Extending Offers to Weaker Candidates to Protect Yield
I go to a target, and I've noticed that many on-campus recruiting teams are obsessed with yield. There even has been multiple cases where a top tier BB (think GS/JPM/MS) has decided to extend offers to weaker candidates who have lower GPAs, but no potential competing offers in the pipeline than stronger candidates have multiple Superdays. Can anyone clarify what is the thought process behind this? Why the obsession of ensuring that the candidate accepts the offer when they extend it? Can't they extend the offer to top candidates, and if they reject move down to the weaker candidates? Not trying to find the best talent for your organization seems paradoxical. Any thoughts on this would be appreciated.
Lol, whatever helps you sleep at night man.
Agree.
Lower GPA > weak candidate.
Weak interviewer = weak candidate.
Just because a candidate can bury his face in a pile of books without coming up for air doesn't mean he's socially intelligent or has the level of intensity required to dominate his peer group (outside of academia) and excel in a fairy demanding environment.
They will almost always extend an offer to the strongest candidate. I've seen my bank extend offers to kids with 3 or 4 (far superior) offers because we really like they guy.
At the end of the day, you extent the offer to the best candidate possible and sell the shit out of him. If you do a good job, often time's he'll take your offer even over seemingly better offers. And if he/she doesn't, move on to the next one.
Pretty much this.
It is not all about gpa...fit and networking may play a factor along other things
I have never heard of any business doing this. They don't have to publish yield statistics.
This absolutely 100% happens. Multiple theories on why, I think a big part of it is HR's desire to "wrap things up" quickly for any given season's recruiting process and not draw things out. Similar trend you see with many large banks is their hiring iffy to subpar summer analysts simply because they don't want to put significant time or resources into full time recruiting.... Just one theory though
Never seen this happen before. This isn't college admissions. Nobody cares about "yield". If a strong candidate turns down the offer, you go to the next one.
At my school, a eb/bb stopped recruiting about 4-5 years ago because too many kids rejected their offers every year.
Someone's a little bitter
It's not that you go for weaker candidates, but you just don't spend time on kids who you think won't show up (e.g. someone also looking at consulting, talking lot more with other banks, etc.). No one wants "an extended 18 offers, got only 1" reputation. More of a fit science.
I don't consider that yield management (or picking lower quality candidates) I consider that common sense.
If someone is interviewing for FT consulting and FT banking, they're not focused and not committed, which makes them a poor candidate. They're not dinged because they may not accept, they're dinged because they're not a strong candidate.
It's not just GPA per se, but just overall stronger candidates being brushed aside for weaker ones in favor of ensuring an offer gets accepted.
Apparently your judgement of candidates is not in step with the actual inverviewers.
Doesn't happen.
Nulla doloribus numquam vel ab ab ea. Asperiores mollitia quis magnam. Qui voluptates ut qui quia recusandae aperiam.
Ut quisquam aperiam veritatis dolor pariatur nemo dolores sit. Qui minus ea soluta ut perferendis. Dolorum beatae velit ea dolor magnam qui.
Dolores explicabo laboriosam omnis laudantium. Placeat perspiciatis soluta voluptatem tempora vitae. Sed quis laboriosam ad quisquam eos impedit velit aut. Repellat tempora qui animi.
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...