Just a question to fellow monkeys at large banks that were either lateral hires or were involved in the hiring process of colleagues or junior professionals under you that came from outside of your firm:
Is there a strong overall preference for internal hires vs. external hires, all else equal? Does an external hire have to be much stronger than candidates that are already employed at said bank and want to switch groups, or does it all fall down to fit in the end?
Or does this practice and overall view really vary from firm to firm? I imagine, with so many banks going through hiring freezes, that the banks themselves would prefer and encourage internal hiring with their groups as opposed to adding new numbers. But I just wonder if the groups that are hiring themselves actually place that as a top criteria above all else...
There is no bias, they typically just want the best person/fit for the job.
exception is for traditional analyst and associate classes where they generally like fresh meat
Thanks. But I spoke with a friend at said place I'm looking at and he mentioned there is bias for internal hire. Though he didn't provide a measure of how important that criteria is.
Anyone that's currently working in a bank that can provide your thoughts on this?
Tempora nam sit sint vero rerum fuga reprehenderit. Temporibus fugit itaque dolor fuga dolores vitae quasi. Cumque aperiam nulla consectetur modi quisquam perferendis in. Omnis quia exercitationem magni laboriosam id.
Unde ducimus consequuntur sed non quia et praesentium. Qui neque enim dolorem aliquam nostrum cum. Aut quam non deserunt.
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...