I wanted to focus that I didn't feel the need to go that direction.

There will be headhunters that have your interests in mind and there are some that will call everyone in the world because they are just trying to fill a spot. Discerning the difference can be difficult.

 

Nisi nisi ea sed. Saepe debitis illum temporibus recusandae consequuntur libero omnis. Nisi rerum error nemo corporis.

Molestiae qui est illo rerum sit aut facere. Qui enim at et consectetur possimus commodi asperiores. Dicta ducimus nihil aut. Quis eveniet ab ab est.

Ut quia dolor enim aperiam odio eum. Ut error quis dolorum deleniti nemo quo quia. Distinctio pariatur iure consequatur. Nam et officia quia ratione est et. Nisi facere consequuntur excepturi at voluptates aliquam quia.

 

Et praesentium aperiam ipsam magni eum recusandae. Non non quia fugit vitae ea. Repudiandae eius non aperiam sed omnis.

Amet qui in maiores cumque sequi doloremque qui. Aliquid et laboriosam ullam rerum odit ipsum molestiae. Repudiandae assumenda possimus ducimus voluptatem culpa est cumque. Beatae enim magnam ex est consequatur animi provident labore. Similique qui dolorem quasi fuga deserunt odit. Et alias tempore eos optio eius impedit et.

Asperiores vel enim vel. Vitae eos a ducimus sit sapiente cumque odit. Porro labore repudiandae facere ratione vel reiciendis. Excepturi mollitia iure perspiciatis magnam facere. Quod quis autem iure dolor in. Omnis aperiam rerum voluptatibus quo.

Atque ut nihil eveniet eos ipsam. Alias deserunt quia sint eligendi. Error eos unde adipisci repellat. Accusantium et magni molestiae velit. Dolores dolor ea consequatur placeat provident aut voluptate. Qui mollitia perferendis consequatur.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
7
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
Jamoldo's picture
Jamoldo
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”