No-name company internship VS Recognised company but irrelevant role.
I'm choosing between two potential internship offers this summer and I was wondering if it is better to intern at an unknown boutique in my area of interest that will definitely offer more work experience/responsibility, or a recognised company in an irrelevant role.
I've been told that recruiters look for well known company names on CVs and might not care about no-name companies even if the work experience there has been very beneficial to you.
Basically its name vs work responsibility and which is more important on a CV.
Based on the details you've provided, I think it'd be much better to do the relevant internship (assuming that you want to go into banking and can get a solid internship experience).
Don't chase the name. Chase the experience.
Definitely this.
I've seen this questioned asked before on this board and most people have echoed Character Defects and Flake. You're going to be asked about your internship in your interview. If you said you did modeling with Joe Blow's M&A it'll be more impressive then if you were getting coffee and cold calling all day at Goldman Sachs. Now depending on the firm, having the name might be more likely to slip you by HR to get an interview, but you'll look far more impressive if you have real experience to talk about in the interview. I have yet to get an internship, but this is the gist of what I've read on here. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
What is more important: Name or Position? (Originally Posted: 08/22/2012)
I want to get into investment banking, something I realized late in my college career. As of now, I have two options: work Marketing position at Citigroup vs Asset Management at boutique firm. A friend of mine suggested I take a job with citigroup because name > position and opportunities for lateral hire. However, I think Asset Management would be better because I would be on the core investment team which will involve a lot more numbers, modeling and finance vs a pure marketing role at a brand name company. Also, there is no guarantee I can get into ICG, as I would be competing against candidates who have actual banking experience. So, taking the position at Citigroup is a lot like putting my eggs into one basket. If it doesn't work out, I'd be right where I started (with a whole set of useless skills).
Granted, I plan to get an MBA but I know pre-MBA experience counts.
So, which argument sounds better?
If it's a marketing position at Citi vs. Boutique AM and you want to start a career in AM I think it's a no brainer. I would imagine work experience means much more than firm name in this case. It may be different if it was something like a "research analyst" at a boutique vs. "research assistant" at a BB, but in your case it's two entirely different departments.
So if you want to do AM = go to the boutique, if you want to tell people "I work at Citi", then go to Citi.
If you want to do investment banking, do the AM job for sure. Trust me, guys in IBD at Citi (and everyone else on the street) know what their marketing department does and know all those jobs aren't very legit.
Thanks guys! I knew I was right :)
AM without a doubt. When comparing Front Office to Middle / Back Office positions, take position over name anyday of the week.
If you're comparing Citi Equity Research versus 5-person Middle Market Boutique M&A, then name definitely wins out.
non-ibanking role at BB v. ibanking position at no-name boutique (Originally Posted: 03/20/2013)
i have two summers left until graduation, and no real finance experience. the goal is to do BB M&A ibanking internship in the summer of 2014 and post-graduation. For this summer, would it be easier to land a 2014 BB ibanking summer gig if I worked in a finance but non-ibanking role at a major BB or do M&A work at a no-name boutique?
Depends on the non-banking role, but generally I think the boutique is the better way to go.
Boutique M&A
In my experience, banks don't care how 'no-name' the boutique is. M&A experience is M&A experience.
thanks guys, i sort've figured that but im glad you all were able to confirm it
IB experience is always better than non IB experience. At least that's what I get from forums on here and other second hand sources. Jim still a student too
Agree with above, take boutique IB.
Qui dolore a nostrum eos. Enim sapiente pariatur est laudantium. Dolorem dolorum molestias est qui.
Quia sed ut officia et sequi. Quia magnam dicta rem molestiae. Impedit voluptatem omnis optio placeat repellat natus consequatur. Nemo quod iure sit rerum. Suscipit consequatur hic molestiae ipsum. Veniam ut quis magnam natus expedita.
Autem aliquam voluptatem veniam doloribus unde nemo. Non ratione et adipisci pariatur non asperiores. Mollitia minima distinctio pariatur et. Quidem sit et consectetur quas et. Commodi ea beatae odio quis.
Id sed hic impedit dolore aut ea. Ab in nulla quia ipsum aut. Sint unde ut cumque omnis.
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...