Can anyone with firsthand experience describe how summer analyst offer decisions are made?
Is it based on a group consensus, or are the opinions of a few people weighted heavily?
Do analysts have a lot of say, or can they be overruled by the senior bankers?
I'm sure it's not that cut and dry, and differs across firms, but just wanted to see what all your experiences were.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
My experience was: I met a
My experience was:
I met a person pretty high up who gave me his HR to find me a team. It was my understanding that unless I really screwed up big time, I was going to get hired because he was the one who recommended me.
Not a single analyst had anything to do with my hiring.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remember, you will always be a salesman, no matter how fancy your title is.
- My ex girlfriend
Generally, junior employees
Generally, junior employees with whom you interact the most i.e. analysts and to a lesser extent associates will be called upon to give opinions on how you have worked throughout the summer, thus largely deciding if you get an offer or not
At the MM bank I worked at last summer, I had a team of 4 people (inc. secretary) - everyone got a form to give feedback on me, but I guess the MD has the final say [I think they literally just had to tick boxes on the form]
I don't see why senior bankers would 'over-rule' analysts, since you probably won't get massive contact time with the senior guys, the opinions of analysts should be pretty important I guess
Joefish is spot on. The
Joefish is spot on. The analysts won't have the final word but play a big role in providing feedback to the VP who then informs the MD.
So basically the analysts
So basically the analysts flesh out the details and leave it up to the big guys to make the final call.
I'm guessing that if I worked directly with an associate most of the time, they would be the ones doing this?
Yeah. My VP assigned me to
Yeah. My VP assigned me to his associate who in turn assigned me to his analyst.
There is no doubt that VP
There is no doubt that VP and below make up 99% of the decision. Due to the fact that MDs might not even know more than your first name if you do not aggravate them they will check off on you.
It will also depend where
It will also depend where you work, e.g. my mate is doing a PE internship right now at BlackRock (very small team and only 3 offices worldwide), working with MDs, Directors etc. directly on a daily basis, so obviously in this scenario, they will have a very real impact on whether he gets a FT offer
Agreed joefish, As a summer,
Agreed joefish,
As a summer, I worked more with senior bankers than junior bankers...given this they were the ones to provide the bulk of feedback.
I would assume that is rare due to the typical structure of a deal team, and most will find themselves working moreso with associates and analysts.
Yup depends mostly on Analysts...
At our office they had a roundtable discussion at the end of the summer where they called in those who worked most closely with the summer interns.
Although analysts (or anyone other than the MDs anyway) never have final say, they usually work most closely with the interns so their views do have a large impact.
If you work most closely with an Associate, VP or other higher-ups then they will contribute as well and play a bigger role in the decision-making... otherwise it's essentially the Analysts funneling feedback to the Associates/VPs who in turn funnel it up to the MDs, who make decisions.
In general, Analysts have significantly more influence over whether or not summer interns get offers vs. whether or not full-time offers from non-summer-interns in fall recruiting are handed out.
http://www.mergersandinquisitions.com/
Mergers & Inquisitions
HK
I work in hong kong and the deal teams here are not as structured as the ones in the US. a lot of times as SAs we work directly with VPs and even on one occassion with a MD. does anyone have any experience with hk offices?