Policies Worse than Diversity Hiring
Hasn't the topic of diversity hiring been beat to death on WSO? I think so, but I get it. The policy is not fair and I'm not a fan. Any policy which hires based on race...is well racist. There are so many other ways to help disadvantaged groups....primarily by hiring based on disadvantaged economic backgrounds...not race. End of argument...thank you.
That said, the amount of time spent discussing this subject on WSO has approached the absurd and ridiculous, especially when so many other policies, both government and HR, are for more harmful to your career prospects. So that's exactly what I wanted to list today. Policies that impact your career much more than diversity hiring (which honestly has never negatively affected me in any way); however, many of the items below threw serious wrenches into my career plans. And let's face it folks. Despite all the bitching and complaining on this website, there contine to be very very few minorities in this business for some mysterious reason. Now let's get to the list:
Government Policy
Economic Cycles / Interest rates - Where you start your career in an economic cycle can make a huge difference in your experience. If markets are booming thanks to low interest rates fueling tons of M&A activity and LBOs, naturally there is a higher demand for M&A analysts for example. If you graduated into the 2008 financial crisis like I did, it didn't matter if you were black, brown, or the last member of a Native American tribe, no one was getting jobs and internships.
Bailouts and other policy decisions - Imagine that there are 10 banks that you really want to work for....related to the above, suddenly a couple of those banks go bust and now you have ony 6 or 7 banks left on your list. Guess what? Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers were great banks to start your career.....they're not hiring anymore.
Big Picture policies - What is your national or local government doing to attract or scare off investment banks? Are taxes too high in the city with a slow but steady drain happening in financial services. New York City? Are you taking drastic steps like Brexit which scares away some banks for places like Frankfurt. London? Are international banking laws making it more difficult for you to do business these days. Switzerland? The wrong policy can cut the total number of jobs in your area which is bad news for your career.
Human Resources Policies
Target vs Non-Target - To be fair, there are some good reasons that discrimination against non-targets exists. It's just easier to recruit at the Ivies and know that you'll be getting a good candidate. That said, not really fair to throw away the resume of someone just because of their school. And sure, a lot of people work hard to get into the Ivies...and a lot of people had SAT tutors, HNW parents who guided them the whole way, and locations right next to those college in the northeast. Let's not kid ourselves that this policy doesn't benefit people of a certain race with a certain socio-economic background in the northeast. You could be the smartest kid in Nebraska, but good luck getting into Harvard. Think they took like 4 kids from the state last year.
Nepotism - Just unbelievable how many slots get taken by nepotism in this business. MD's friend's kid. CEO's son, etc. etc. Unless have these sorts of connections, this is not good news for you. Some companies have strict policies against nepotism and others turn a blind eye. Very unfair situation as it almost always benefits kids who are already advantaged.
Again, the policies above all remove a ton of positions for potential qualified candidates, yet for some reason, WSO likes to spend 90% of its time bitching about diversity hiring. The subject has been covered and it's time to move on kids. Study hard, hustle even harder, and overcome the dozens of unfair obstacles which will always be there in your career and life.
Target vs nontarget is the only internal firm policy you mentioned and it's literally based on merit. You didn't even describe it right. The smartest kid from Nebraska will certainly get into Harvard, even if there is a smarter student from Boston with the same credentials. Also, they don't throw away resumes because of a college lol, they just do on-campus recruiting for targets. Not rly unfair because those colleges are hard to get into and those students earned it.
Fed reserve and gov policy can be good or bad for recruiting, but it's not racial descrimination and is reactive to the economy rather than choosing to make recruiting harder. Local gov makes no sense because you can just apply in other cities from which you live. Nepotism is not a policy lol.
Diversity hiring is literally racist and as long as it continues, you will continue to see ppl complaining about it. Not sure why that's so hard to understand.
So do you think a kid born to corn farmers in Nebraska has the same chance of getting into Harvard as a kid born in NYC to investment banker parents who attended the same school?
If you're a smart kid born in Nebraska, 99% chance that everyone around you will be prepping you to attend University of Nebraska on a full scholarship rather than Harvard.
For Ivy League (especially these days), it usually takes guidance of one's parents from a very young age and effort. Don't pretend for a second that it's only the latter.
Other side notes: When governments choose winners and losers, it is most definitely a form of discrimination. Also, many companies have formal policies against nepotism and the hiring process.
And ok, you're right. They don't necessarily throw away your resume. They don't even look at it because they've decided on the number of slots that they are filling from colleges X, Y, and Z. Wow, that really changes the story there.
EDIT: Note that legacy admissions are a very real thing at Ivy League schools. Do you think that benefits a certain race and/or people with generational wealth? Or do the legacies just make a bigger effort since that's all determines your admission to an Ivy League right?
You are making a mistake. First you compared the smartest kid in Nebraska to other applicatants.
Now you are comparing the likelihood of any student from Nebraksa from getting into Harvard compared to a kid with prep and parental Alumni. In other words, you are now talking about the chance ANY kid in Nebraska will BECOME the smartest.
These are two different things.
What you stated in your original message is incorrect. The smartest student and best qualified candidate in Nebraska will have a better chance of getting into Harvard than a student of equal IQ and resume coming from NYC. This is because there are more students like this in NYC, but it is much more rare and impressive to see a student be smart in Nebraska, DESPITE all the challenges you mentioned in your reply.
See what I am saying?
Yes, if both kids received the same guidance at an early age, the kid in Nebraska would have the better chance. But what I'm saying is what are your chances of getting really good guidance from your parents to attend the Ivies if you were born in Nebraska? Very very low chance.
You even say yourself that it would be "much more rare and impressive to see a student be smart in Nebraska"....well why is that? The answer proves my point.
Ok... I never said otherwise. YOU said in your OP that the smartest kid in Nebraska would have a worse chance of getting into Harvard than just A KID from the Northeast. That's just wrong and I was correcting you. Feel free to go about your day.
Ok, I see the technical point that you're trying to make which to be clear is technical. What I'm trying to say in my post is that ANY kid born in Nebraska has a much lower chance than ANY kid born in the Northeast.
My point was also that EVEN for the smartest kid in Nebraska, his chances of ending up in Harvard are not all that great. For the smartest kid in Delaware, for example, the colleges are literally next door.
Damn bro, good point. Maybe you should start a company and do Nebraska hiring and recruiting events. Or better yet, do a "Corn Boy Diversity Day."
Who knows, maybe you'll get Warren Buffets grandchildren :P
Yup, well it's a real thing. Valedictorian from my high school went to the local state school because she didn't want to leave home. She's probably about 10 times smarter than you and me combined. Guess she shouldn't have the same shot at a job because her parents lived in the middle of nowhere rather than 30 minutes from Columbia? Which is the whole point of this post.....lots of stuff that isn't very fair in the hiring process, but people like yourself don't seem to bitch much when it benefits you. Then, it's all EFFORT! What a joke.
She shouldn't have the same shot because she chose to go to a local state school whereas the students who chose to go to Columbia learned a lot more and are probably more qualified candidates. It's not like living next to Columbia got them into the school lol. And she can still get the job if she puts in the effort, so I don't see your point. I came from a no-name school and went in-state public and still landed at a top ten IB. My dad didn't even finish high school dude. And I still respect those Harvard students because I know they are smarter and worked harder than me.
Hiring based on race is very different from (and worse than) giving weight to the fact a student got a 4.0 in high school while playing sports and being president of business society and had a crazy life story described in their well articulated college essay and therefore got into Harvard.
My point is that if she lived within 30 minutes of Columbia she would have almost certainly gotten into Columbia. For someone to leave their comfort zone and attend a college 2,000 miles away is a much bigger challenge than someone who can literally attend the same college across the street. You are asking that student to cross a much bigger hurdle.
No, she has a better chance getting INTO Columbia where she is. In NYC, there are more candidates like her, as I mentioned.
And yes, I am asking her to cross 2,000 miles. Her fam isn't there? Tough shit, life isn't fair. If she doesn't, that's her choice, but I'ma still take the candidates from Columbia who were around smart students and the best professors. But guess what, I'ma take the kid from Columbia who is originally from a few thousand miles away before I take the kid from Columbia who is from down the block. The former is more interesting.
Correct, that's what this post is about. Lots of policies that are not necessarily fair. Not fair that she has to be smart and travel 2,000 miles from home and someone else can be smart and go across the street.
That's not a policy thing. That's a life thing. You can't expect firms the make things equitable for everyone because they had different circumstances growing up. It's your job to work through despite your luck at birth. And traveling 2,000 miles and leaving fam shows indendence. I don't want someone who is too scared to do this and I don't want the kid from around the block who still hasn't moved out either.
If you have a policy of hiring from a handful of schools, your POLICY will intentionally or unintentionally close the opportunity to other talented candidates. If you had a POLICY which hired slightly less people at on campus events and opened more slots for kids from any school, there would be more opportunity for those candidates. So, yes the policy does matter.
Same as something like diversity hires. If you say that 2 out of 10 candidates must be a less qualified diversity candidate, that leaves 8 slots for the best candidates. If you hire 9 positions from your favorite campus, that leaves only 1 position for the best candidate.
Now as I stated in my OP. There is a reason that banks target the Ivies. There is a good chance that there is an overlap between the best candidate and an Ivy candidate but not always the case. And just like diversity hiring does not choose the best candidate a POLICY of limiting hiring to mostly a few schools will also result in not always getting the best candidate (althought many times, they will be the best candidate due to the quality of those schools).
And you make a good point. You don't want necessarily want the kid who has never moved anywhere and just had to cross the street to attend Columbia, but guess who gets the interview anyway. THAT KID!
Just to add, my bank has an explicit PRO nepotism policy - like they flag in writing who is a referral from a “relationship” to interviewers ahead of time
Literally had a 5.0 in highschool, perfect SATs, went to state school because I’m broke and im diversity. Now I’m afraid all I will ever be seen as is a kid who cheesed the system.
That really sucks man. People like yourself are the unintended victims of the policy. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cheeseballs who think diversity hiring is a huge problem like the guy above. There are others like myself who see no difference in quality between minority candidates and others. So don't worry too much about it.
Sunt maiores unde ad ut. Adipisci voluptas pariatur consequatur odit quasi. Deleniti et magni molestiae non itaque. Enim asperiores similique perferendis ullam aperiam itaque cum. Et adipisci qui dolore exercitationem. Voluptas aut tempore est illo similique voluptatem.
Dolor recusandae optio perspiciatis reprehenderit. Hic minus maiores aut nemo et eligendi qui voluptas. Quo blanditiis vero sit.
Dolores sit ullam aut occaecati. Itaque in assumenda qui minima. Rerum officiis sint magnam qui iure veniam sit voluptatem. Ea voluptates molestias nihil explicabo dolores quod qui.
Harum minus blanditiis nobis corporis cumque. Vitae impedit nostrum ullam perspiciatis. Consequatur possimus consectetur excepturi qui et ducimus magnam. Voluptates laborum animi et non molestias debitis quas.
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...