Going through SA recruiting, I got in a debate with a friend regarding workplace personalities. I'm curious to hear other perspectives. In your firm, would you rather work with someone who appears super laidback/passive (which potentially makes them seem uncaring) or seems super competitive (potentially being a tryhard)? Obviously, a combo is best, but in these 2 extremes, who would you rather work with?
| +200 | UBS Accused of Favoring H-1B Workers While Cutting U.S.-Born Employees | 50 | 5h |
| +101 | IB Energy Drink Tier List / Ranking | 69 | 6h |
| +85 | PJT M&A Group Selection 2026 | 13 | 1d |
| +73 | ONLY THESE BANKS OR YOU STRUCK OUT | 28 | 4h |
| +34 | Feedback for internship first desk at IBD BB - personal fit, "don't be too confident" | 23 | 2d |
| +28 | Does BofA still pay its associates rat pellets? | 14 | 1d |
| +28 | Firm Thinks I'm Lying About Offer | 7 | 2h |
| +23 | Stay at Weak Dealflow Team or Lateral? | 4 | 8h |
| +19 | Updated JPM Group Rankings | 31 | 6h |
| +19 | VP Deal Origination Credit | 2 | 1d |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
laid back. If i'm going to spending 80+ hours a week with the person, I'd rather they be fun to be around.
Are you talking about working with a superior or a subordinate? I think every analyst would love to have laidback associates/VPs and go-getter interns. Nobody likes that associate that keeps turning shit way too many times and nobody likes the intern who can't get anything right and doesn't try to improve, halfway through the summer.
In this case, I'm asking about working with a subordinate. Would you rather have a laidback or competitive intern?More specifically, would you rather have someone who seems very passive and looks like they don't work hard (more chill), etc. but get their stuff done well and on time or someone who seems very passionate and competitive (more proactive), but produces the same quality work?
Personally, I was leaning towards laidback; my friend was leaning towards competitive.
Assuming the quality of the work is the same, I would choose the laid back person any day.
As stated before, if the work is the same, the laid back person. But that doesn't mean I want a laid back subordinate who seems like he just came back from the bathroom and was taking bong hits. I also detest the hyper competitive person who seems like they're going to (or actually does) put down or backstab their colleagues to make it seem like they're better than everyone, especially if it's going to affect the quality of work product.
Go getter analysts are annoying.
Sunt qui consequatur quia itaque. Animi et non consequatur ut possimus quidem.
Eos cum enim est. Nulla nihil incidunt et commodi nesciunt quo commodi. Quo tenetur id aliquam a molestiae iure est. Eum voluptatem deleniti tempore rem eos et consequatur.
Sunt sed magni impedit temporibus maiores tempora voluptas. Adipisci veritatis quae voluptas nobis quo rerum cupiditate. Repellendus doloribus odit nihil et. Laborum quo voluptate qui quia. Itaque corporis saepe ipsa qui. Adipisci et minus dolorem dolorum sit.
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...