Most meritocratic jobs?

fleetersamuelli:

What is meritocracy but thinly veiled nepotism? Are the opportunities that people are given, their genetics, their values, not a product of where and to whom they were born? Meritocracy is a facade that is used to legitimize the continued dominance of a particular social group. Then again, as a member of that social group, I am not sure that I should be complaining.

I like this comment. Remind me of "The rise of the meritocracy" (where this term was coined) by Michael Young.

Anyone self employed

If you really want to work in a meritocracy, I'll trade jobs with you...

Politically outmaneuvered into leaving? Doesn't seem to make sense... generally the people that are making money off of you want to keep you there. They may try to fuck you over pay wise.... or something of that nature, but if you are genuinely creating the profits, they have little reason to want to see you go. There can be politics in which desk you get put on and many other things of that nature though.

lots of politics getting onto the floor but once you're there it's much more of a meritocracy but then again I'm not in the industry yet

"However, after a few months certain people in seniour management became annoyed with him (eventhough he was making money) and moved him onto a vanilla desk in order to try and get him to resign (and so I'm guessing void the guarantee )."

so he should stick around, get paid, then roll. if he is in the uk, look into "material change in working conditions"

If you are an arrogant douche who everyone else hates to the point where it does not matter how much money you make because your attitude is toxic to the desk then yeah they may try to remove you via a political route. If you are likable and make money, then you are golden.

I think the entry process is far too based on what school you went to and who you know rather than how good you actually are and what kind of person you are. Once you're in, I would say that meritocracy is a pretty key factor, especially in less structured places.

Love this new kind of discussion thread btw.

I really dig the independant trader/consultant's point of view: that understanding the social reality around you is also an important factor to rising through the ranks, and that just because the market is doing well doesn't mean a person is.

This is mainly a function of how observable performance is, trading and hf will be a lot more meritocratic than banking or pe (until a senior level that is). This is why the latter care much more about prestige, in lack of observable performance you can hide behind the brand.

There seems to be a conflation between "talent" and "merit" in discussions about the presence of meritocracy on Wall Street. I would say that the former is often a cause of the latter, but they're not the same. In SirTradeaLot's story about his new boss, he highlights ideas he had, and how he was able to execute them with a new boss in place. To me, it seems like this story misses on whether or not his firm was meritocratic to begin with, instead, it shows how his new boss was adept at spotting talent, which is distinct from being able to spot merit (the latter being much eaiser).

Think about it like this, take two boy scouts, one who is older and has all the merit badges you can get, and one who is younger and has very few. The older scout has more merit (in terms of badges), and assuming the scouts are meritocratic, he will get more boy scout work (or whatever) because he's accomplished more. Now, if the younger boy scout comes up with a system that will allow him to gain merit badges at twice the speed, he has more talent than the older scout (assuming it works). But until he actually goes out and gets them, he will not surpass the older scout in a meritocracy. Now, if he does, and his system is successful, he is not only equal to the older scout in terms of merit (i.e. total merit badges), but he's also accomplished something extra, a superior system by which to get them. In this way, he's now superior to the older scout in the eyes of a meritocracy because he's accomplished more thanks to his system for getting badges.

I know, that was a very labored metaphor, but tl;dr - Wall Street is extremely meritocratic because the entry level workers oftentimes have significant achievements - academically and otherwise - to their name prior to working at a given financial institution.

This doesn't really need to be over-analyzed. Different firms and different roles will have different reward patterns within finance.

General rule of thumb: larger firms have less talent-driven upward mobility, as there tends to be a more structured hierarchy - all things being equal. IB, PE, CF will be more structured than a role where your direct value-add can be quantified more easily S&T, HF, ER.

This is for Junior/Mid-levels. At the senior levels, it's all value-add numbers.

I agree with the need for identifying the difference between talent and merit. I know plenty of people who build up a CV full of prestigious degrees and certifications, but don't retain the knowledge or know how to properly apply it. These guys will have the upper hand initially, but in the long run a guy who doesn't have these designations but works like a madman and has acquired more knowledge, skills, etc. will have just as good of a shot. A guy who knows very little about business, but is smart enough to get into HBS will land a IB/PE job ahead of a non/semi-target student who has a true passion for finance 99.99% of the time. Obviously, going to HBS will present huge opportunities down the road, but if the person is not as passionate as the other guy and can't produce alpha (while the other can), the non/semi-target kid will likely have just as good of a shot in, say, the HF world a few years down the road. Obviously alpha generation is not the only thing that will lead someone to be successful, there are definitely networking skills that are required to, but assuming someone can do this they have just as good of a shot as the HBS guy. They just have to want it more and understand how to best play the hand they have been dealt. I think a lot of people who try to make it, get fed up because it can be so hard and quit. They then feel the need to attack the structure of the system itself and declare that since they didn't make it and they tried so hard that there is no explanation for their failure besides of the lack of meritocracy.

In a lot of ways, some people have much better odds of breaking in then ever before. Minorities had virtually no chance of being on wall street 40 or even 30 years ago. Today they have much better odds. I'm a white male who comes from a lower middle class background. Perhaps it's a little bit harder for me than it would have been years ago as back then there was less competition, but I hardly think it's anything to gripe about. At the end of the day it's about the skills, drive and personality of the individual.

Meritocracy is not dead at all. Most people just use this prestige stuff as a massive excuse as to why they are not succeeding on the Street. Here is the truth.

There are people who will have it easier than you because they are connected. However, is there anything you can do to change that? No. So why are you complaining about it. If you work your ass off you will get a good paying job on Wall Street, maybe you don't become a decamillionaire but i don't think making $4-500K a year is anything to scoff at if you really had the cards stacked up against you.

No one cares, but our youngest writer's background is the following: 1) Under 1100 SAT score, 2) worked seven finance internships between freshman and senior year from garbage jobs like financial advisor intern all the way up to a really chop shop investment bank during his junior year 3) got laid off TWICE, 4) is now making close to a two handle in his mid 20's. The guy used to live in a car so I don't know what the excuses here are about.

You know what they don't teach in "Meritocracy"? Grind. They don't teach you that you're not special because you absolutely are not special. You can sit there and complain that you could have gotten promoted to MD faster if you had it all handed to you. Yeah that is true but there are NO results from that. None. So why are you complaining? Instead do what no one else is willing to do, put in all those hours, throw away the frat parties and get working.

Another major issue i've seen with young guys joining finance is they complain like no other. Jesus christ man you have got to be kidding me. If you're complaining about making 7 power point edits at 2am what are you going to do when a client really yells at you on the phone, go run to your MD for "help?". Get out there and take your promotions because you worked for it. Control you emotions that is half of the game of finance.

No where am I saying that you're going to make $10M a year if you just work hard. That's a bit of a pipe dream. Instead the truth is you can make good money, young and have a good life if you're willing to do the work. If you're extremely smart and have that incredible grind personality sure you may start raking in millions.

Finally another huge thing i've seen in finance that is terrible is the "BCC" email. Get the fuck out with that shit. Seriously. If you're a real man and a real person you have something that needs to come up go talk to them in person. You know like a real human being. If you think throwing people under the bus and trying to play "dick bag" is going to work, don't be surprised when you get a pink slip. At the end of the day the entire idea of meritocracy should be summed up as follows.

"Take ownership and Pride in your work".

If you get called out, own up to it. If you catch an error fix it and hand it to the person saying you fixed it and DO NOT raise it up the flag pole. Build some real trust between you and your employer. That's how you win at life. All the cynicism is just excuses. Take pride, take ownership and take what you deserve. If you're putting in 110% of your effort into everything you will become successful.

Yeah maybe not a ferrari every week, but you'll look in the mirror and barely recognize who you've become.

I think people are missing the point of the post. There were really three points.

1. There is no other industry where average intelligence people can make this kind of money
2. There are no hand outs
3. Who are you taking advice from

Number three seems to be ignored. Who should most people be listening to? 1. Wharton 1600/1600, 4.0, --> Goldman --> Citadel 2. Minnesota state --> Managing director at Lazard.

That's really the point, i mean making $180K, 280K, 380K is irrelevant.

It sounds like Blackhat and SirTradesAlot have some serious pedigree which is awesome. His resume is nails from "hello I am blackhat/sirtrades". He has that interview on lock down and that coffin is set up as long as he doesnt fuck it up.

(note in no way am I saying either don't deserve it, they sure as hell do getting a perfect SAT score and locking up any legit job like that is no joke. To ignore the fact that most people cannot achieve perfect scores though is a bit insane).

Given the vast size of the forum most people are likely not that smart so they should be looking for people who had a different path. People who escalate the ladder quickly with very high degrees and high IQ's usually have a problem disassociating their cognitive abilities.

Another one of our writers is a VP and came from an IVY league, does that mean people should only look there for advice. The answer is an obvious no.

The story was not meant to be a "brag sheet" it was meant to say "If you grind like no other anyone can make good money in this business"

Hopefully that clears things up, in the grand scheme of things yeah $200K is not a lot of money at mid twenties, however... go look up people who graduate from no name schools and see how much they are making a few years later.

Rule of thumb = make self to self comparisons.

(no I did not throw monkey crap at you guys do not care to do so, I believe both of you guys know your shit based on your previous posts)

^^ I agree with all your comments.

Tone was not meant to be condescending in any fashion. Your advice again is spot on from the posts i've seen. Point again was its not always the right move to go and B-line it and take advice from a blueprint of sorts.

Of course I'll stick around and continue to pay the dues as necessary on any online forum. It is what it is.

Also agree with the cut out on top in the OP where you're quoted, basically searching for a job where you're not going to be a "cog" in the wheel. Vast majority of people make this mistake and join sweatshops where they churn and burn a 2-3 year stint.

End of the day though, an average intelligence person can get a job on the street with grind and networking. If we're talking about average school guy going and becoming a BSD or hedge fund manager... yeah bullshit that's a pipe dream.