Declining Analyst Quality - Fact or Myth
Been hearing a lot of chatter on the floor about declining analyst quality the past few years. Do people actually think this is the case, or is it a myth?
My take is it could be 3 things:
1) Selection bias. The VPs and Ds complaining were the relatively high performers as analysts/associates, and therefore have relatively lofty expectations of juniors.
2) Simple human bias and a yearning for the "good old days."
3) Actual decline in analyst quality.My take as an experienced associate (ignore the username) is it's a combination of the three, but the decline in analyst quality is very real. I've observed that associates used to have the authority to demand a finished work product from analysts, and therefore could spend more time checking and thinking about what else to include in materials, making VP and D lives easier.
Nowadays, I work with average or bad analysis who pull things like lying about being jammed, disappearing for hours at a time… or some of them just plain suck at the job. I then have to spend more time actually preparing the materials, and the inefficiency goes up the chain.Have people actually observed this decline, or is this unique to me or my group?
No need for 50 pissed off analysts to reply power-tripping about how they are pushing back more, don't care about the job, etc. Interested in objective answers only.