• Sharebar

I've heard it sets you apart, and shows interest. But I don't get whats the point of work experience if a Harvard philosophy / econ 4.0 guy is gonna beat out a Ross finance 3.6 guy with involvement in finance clubs that teach dcfs and solid work experience.

If work experience and knowing how to model etc is really that important, then the undergraduate business schools would be taking all the BB spots. However, it seems that just showing "interest" in the field is sufficient.

I understand that knowing how to run a DCF going in as a SA or even FT analyst might matter more for elite boutiques and other small shops, but at least for my semi-target, i dont get why people try so hard to get a spot in the clubs that teach you DCFs and LBO models.

Thoughts?

Comments (4)

  • dest149's picture

    It's not so black and white as you try and portray it. There are a lot of intangibles that cannot be quantified. First, I'll direct you to look at the "big picture, or long term" which is ultimately what firms are looking at when recruiting employees. A Harvard 4.0 grad might beat out the Ross candidate because maybe Harvard Grads with a 4.0 have a track record of success. In this case, although the Ross candidate may have more work experience, the Harvard Grad may have more potential to excel. Banks don't mind being the first work experience in some cases, because it means you also don't come with bad habits. (That's not to say that work experience or = to Y then you get the offer, if X

  • mrb87's picture

    I thought this until I started working and had my own summer analysts (and later 1st year analysts) to manage. It was night and day between those with prior work experience and those without it -- the latter were way too immature and just didn't "get" it. It's more excusable for a summer analyst to not have prior work experience, but the (few) 1st years with whom I dealt who had no experience were simply terrible.