EB Recruiting Lead to WSO Students: Help Us Decide Preference over In-Person vs Virtual Superdays

Fully virtual for sure, back when i was doing recruiting with in person superdays, there were some super days I missed or didn’t attend because they conflicted with school. Also glad to see an EB asking the WSO community for input.

Fully virtual hands down, in person is such a pain

Superday processes can be more rigorous - can get the kids to do a financial maths exam, group case study, hand them a big binder of financial reports and get them to talk through it. In-person interviews always have a different dynamic as well. Can sense interpersonal skills and confidence in the waiting periods between sessions.

If you guys have the bandwidth and resources for in-person superdays it can really help you select the right candidates and prevent any slippery ones from getting offers

I feel like a good combination if possible is on campus first round interviews and then virtual superdays. That’s what the boutique I used to work at did, and feel like it’s a proper mix of in person interaction without needing to fly across the country (assuming the EB you’re talking about is Qatalyst) and not having to risk missing an exam. I went to a Ivy and most of the teachers there were unforgiving about missing exams for interviews. 

Fully in person. There is so much complaints about recruiting and the class quality... Why give them virtual recruiting?

full in-person is great IF the students are flown out on the company card, likely with breakfast/lunch provided. i've had two in-person and three virtual super days. 

-the virtual ones were kind of awkward as there was usually commotion on the interviewer's end and one time, there were recruiters present in every breakout room with their camera off to 'observe us' before and between interviews and during group portions (we had to have our camera on). at the same time, i only had to miss one day of school and didn't have to spend lots of money. 

-for one superday in person, i had to pay expenses out of pocket with ~10 days notice and was told i'd be reimbursed later. my cheapest option was around $220, and we were told later that there was a reimbursement limit of $100. for the other, HR coordinated our travel which was lovely and I didn't have to worry about that between school and recruiting. it was also nice to get more of a feel for the company in person, but i had to worry about costs and missing school. 

in-person is a huge pain for students, so if you feel it's necessary, you should be making sure that the company is making it as painless as possible for students or you will miss out on candidates

You will get better results with in person. As evidenced by the increased effort. At a top firm I would not spare this expense to find the right people. 

Most EB interviews I’ve done make it to in person now

Not in banking but for my McKinsey interview they swapped to in-person this year, and I preferred it because I got to meet my interviewers and get a better sense of what working with them would be like. Also, connecting as people is much easier in person for some people at least, and doing virtual interviews comes with the whole "look into the camera not the person" and stuff. Definitely sold me on the firm as well since the other two were virtual

Maybe to help solve the issue with timing you could host 2-3 superdays on different days to let the students choose which conflicts with their least important classes that are solely lecture. Though I understand this is a smaller firm so 2-3 superdays could be a lot.

Anyone saying virtual is a brazen homosexual.

And OP is also larping.

SY stop gooning on WSO and start responding to cold emails buddy

When I was a student, virtual 100%. Now that I'm on the other side, would prefer in person

Virtual Superdays make more sense for most students. You save travel time, avoid missing classes, and still get a fair chance to connect with interviewers. In person is nice for networking, but virtual feels more practical and inclusive.

Thanks for raising this topic—it’s a crucial one for many of us navigating recruiting in IB. The choice between in-person and virtual superdays really comes down to the experience you value: in-person gives you richer network opportunities and better read on culture, while virtual offers convenience and cost savings.

One added thought: consider which format the firm uses for decision-making, since firms may assess and promote differently based on format. Also ask: have you noticed any data or feedback about conversion rates visit from virtual vs in-person superdays at elite boutiques (EBs) you’re targeting?
How are you leaning currently and why

1,000% in-person. This is coming from a lateral who was working a full time job while recruiting. Even though I had to fake a sick day and fly to a city for my super day, I think it made all the difference in me getting hired at this firm, which was the only one to have an in-person super day. An in-person super day allows the interviewee to showcase many qualities (or weaknesses) that virtual simply cannot, such as full body language/posture, true eye contact, hand shake, energy, how they perform in front of actual people, their height (which subconsciously matters), how their voice projects in a room, etc. If you're deciding between two people who are exactly similar in terms of technical knowledge, the deciding factor will be all the social and psychological factors, given that IB ultimately is a sales role. How someone physically behaves in front of actual people in an actual meeting says a lot more about them than how they act from the comfort of their room (likely wearing sweatpants). Maybe at bigger banks where analysts bounce after 2 years this doesn't matter, but for an EB like yourself with under 100 people, each hire is a significant investment. I would posit that doing your full diligence on the candidates will lead to the best hires.  

C/O ‘27 with an MM IB offer for next summer-

Strongly prefer in person superdays. Being able to actually meet people, see the office, etc gives you a much better sense of culture. 

Hard to say if I’m a good fit to work with people I met on a zoom with for 30 minutes. Easier question to answer when I shook their hand and had lunch with them.

In person

Why not give the option to go virtual for students that are not local and do in-person for everyone else? That's what few of the banks I interviewed at did. I personally prefer in-person.

also u want a kid to work with you 100 hours a week, wouldn't you wanna meet them in-person?

Fully in-person is such a great way to get to know the firm as well as evaluate how candidates conduct themselves throughout a day (or few hours)

Virtual is the way to go, especially if candidates have heavily networked across the firm. In-person seems unnecessary for both parties and quite costly. While it's a great way to vibe-check your candidates as to how well they do with face-to-face human interaction, isn't that what the summer analyst stint is for? If they've impressed a couple of Juniors by being normal (rare these days), and impress their interviewers over Zoom, what more can you ask of a 19yr old sophomore who likely doesn't even realize why he's chasing this job outside of social approval/lack of other concrete aspirations?

Fully virtual, my professor docked my grade what essentially became a single percent for every missed class. Luckily I only missed 1 for interviews.

I think it depends on the city, a lot of firms do them on Sat/Sun which is fine for in person (leave Fri/Sat, go there, head back and trudge into class). But if you're doing it multiple days or cant do it on the weekend, then a virtual shot would always be nice