My firm is in the middle of recruiting for SAs, and we have been having a bit of a debate in the office; I wanted to see where some of you guys stand on the matter.
We do most of our recruiting through OCR, but we also take apps from non target kids that reach out to us. So, here's my question:
Would you rather interview a kid that goes to a target, has a good GPA (3.6+), but has no finance experience, or a kid at a complete non target, good GPA, and a previous IB internship?
Many of the analyst/associates at my firm prefer the target kids with no experience at all to non targets, who have worked hard to get their resumes in front of us, and have great experience.
Please, discuss.
(For full disclosure, I attended a top private university. Think Duke, UChicago, NU)
I'm curious as to why they prefer the target kids. Any more color you could provide on their reasoning?
Obviously most people will pick kids from their undergrad/b-school, but some seem to just automatically write-off non targets. Their reasoning is something along the lines of, "If they were smart enough for banking, they'd be smart enough to get into a better school." While that may be true at times, if a kid already did a banking internship, he's probably smart enough for banking.
Any current bankers want to weigh in on this?
I go to a non-target (for NY at least, some regional office recruiting) and was able to get an offer for BB IBD this summer.
I think your coworkers are pretty off base in thinking that kids go to non-targets because they weren't smart enough to get into a target. When I was 17 I didn't even know what Investment Banking was, much less what the target schools are for it. I just went somewhere with a solid program in what I wanted to study where I thought I'd be comfortable culture-wise.
Also, this may not be a big enough sample, but one thing I've noticed going through IBD recruiting and meeting a lot of kids from targets is that they all seem to be from that region of the country, meaning they grew up in places where a lot of the business community and quite possibly family and friends as well went to those schools. I grew up in Texas. When I was in high school I never heard anyone even mention wanting to go to an Ivy. Everyone wanted to go to UT, A&M, SMU, Rice, etc... because that's where their families and all the business community went to school.
That said, going to a non-target and having met plenty of students from targets I would say that the average target student is indeed quite a ways ahead of the average student at my school, but at the same time I would say top non-target candidates (ie those that are getting multiple superdays) could go head-to-head with the top target candidates any day. This might not apply to S&T where you have physics students, etc... applying, but I think we all know IBD doesn't demand a tremendous amount of intellect and is more about motivation than anything.
Fact: I'm a non-target school EECS graduate.
Question: Do you really need to possess the higher intelligence of the target school kids in order to excel in what most entry level IBD analysts do in their 2 years stints?
Opinion: I think most IBD analysts can't do what entry level engineers do at Raytheon, Google, QualComm and Intel, even if they get trained for 12 months. My non target school sends a lot of them to these companies.
I like how bankers think they're smart and that banking requires any level of intelligence. Sure, a lot of bankers ARE smart because smart people end up getting the positions that earn the most money, but the profession itself requires nothing more than hard work and a good attitude and pitching/client skills at the higher levels. I have a friend who got a SA at goldman sachs a sophomore (not family friends with anyone in the firm), who used to be a math nerd like me before be dropped his math double major because it got too hard conceptually, not because it was too much work. He also doesn't do all that well in all but his finance/business classes. Therefore, I wouldn't even factor in the whole intelligence factor in a recruiting decision. Sure, experience is nice, but ultimately the job is gonna go to the person that shows me that they want to do banking the most, are eager to learn and put in the time
My guess would be that they all are seeking to fulfill some insecurity about being able to tell their dad they are working next to a Harvard boy. After having worked for months next to a large number of HYPW +MIT grads I can say that if I were in an interview I would give it to the BEST candidate. School would not factor into the equation at any point. I know you have good grades, I know you can work hard, now answer me this: Do you really want this position or am I just a backup (and thus you will never be satisfied/always searching for the next exit opp)? Can I see myself working next to you and are you cut out for this type of work?
Only 3 things that should matter in the interview. Obviously there is some BS that narrows the applications down from 10,000 to 500 but from there on out its just a matter of those 3 questions.
Non/semi-targs FTW.
Note: Biased.
FWIW, the kid with experience will likely be less of a pain in the ass to work with for about 6 months.
With that info, I would go with the non-target, but I would need some elaboration as far as extracurriculars and course work.
In regards to the candidates we've been debating, extracurriculars are similar and course work has varied since they come from different majors. Math, econ, finance, accounting, ART HISTORY lol, etc.
Yes, my prestige-whore coworkers actually picked an art history major just because he has a 3.9 and goes to an Ivy.
on-Topic: i'd go with non-target in this case.
There are a million reasons why someone didn't end up in a target school,that doesn't prove shit about how much they know or are interested in banking?
I go to a target and am in the process of recruiting and would choose the non-target in two seconds so long as he/she also fits (behaviorally) within the firm
How bout this? Target kids with IB experience.
Haha! We have some of them, too. But that's a no-brainer.
Are you sure about that? I have friends with 3.8+, multiple buyside/IB experience, connections with analysts, and leadership roles in school (target) who are getting shut out by BB/top boutiques. How do you explain that??
During the superday I just had, each of the MDs I met with asked how I received my previous jobs. For each of them, I researched and networked extensively until I was able to get in. I think this shows more initiative and drive than someone who simply applies to jobs via their OCR, etc...
I think this applies to this non-target vs target argument - if a non-target has gone out of their way to get their application in front of you, whereas targets go through the motions of OCR and check all of the boxes to get their application in, which shows they want it more? Not discounting the initiative shown by the target students, but at that point, I think both applicants should be viewed equally and given interviews or offers based on their experience, fit, etc...
That was almost exactly my argument. Thank you, kind non-target kid. Good luck with your recruiting.
I would always take the kid with relevant experience as they can hit the ground running more easily. There are smart kids at every school and many choose those schools for reasons that aren't always obvious. The bias towards target kids is small minded. I understand the value of recruiting at a target school - to get to the deepest pool of candidates with the least effort, but once you have that pile of qualified resumes, it's all about the individual (or should be) and not their school.
The smartest tech entrepreneur I've ever met went to Colorado State and studied econ. I have watched him run circles around VCs and large cap strategic partners/competitors. There are very talented kids at complete non-targets.
I personally chose to start school at a non-target (but target for engineering) over engineering at MIT. I made that choice because of location and the ability to compete for a specific club sports team. I had never heard of IB when I was 18, and college prestige was near the end of the list of factors in my decision process (although academic rigor in my preferred field of study was high).
Going to a target vs. non-target comes down to way more than intelligence. Some people can't afford top notch private schools even if they get in and many kids at 17/18 do not understand how much people care about prestige.
Go with the experienced non-target.
Completely agree
I think many people on this board underestimate how hard it is to land an offer even if you are at a target w/ OCR...we network just as hard, if not harder. Students spend the entire semester attending each information session, reaching out to alums, scheduling informational interviews, just for those 20ish interview spots chosen out of the entire class.
non-targets dont have information sessions, alumns, or the luxury to set up informational interviews with people in the industry.
Hahahahahahahaha
Information sessions at targets are not used to "get ahead", you go to them so you don't fall behind with the rest of the campus (who are all competing for the same interview slots).
You can always find alumni on the street, and those from non-targets are actually more receptive since it's not like at a target where 50% of the entire class is trying to go into finance and spamming simultaneously.
I'm not saying non-targets don't have it tough, but it gets old reading the same thing over and over on this board as if targets have a silver spoon handed to them when they work just as hard for an interview spot.
Many non-targets have absolutely no alumni. All target school have a plethora of them working in the financial industry, which gives kids going to a target school a huge advantage. I agree with you that the whining from non-target kids is too much most of the time, but let's be honest, going to a target puts you at a HUGE advantage over those who go to non-targets.
Experience>the school you went to
The guy from the non-target is probably just as smart as the kid from the target, but could not afford to go to a target school, wanted to stay closer to home, etc. His experience is him demonstrating an interest in finance. The kid from the target has done no such thing. For all you know, the kid from the target school could be applying just because he saw your flyer on campus. Considering the amount of work the non-target kid probably had to do just to get his resume in front of you, is probably enough proof that is a hard worker. Give the kid a shot.
HIRE ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
JWR I couldn't agree with you more.
I do have sort of a response to this thread though: are any kids from targets with 3.6 GPA's and no finance experience getting interviews?
At my school, which i believe is a target, this year has been incredibly competitive and without a 3.8+ GPA (exception for heavy engineering/quant majors) not having any experience seems to mean not being competitive...no?
Hire me
One of the places I interviewed in the Fall for FT was an an accelerated superday.at an elite botique. Managed to line it up since I had an exploding offer. At the end of the superday the head recruiter asked me "how would i compare to the wharton kids that they'd be interviewing, who, once starting FT, would show up to the office with a sleeping bag in hand and ready to crank?" Coming from a semi-target and going up against that mentality is pretty brutal.
Another thing I've heard from a number of buddies at BB's is that many of the target kids (probably an over generalization) have a major sense of entitlement, and once they get in their FT, they feel like they don't have to earn shit.
I say if it comes down to the scenario in OP, the experience of the non-target and having his resume get in front of you in the first place represents hussle and initiative, and that's probably pretty representative of how badly that dude wants it.
.
I go to a semi target so I'm biased (or regional target I guess), but I don't think some targets understand how much more work it takes for us. Everything I've gotten (or any of my friends have gotten) we have WORKED for. That means we've spent hours cold calling, emailing, harassing people, following up, until we were finally given a chance. And even then..no one expects us to succeed. We have to do well. My current boss literally told me I'm fired if I fuck up, even once, because he has no reason to expect I will succeed/I can complete work. I think a semi-target with IB experience has a much much stronger work ethic than a target (in general). And that means that getting IBD means so much more to us, and we won't stop working just because we're there.
targets OCR is far more extensive. granted, my school gets recruited at every bb and just about every elite boutique, but its only for juniors. I'm a soph right now too and getting my ibd boutique internship was the most difficult thing ever. i have friends at targets though who applied for boutiques via OCR and/or applied for soph programs via OCR. semi-targets and non-targets can't do any of that. I've literally had to follow up with contact 7 times before to set up coffee meetings. and i've cold called every bank in the area. at the same time, i've been to 2 bb superdays now and have made friends with people from targets..and they easily got boutique banks their freshmen/soph years. not to say that they're not smart or didn't have to try, but it's a trillion times easier. and at the same time, it's a trillion times easier for me than it is for a complete non-target.
a lot of people at semi-targets went to the schools they go to not because 'they weren't smart enough to get in anywhere better' but because they couldn't afford anything better.
Non-target with no relevant experience > Target kid with multiple IB and buyside internships
(Full disclosure: I am from a non-target.)
I lol'ed at the Target kids thinking that the effort they put into recruitment is even close to that of the Non-Target. Finance is all about connections, your target school may only recruit students with above a 3.8 GPA but one of my younger friends has a 4.0 (not rounded) and can't get anyone to give him a chance. I applied to 300+ places, only received 4 interviews, and luckily received an offer. I have no complaints about how much of a challenge it was, but give me a fuckin' break, "it's just as hard for us," do you really believe that?
It's a difficult market out there and OCR has actually become a challenge - go figure, meanwhile the non-target kid can't even land an interview.
Exactly. They say / type this as the silver spoon hangs from their mouth. Sorry I can't afford top tier institution, but still worked my ass off to break into banking.
Oh please, don't give the old "I couldn't afford to go to a target" excuse. If you actually worked your ass off starting from high school, any top tier institution would have paid for your way to go; many come from underprivileged backgrounds at targets and have their tuitions covered 100% because they've worked hard their entire lives. We earned these "silver spoons" you keep alluding to, stop whining and grow up.
I sent out well over 1000 resumes, including OCR, online drops, cold emails, and as followups to cold calls.
Albeit, I had a 2.3gpa from a super-nontarget. I still managed to get into a sweet bank (but I hate Charlotte)
i've been on both sides of the fence (i transferred to a target from a non-target, so I can understand their "pain" and the difficulty). some of my early internships were secured via intense networking/cold-calling as opposed to now where i still have to network my a$$ off but still have OCR.
tbh, if it were me, it rly comes down to personality, which in most cases would mean going with non-target kids. it may be my experiences of being at a target and the type of people that go there, but i found people who go 2 my school to b extremely rude, deceptive and just flat out vicious and evil. not to say non-targets kids can't be this way or that everyone who goes to a target is a giant rich doucehbag. i, myself, am from a working class background.
ultimately, this isn't rocket science, it's really a popularity contest and those who are well liked/popular/social get ahead while those who look perfect on paper yet have terrible interview skills or just flat out of unlikeable get shafted. i have friends who have astronomical GPAs, amazing internship experiences and frankly are beyond brilliant, but screwed the moment they open their mouth.
so yea, in a nutshell, i guess i'd pick intelligent hard working kids who are humble, which tends to be non-target students.
This probably wasn't meant to become a non-target, target pissing war. But since it has I guess I'll add to the fire.
I am still in high school and I don't know shit about shit really. I do know that I just busted my ass applying to 10 schools so that I might have a chance at getting into a target school. I worked hard from 8th grade until now to be in this position.
I am just a simple kid from the Midwest. My parents went to no name schools and I don't have crazy connections or money. If one of these targets accepts me they will pay for any expenses out of my parents reach.
At the end of the day the target/non-target comes down to effort, not money, not well off connected parents but effort. I put in my effort now, during high school to hopefully enjoy a more fruitful and less headache filled recruiting process while everyone from a non-target slacks off and are in turned re-payed with needing to bust their ass to make it during recruiting.
Just gets me a little irate when I see people associate targets with lack of effort and luck.
Good point. Important to remember though that a very small portion of high school students like yourself are on forums like this and are aware of the differences in recruiting/OCR/interviewing, let alone the full scope of jobs in finance, at the time of university/college applications. At that time, there are variables that are of much higher priorities to a lot of students than their school's exit ops.
Looking back, I doubt that many people would choose a non-target over a target given the knowledge they have now. I know I certainly wouldn't have. Hindsight is always 20/20.
Agreed. I am going to a non-target, but would have chosen a target in a second if I got into one. 20 guaranteed interview slots is greater than 0.
Also, those who get into target colleges do not necessarily work harder in their high school years than those who go to non-targets. You get in through connections or luck. Many smart, qualified kids get rejected.
In this thread, non-targets with an inferiority complex moan. Yes, you "busted your ass" networking etc just to get an interview, but why is that more difficult than someone at a target who has been busting his ass since the age of 10 to get top grades to get into top schools and then had to bust his ass competing against top students at targets for the top firms that he's interested in?
The problem with non-targets is they see everyone else around them without motivation and doing nothing with their lives, so they think the amount of effort they put into breaking in is superordinary .... yet they have no idea that at a target, they will be surrounded by people who are just as motivated as they are making their "effort and strive" average at best.
I mean really, people moan about the difficulty of networking but spare me please... Is emailing people and calling people really that difficult? All it takes is motivation, and motivation is aplenty in target schools.
"The only thing you are guaranteed at birth is death. You have a right to that. The rest is earned."
The non-target v target moaning is no different to the Barcap tech analyst moaning about how easy buyside recruiting is for the GS TMT analysts, or the MM PE guy moaning about how easy the megafund guys have it for b school recruiting even though they 'workedharder and were given more responsibility in deals'. If you want it, you gotta earn it. And if you have a chip on your shoulder, you will NEVER be satisfied with what you achieve.
There, I said it.
Busting ass at age 10? A huge component of college admissions is luck.
I have a dream that my children will one day live in a Wall Street where they will not be judged by the school they go to but by the content of their character.
One day right there on Wall Street little non-target boys and non-target girls will be able to join hands with little target boys and target girls as sisters and brothers.
I have a dream today!!!!
Target school's actual numbers from this recruiting season:
436 applications for Goldman Sachs investment banking 15 summer analyst positions available
u do the math. Going to a target school is not a a guarantee. Plenty of friends in the 3.8-4.0 GPA range that literally have nothing right now and are reconsidering their career choices.
Therefore, you take the target school kid. It's a filter system. Sure you might get a couple screw balls that fall through the cracks, but in general, you get a solid group of smart, capable, and hard-working recruits.
15/436 = 3.4% guaranteed rate. That's higher than 0%.
Non-target all day long.
Like Gordon Gekko said, "Give me guys who are poor, smart, and hungry."
Well shit, if you are going to use that line.
Students of middle-earth by far!
http://www.youtube.com/embed/gqKN_sgO_oA
I went to a non-target on a full-ride over target schools. Glad I didn't have to pay for school, but now I can't get a job despite high GPA and decent experience. Recruiters are being lazy if they just seek out "target" students. I know plenty of kids with sub-2000 SAT at target schools because they have rich dads, and I know plenty of kids at my non-target on full scholarship who chose to come over some Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA, etc. because it was free. Go figure.
My 2 cents - I've been at BB firm for 2 summers and seen quite a few interns intimately. kids from hyp etc... have much better work ethics and will overtake non target kids quickly, but they need the hunger. Some kids are lazy and just doing finance for the hell of it- this guys 0 experience suggests he might be one of those kids.
Whoever is less of a douche.
This thread has certainaly become a pissing match... but I wanted to dispell any myths about recruiting since I feel like a bunch you are in college or still even high school.
For the record, I spent a bunch of years in banking and interviewed a lot of undergrad kids.
At the end of the day, in Superday settings, we simply chose the best candidate. What I mean is that we chose the kid that we got along the most with, knew his shit, didn't seem like an arrogant prick, thought he could work hard, etc. I didn't give a shit where he/she went to school, if one kid had a 3.8 vs a kid with a 3.3 - when all is said and done, I picked the kid that interviewed best. Now, you cannot completely throw out GPA and extra cirriculars, because when we (the bankers) deliberated as a group, we sometimes, consciously or sub-consciously, factored in GPA, like damn this kid had a 3.94, he prob works hard. In regards to extra-cirrculars/interests, it really is a good way to bond with the interviewer, "hey man you also like fishing? me too bro."
Looking back, I would say it was pretty evenly split between targets and non-targets. I saw target kids completely own the interview and get the offer easily. I've seen non-targets do the exact same. I remember interviewing a kid from Wharton with a pretty good GPA, nice guy but honestly he didn't know his stuff at all and I was not impressed... pretty much dinged him in my head right after. The next kid in the round was from a state school with a decent GPA. Kid walked in, had great presence, I got along with him well and he had a very good understanding of banking concepts, to the extent that I started to grill him on M&A modeling, which he answered well. He got the offer.
During a superday, you will usually get interviewed by a number of people, let's say for example that its 6 people. Those 6 people will then rank all the candidates themselves. Then we will go into deliberation and talk about who we like, who were our top choices, or who we really didn't like. We usually instantly ding the lowest guys, or candidates that everyone was in agreement sucked. Then we go through the other candidates and talk about them. If one person is vehemently against someone, he probably will get dinged, which sucks for him, because I know how situational interviewing can be. Obviously, an MD's opinion has more pull than analysts, but at the end of the day, everyone contributes to the decision.
I would say 99% of the time, the best candidates easily stick out and will get offers, whether you are Ivy or state. The remaining few spots will take more time as we deliberate who is the best out of the middle bucket. Usually, 1 or 2 kids in the middle bucket will get the offer, and the remaining kids in the middle bucket are either dinged or put on reserve, in case one of the top candidates takes another offer.
So, long post, but in conclusion, stop pissing on each other, its stupid. When interviewing you, I don't care where you went to school or if you were President of your chess club. I once met a kid and I asked him what he liked to do, and he said like classical art, WTF man - that may jive with some people but not me. Now, I am not trying to tell kids not to work hard, because you definitely should; we all know this: being in an Ivy league school and having a higher GPA will certainly grant you more interviews and open more doors. But with that said, once you're sitting across the table from me, let the best man win.
Awesome post. /thread
Dayaaam thanks for weighing in on this. I was going to comment because there is a lot of terrible info on this thread and a lot of pissing and people hypothesizing about what goes on, but you hit it right on the head, and having been on both the interviewing side and having been the one interviewing I can say that you're definitely correct. A lot of these kids have no idea just how important being a chill ass dude can be. The reason we ask a lot of these interview questions is to see if a kid gets super heated and defensive over nothing. If he flips out when I ask "why should I hire this kid over you because he went to a better school" or "why should I hire a kid who has a chip on his shoulder and is willing to jump on every grenade I lob to him" is to see if you come off as a douche bag. We want to work with chill ass dudes (note that this can apply to women in the equivalent) who will work their asses of and not bitch. I don't care where you went to school... getting into pissing matches and deliberating over who has it harder targets or non-targets doesn't matter. If you're good, you're good.
experience wins out of schooling this time round. i'd definitely give the non-target guy a look. I've seen enough target & 3.7+ GPAs to know it doesn't necessarily translate into a good analyst
IMO, whoever has the following qualities, in order of importance: - IB experience and can speak to it... shows interest and dedication to banking - Understanding of banking, concepts, and technicals - Good attitude - Good story
If a target kid gets all these down, then he/she should deserve the offer. If a non-target kid, then so be it.
And if you're talking about who to interview, then I'd say whoever shows the most interest to banking. Banking isn't about hiring the smartest person, it's about hiring the best bankers. The best bankers are those who've historically shown persistence to the financial services industry (and banking internships +1 if applicable), and who would want to do it at your firm with a good attitude. They know what they want because they have tried it out for themselves.
Personal experiences definitely shape screening bias as well. If I saw a CV from a guy who went to a shitty high school which I knew, yet managed to get good grades and broke into a decent college, I'd probably push for them to get an interview even if they had no good work experience or ECs.
The kids at my school (target)who got IBD or S&T offers from BB's deserve it, by and large. These are kids who were gunning for IBD from Freshmen year, with 3.7+ GPA, a bunch of ec's, heavy networking, and good internships.
All this discussion about non-target vs target is pretty dumb. Even if you go to target, guess what - you have to bust your balls to get into banking. Getting 3.7+ GPA at a target is no joke, since you are competing against much smarter and driven kids, and all grades are curved.
Also, I know plenty of seniors at my school with 3.5+ GPA who didn't get any offers in finance, including MO jobs. Many are going to grad school after graduation, or some chose Plan B jobs. To tell you how bad shit is at my school, there was no-name small boutique 3rd tier consulting firm that did info session at our school, last year November. Over 300 people showed up and took the pre-screen test just to land a first round interview, with this shit garbage firm. This firm only interviewed 30 kids at first round, so vast majority of kids who applied to this job were rejected. Shit is fucked up, no joke.
In the end - the kids who get offers from banking, whether they come from non-target or target, by and large, they deserve their offers. They worked hard and beat the fierce competition.
Quo autem nemo magni incidunt. Dolor harum quo et et hic assumenda consectetur qui. Illum similique libero necessitatibus dicta.
Repellendus pariatur ea et. Dolorem nisi amet natus et enim minus ab. In sit eligendi tenetur porro delectus.
Quisquam iure assumenda qui rerum eum numquam dolor. Sed sed excepturi ut minus perspiciatis quae.
Adipisci dolores cum aperiam adipisci. Saepe qui explicabo unde eveniet veniam dignissimos quam.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Deleniti quibusdam voluptates nostrum perspiciatis. Rerum dolorum excepturi est libero unde vitae. Veritatis sint occaecati ab et.
Assumenda sit earum porro sit dignissimos ab velit eum. Quaerat sequi fugit qui doloremque ea est. Repellendus minima similique deserunt enim dicta. Omnis quidem est iusto accusamus ut necessitatibus eius. Non debitis veniam magni quaerat aut.
Maxime sed ut eveniet blanditiis omnis sit. A quo delectus iste enim. Laudantium quia veritatis sunt molestiae nostrum voluptatem officia. Nemo aut qui totam facilis deserunt provident. Sapiente aut nobis vero possimus dolorem aut magni.
Sunt voluptates ex atque sed est corporis quo. Voluptatem ducimus temporibus sunt quae dolorem dicta.
Ipsa assumenda eum quidem aliquid enim dolorem. Repudiandae impedit quidem pariatur ratione. Placeat adipisci unde qui cupiditate consequuntur.
Pariatur possimus hic aut libero magnam ut. In earum laboriosam saepe sed aut. Blanditiis est delectus et consequatur cum nihil iusto nisi. Qui labore nostrum tenetur sequi ut ea.
Beatae ex voluptate dolorem sed nulla voluptas voluptas. Omnis nobis cupiditate temporibus non beatae ut. Consequuntur aut explicabo doloribus quos iusto omnis cupiditate. Dolores nisi ut provident ipsa animi at non. Sunt ducimus consequatur unde ipsa velit quibusdam esse.