Is diversity recruiting fair?
Not saying people who break in through diversity events are unqualified or unintelligent. I just don't understand how is it fair to give LGBTQ (or other minorities) people a huge advantage in the recruiting process.
Trending Content
Career Resources
Not at all. But then again, nothing in life really is “fair”
OFC it's not fair. It's a reverse-discrimination. Only diversity program has to be considered is one for veterans.
Agree with this - veterans should be the only ones given outright benefits. I understand promoting diversity networking and more support during the actual course of the analyst/associate program, but these "must fill x% of the class with diversity" is leading to a wide gap between the capabilities/general quality of diversity and non-diversity candidates in the analyst class.
I understand discrimination happened in the past (coming from an Asian, so we faced it to), but the problem is banks are trying to go from 10% female/minority classes to 50% in such a short time (looking at you GS). Because of this, lots of undeserving kids are squeaking through.
Yes, I know that rich white kids got through on connections in the past, but since that's showing no indication of stopping, your connectionless non-diversity candidate is finding it much much harder to break in. So many PE/VC firms have analyst programs only for "women/minority/LGBTQ".
It's a zero sum game folks. From my end, I try to push candidates that don't benefit from these programs as hard as I can, but sometimes that's not enough.
So if a candidate fits the diversity bracket(minority, LGBTQ, female) you wouldn't push for them as hard as you would for a connection-less "white" male????
Is systematic and structural discrimination fair? There's a reason why the vast majority of candidates hired outside these programs are upper/middle class white people. Realistically speaking, the hurdles that individuals from minorities face are much, much higher on average. Giving people the opportunity to be viewed separately is just a mechanism to account for the fact that, in the larger context of socioeconomic status and privilege, the fact that they have made it to the same place as the average straight white male (saying this as one myself) has required much more work. At the end of the day, there's a reason that in lieu of these programs, so many of those hired do fit the SWM template. These programs don't exist to take opportunities away from historically "standard" applicants, but rather to open up opportunities to structurally and systematically disenfranchised applicants who have done an unthinkable amount more to get to the same place. While I understand the frustration, both the history of finance and the world are incredibly white and male, which, without intervention, those same trends and structures continue to exist and create a self-perpetuating cycle of classist capital consolidation. To cite some empirical evidence, a valuable study done by Bertrand & Mullainathan found that applicants with "white-sounding" names were much more likely to get callbacks for jobs in general than those with "black-sounding" names, and even more frequently were likely to be channeled up, i.e. offered a position of higher seniority than the one they were applying for. I hope this provided at least a degree of clarity on the purpose of these programs both inside and outside the finance world, but I'm happy to discuss further if you disagree or find anything I said unsatisfactory.
The standard applicant is not just rich, white male. Plenty of asians (who are fucking diverse in their own regard; it's a whole darn continent) and middle/lower-class white folk get absolutely fucked over by this system.
I wouldn't care if it's only finance since a lot of applicants are doing it just for the money, but this is happening in a lot of industries.
Whilst I agree with part of this, if you look more closely to who these people in diversity programs are you'd be surprised. Often times it is some of the richest people within minorities and a white male coming from a poor neighborhood as our good friend Lloyd will missout out on the opportunity. But agreed life's not fair, but banks are trying to make it fairer by discriminating even more. I think that it would be more relevant to consider parents income rather than gender or race when it comes to diversity hiring, or a combination of the two factors. I'm sorry but if you're a black dude and your dad racks in $1m per year you've got nothing to do here.
I fucking hate diversity programs. don’t need to lay it out here, some did, but the connectionless so called white privileged kid has to be more talented and work harder than most others.
As an Asian male, diversity recruiting pisses me the fuck off.
It's completely fair. Anyone non-diversity who feels they wouldn't have an offer b/c of diversity recruiting is mad they don't stack up to their non-diverse peer set.
Banks want diversity because their CLIENTS are diverse. It has nothing to do with rich or poor or trying to help underserved communities get a chance (in most cases). It's about having the faces (and sexual orientations) at your bank match the faces (and sexual orientations) of the clients you're working with in an increasingly global world.
That is why banks are willing to pay and compete for diverse talent (often just as qualified) b/c it's hard to come by in an industry that's historically been primarily white. Basic supply and demand.
"It's completely fair." Agree for the most part, but think emphasis should be more on socioeconomic condition.
"Banks want diversity because their clients are diverse." Banks want diversity for their image.
"Often just as qualified" Sometimes, yes, but the bar is clearly lower.
Obviously not. As a diversity recruit myself with a good GPA (above 3.7) and competitive internships, I can't exactly AVOID being diverse (I have to check a box every single time I apply). But to be completely honest OP's comment literally just proves the fact that there IS an underlying racism. How can you say that there's no difference and that it's unfair when a lot of people just see all non-white people as being less able, because the perception is that we only got in using these programs. In reality being from a decent school overall that is a non-target for most banks and coming from a background worlds away from banking, because I grew up poor and not even in this country, I'd be stupid to not take advantage of these opportunities. Overall, I liken these diversity programs to the mom and dad connections most of the white guys above me have. Also dude, stop being such a bitch about it because honestly, we don't even make up 10% of the applications, how many hispanic/black/gay bankers do you actually know?
Privileged white males have a huge advantage in the recruiting process - there is absolutely zero debate about that. Diversity just sets the playing field. Shouldn't be a problem if you were good enough to begin with, and not relying on white privilege for things to fall on to your lap.
Honestly, based on my experience, the minorities are the hungrier, harder working, and the very last folks to complain.
Funny how you overlook Asian male applicants. Asians are only categorized as minorities when it’s convenient for other minorities. In the end, we don’t get “white privilege” or diversity steroid shots during any application process. I graduated from MIT, and it’s kind of crazy how “some” diversity kids that I met there even got in compared to my friends back at home. Of course, we just “deal with it.” I mean what the fuck are we going to do politically we are still “minorities.”
My dad used to say to not enter finance and just stick to medicine because the white guy is always going to get the promotion over me. Now, kids aren’t worried about getting a promotion; rather, they are more worried about getting a fucking job.
Although I didn’t recruit for IB, I still had to work my ass off to break into the hedgefund space.
Advice to prospective Asians: Worry about what you can control.
My issue with diversity recruiting is about gender rather than race. This is not to say that girls are less capable at all. Some are even more capable. But the reality is that maybe 20% of applicants are female. So for a bank to get to a 50/50 split, they have to hire a very high percentage of the girls. Because of this they end up hiring some very qualified candidates but also some that shouldn’t be there.
This didn’t necessarily make it harder for me to find a job. I was mostly frustrated by seeing how little effort was put in by some while I was busting my ass for an internship.
I also don’t think it’s fair for the qualified candidates. It puts them in a bucket with unqualified people rather than the rest of the class.
What about Asians guys? Say white guys have advantage as you guys are saying. White and Asian female have women’s program, black and Hispanic male can apply diversity, black and hispanic female can apply both women’s and diversity.
Isn’t it unfair for Asian guys to have not a single program that they can apply for. Is the industry forcing them to be homosexual?
It’s just obviously unreasonable.
As an asian guy who destroys the curve at a lower ivy who probably deserved to be at a better one and one who barely got into banking and landed a pretty good BB (and literally knowing I got dinged for being asian at some other BBs) I take it as motivation to be the best analyst. These diversity kids won't know what hit them.