Recently, I got into a debate with a friend about what determines your offer figures and she told me that the MBA graduates from target programs coming in her class at the firm (she is in a marketing leadership training program for an international consumer products company) received better offers and are often given better opportunity/treatment during the program. I never thought that target kids would get paid better or have access to fast-track opportunity after getting in just because of their school brand. My thinking is perhaps they had received multiple offers or had participated in more impressive extracurricular activities, which makes them the candidates with more potential/perceived value in the eye of employers, therefore more room for negotiation and higher offer. What do you think? Does this happen at your firm or my friend is wrong?
Trending Content - Job Search Advice Forum
| +22 | Layoff Stigma | 12 | 2d |
| +20 | Down bad for career advice | 3 | 3d |
| +18 | Feeling behind | 2 | 1d |
| +18 | Don’t underestimate how risky joining a startup is | 3 | 3d |
| +18 | Advice for incoming freshman @ target | 5 | 2d |
| +14 | Delete | 3 | 4d |
| +13 | Feeling pigeonholed due to past internships | 3 | 4d |
| +10 | Low Tiew Consulting vs Middle Office at an mid-size Investment Firm | 2 | 5d |
| +9 | Need advice - reentering industry | 1 | 6d |
| +9 | 2027 FT IB Recruiting from Private Credit | 4 | 1d |
Career Resources
On the sell side, if you are hired into a post MBA role within an Associate class, the pay is uniform with respect to salary, signing and relocation bonuses, and stub bonuses. The only thing that is not uniform is the end of year bonus which varies based upon performance.
Depends on the company and the industry. But it does happen.
Can you elaborate on this? Personally, I think if a company systematically implements a policy like this, it will just discourage non-target kids with high potential and retain prestige whores in the organization in the long term.
The problem with that rationale is that the risk of "missing high-potential non-targets" and instead "retaining prestige whores" isn't really a risk at all. The kid from Harvard already proved he's at least smart enough to get in to Harvard somehow. The non-target has not, so in truth the risk lies in hiring the non-target student. Actually, there's never any real reason to take a non-target at any firm that has the reputation or opportunity available to recruit target kids instead. That's essentially what constitutes the entire non-target problem...
I should know, as I went to a non-target.
To answer the OP: from my observation, there is definitely discrimination of sorts in certain stages of your career and in certain types of places. It mainly seems to take on the form of an idea that non-target hires don't have as much "pedigree." I can't speak to how this manifests itself in terms of pay structure, bonuses, exit opps, etc, but from what I understand it's kind of like this: if Peter Sullivan hadn't had a PhD from MIT in Margin Call, he wouldn't have been in the board room regardless of what he found in that model.
Interesting, I went to grad school at a semi-target that borderlines a target, yet I was never informed of this type of discrimination before this way or another way. That's probably because most of my classmates went into i-banking and economic consulting where compensation scheme for the whole analyst class is quite structurally standardized. I am working in corporate finance for a large regional commercial bank and have seen that the vast majority of my managers and even the CFOs went to non-targets and semi-targets. I guess preferential treatments for target kids are doled out more often in high-finance or leadership training programs then.
Ut mollitia nesciunt laboriosam eos odio hic. Libero officiis dolorem dolor. Quos odio repudiandae praesentium ut voluptates laboriosam. Molestias dolorem incidunt ratione quisquam. Animi itaque quo sint inventore deleniti sint molestias.
Qui id nulla qui. Iure consectetur odio in. Nam neque voluptate consequatur soluta.
Sint consectetur autem velit cum ducimus. Distinctio fugit voluptatibus consequatur et molestias voluptate. Provident minima aut quae enim. Sit ut facilis fugiat.
Voluptas non dolor quo minus tenetur labore. Officia corrupti tempore impedit aut et sit. Sequi ea repellendus occaecati repellat et. Iusto repellat ut error porro quas qui. Voluptatem sed dolorem dolorem ducimus.
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...