Post-MBA associates - what's the point?
According to my observations, most associates that enter IB post MBA have several characteristics in common. First, most of them went to crappy or semi-crappy schools for undergrad. In addition to that, they worked in some crappy jobs like HR/payroll analyst at the local office of a restaurant chain, loan administrator at some regional bank, or auditor at Big 4 at best. I think that many of them couldn't make it to IB after undergrad or didn't even try as they knew they didn't stand a chance. My impression is that they view their MBA and their IB gig as a chance to redeem themselves and put some 'prestigious' names on their resumes. It’s not that I haven’t seen post-MBA associates with impressive backgrounds, but these are not in the majority. Most associates I’ve seen are really mediocre. I also have the impression that most of these guys don’t know exactly why they want to do banking, which is funny because they are supposed to be hired for the long term, but I don’t think that most of them really have that intention, or even if they do, they don’t know what they are getting into and soon bail out. Some stay because they don’t know what else to do. Isn’t that one of the reasons that you have so many bitter VP’s and MD’s who entered post-MBA and remained trapped with no good exit options and take out their insecurity for being mediocre on their underlings. I think the result is that one of the big differences between mid-level to senior folks on the buyside and sellside comes down to buyside folks being overachievers who managed to actually achieve what they wanted, while sellside associates, VP’s and MD’s being bitter and insecure as they failed to live up to their aspirations during their whole life, with IB being one of their biggest achievements. Seriously, the only reason that most of these people managed to get jobs in IB after MBA is that they face lower competition at that level as most analysts don’t want to go back anyway.
Have you found these points to be true in your experience? As most of these people are not dead set on staying in banking, what is the point of going in if their exit options are reduced compared to those of the analysts? Most PE shops won’t hire them, HF even less so, corpdev or corporate finance are jobs you can get without IB experience. So why waste 2-3 years to go back to square zero? I am excluding the small part of MBA hires that are really talented and passionate about the job and know that they want to make MD’s.
Just because someone had a mediocre background, it doesn't mean they are not equally as productive as the people who actually get those IB analyst jobs. They just have less pedigree, so they can't land those jobs initially. That's why they needed the MBA, to show employers that they are actually more productive than their previous background suggests. Not to mention, many of them might not have been interested in IB as undergrads, or maybe didn't even know about the career early enough. It's like saying, why are there all these people with good jobs who had bad high school grades, test scores, etc.? Because, if you messed up in high school, you can use college to makeup for it and show people how talented you really are. Or think of all the people who were terrible students, but once they get in the real-world, their true colors shine through and they become really successful.
Whoa. Way too many misconceptions on here. I'm not even sure where to start and I don't have the energy to tackle all of them.
As a first year at a top MBA program, recruiting for banking, let me dispel some of your thoughts about the "kind of people" who come in as associates. The most common I've seen are:
Quite a far cry from what you listed above. The guys who have an industry focus and specialization can do phenomenally well as senior bankers covering the space that they're passionate about. It's rare to see this level of commitment or dedication from someone right out of college.
And yes, it's true that not everyone was very familiar with investment banking or what it entailed when they were in college. Some of them did not go to Ivies or equivalents for undergrad (but were top students at whichever schools they went to). A lot of others may have went to targets, but didn't want to do banking at the time.
Curious Kong - yes, i'd say so. Being a post-mba associate at a bank is usually the exit opportunity. Of course, there are stories of associates who make the switch into PE/HFs, etc. but it's much more difficult because the process is not as standardized as the pre-mba track. Positions at PE/HF shops come up sporadically at the post-MBA/VP level. It's definitely a 'right place, right time' type of position. Even then, many of those places will be reluctant to take a chance on an i-banking associate with no buyside experience (more expensive, too much time to train, etc.). Furthermore, I've come to find that many bankers (more seasoned) have a difficult time making the transition from sell side to buyside. It's a pretty different skillset and even at my shop, I've seen some senior folks only last a year or two before leaving.
Some of us have social skills and have seen a tit that didn't belong to our mother. we spent a few years after college (a place where we partied and saw the aforementioned boobs) actually learning things that I couldn't teach my 8 year old niece. I'm super glad you can beat the piss out of me at excel, I will remember that when you stammer and stutter when you are forced to speak face to face with a client who, unlike yourself, did not spend his formative years playing Dungeons and Dragons.
Die in a fire.
xoxo, hope that helps