Do your associates just not care?

Honest question. What's wrong with taking an hour on a Tuesday to work out? Assuming they will log back in after to complete work

fund size?

i would hope the larger the fund size, the more serious they take it

Dang, I'm fighting for my life til like midnight every night responsible for all the analysis, modeling, notes, all the admin stuff etc. Hopefully a few years down the road this will start to open more doors if my peers at MF's are all clowning like what OP has said. currently at a $700mm fund with a big drop in comp compared to OP's associates.   

Just fire their lazy asses for them to be stranded in a shitty job market and hire recently laid off BB employees who are undoubtedly desperate.

OP you seem like the problem here

turns out most people don’t wanna work for an insecure hardo 

I’m also going to guess you’re not a big goer of the gym yourself

Sounds like you guys recruited the wrong associates.

Are you guys hiring?

Are your associates affluent kids from good backgrounds, if so they have no reason to care. Hire more PSGs

This is something that needs to be addressed quickly. Get in someone’s face and tell them to get it done. If they don’t respond then they aren’t interested in the job. 
 

Hire slow, fire fast. A million kids want that seat. I don’t agree with some posters, you don’t sound like a psycho type A guy, the stuff you are asking for us pretty basic. 

I agree with you 100% (VP in PE here) and have experienced the same issue with my juniors. Apparently, attending personal dinners on a weekday is more important than attending advisor calls or addressing a time sensitive matter that a partner specifically asked for. 

Most of my peers at other firms are experiencing it as well. It's just supply and demand tbh. Over the past few years, there has been a sizeable jump in opportunities on the buyside while the talent pool has shrunk as more bankers have pursued tech / entrepreneurship / other opportunities. A lot of people were also able to raise first-time funds in the past 2-3 years which wasn't as easy prior to the pandemic. My guess is some of these funds will shut down over the next 4-5 years which will change the supply/demand dynamics back in the employers favor and change this type of associate behaviour. Look at what's happening to the tech sector after hearing many programmers/software engineers brag about working 3 jobs at once and still having time for SoulCycle / travelling all over the world / etc. 

Gen Z is soft, even softer than millennials somehow (see comments in this thread) and I already feel like I’m way less hard working than my parents.

No point in complaining though, highly doubt it’s going to change.

When I hear about these types types of situations I generally think of three things. 

First, they genuinely think they are competently doing their role. Has this expectation been communicated to them? It is entirely possible that if you told them to be better that they could step up and be better  

Second, have you trained them? If the work product isn’t up to standard did you show them what standard was? 

Third, what is your interview process like? Most of what you seem (rightfully) concerned about appears to be things you can screen for in the interview process. 

It is entirely possible (and plausible) that these employees are duds. They could have just slipped through and just be a good interview. However, PE isn’t that difficult of a field. I would be surprised if they actually are such duds. But it is possible. I don’t work with them so I don’t know. 

It sounds like you do have some bad associates and I’ve definitely witnessed some similar stuff amongst juniors at my firm (ignore the title, I’m a senior associate at an UMM that hires analysts as well as associates out of banking).

Honest question though, along the lines of what someone alluded to above with PE not being the path it once was. Do you ever wonder if the value of the marginal hour of work has just come down super meaningfully in this industry? The reality in the UMM space in my experience is that everything is banked, been owned by multiple sponsors for the last decade, being sold in a competitive auction etc. It rarely feels like all that incremental diligence is really uncovering some unique insight that will give you an edge in these highly efficient processes that generally result in some sponsor paying a market clearing price.

The reality is the funds need to deploy all this capital, and getting deals done is a result of where partners feel they want to lean in to get something across the line. As a result, I feel a bit less motivated to go the extra mile given it’s all a bit of a dog and pony show at the end of the day.

Maybe our firm just has a shit process or the tides will turn on this dynamic if the industry isn’t able to ride a levered beta trade for the next decade. We’ll have to see.

OP sounds like he hasn't gotten laid in like 3 years jesus christ. Have you tried directly communicating? Most IBs don't teach analysts how to read minds during their stints, so its helpful if you actually verbalize your expectations rather than just bitching when they're not met. Also, go to the fucking gym. If you're mad at your associate for getting a 1hr pump in, you're a fucking pansy. If anything get in there and spot him. 

Do your associates have carry? If not, that’s a pretty big reason for a lot of it in my view. The whole notion of them being expected to be fully motivated by the fact that you do direct promo is unrealistic - I’m sure your firm like most others in PE is incredibly late to notify of if the promo is actually there and you should know that it’s always uncertain in this industry (can quickly get screwed by a lateral hire above you, etc.).

Agree with a lot of the general sentiment, but you have to realize that the world is changing and people aren’t necessarily willing to sacrifice their entire lives to pursue a PE career at this point

In defense of the original post, if there are important timelines (submitting to IC and have to get a draft to partner for review) then yes your Associate should be locked in and not aloof. But  many work streams are not time sensitive to that extent and you shouldn’t have your juniors think everything is a fire drill (otherwise will lead to burn out and ultimately churn).

Probably should over-communicate with juniors with regards to timing, etc. (and vice versa they should check in with you too). Truly believe a lot of these issues are just related to lack of communication and poor time management, not lack of ability (most people can do these jobs, it’s mostly about the right fit and culture for each person to thrive in). 

Tbh, and a bit off-topic from comments above, you sound like you're gonna burn out in a few years. Definitely don't sound like Partner material or "I'm gonna be doing this for the next 30 years".

People that do IB/PE for life are jacks of all trades...and masters of all trades. I.E. incredibly analytically sharp but also incredibly politically and socially cunning, finding ways to get people to do things that often people don't want to do/realize they did for you.

You wanna be the guy that the Partners look at and say "Wow this guy is always dependable/comes through....and makes it look so easy running the junior team while being a real human"  and that associates say "This guy hasn't drunk the kool-aid, is relatable and views me as an equal rather than as my boss, while getting shit done together". Whether either of those hypothetical statements would be completely true is irrelevant...but that's the perception you're going for from your seniors and your juniors.

You just kinda sound like a grindy undifferentiated execution monkey .. no offense .. with pretty low emotional EQ.

When I ask to schedule calls they forward to the admin. I asked you because there's some commercial judgment on who to include, which to prioritize. I can also just ask my admin too.

Ignore title my ASO years are behind me.

This is the only part from what you've mentioned is unreasonable. Asking associates to play admin is categorically different than asking them to be available.

Seeing as how I’m likely going back to PE after B School this’ll bite me in the ass, but honestly it’s funny as fuck how many threads there are of butthurt VPs. 
 

Some of the things mentioned are definitely ridiculous, but I’m glad associates are taking a stand and doing what they want to do, cuz apparently y’all can’t do shit about it except complain on WSO. They haven’t ever had this much power, so it’s honestly kind of funny to see it play out. And sorry, they went to Soul Cycle because they realized that the “urgent” request had no practical urgency, and realized that the VP either (1) didn’t know that, (2) is getting way too antsy, or most likely (3) didn’t even attempt to push back with the Partner, knowing full well there was no urgency to this task, and promised that they’ll look into by the next day for no fucking reason, and then pings the associate. Thus, Associate takes it into their own hands because they don’t respect a spineless VP and forces him to stay up late to review some dumb ass piece of work that’s gonna get completely overhauled the next day when the partner changes his mind. Finally, there can be consequences for seniors not respecting juniors’ time.
 

Fundamentally different from my years getting absolutely fucking destroyed, and then when I finally get the duck out of there my VP gives me the parting feedback of “you’ve been great, but sometimes you seem unhappy.”

Our AS1 comp was 340 and AS2 was 385. So I think they're reasonably comped but what do I know. 

This is expected total compensation correct? What is the base salary? I think in general there’s a skeptical feeling among younger workers about actually realizing the bonus because we’ve seen companies even in years of record profits give a pitiful bonus due to the “pandemic”. That doesn’t even count this past year where some firms gave $0 bonus. In the past trust existed between both the firm and employee in terms of earning deferred comp with the bonus, but that trust is quickly eroding imo. It might help to just shift more of your compensation towards base which is actually guaranteed, because that’s the number that is getting a lot more weight these days. 

Seems like your associates need to trade in their soulcycle memberships for some work ethic.

Tell me what shop you’re at that’s paying $340k for a 1st year associate and I’ll replace your associate tomorrow

I'm a director. My analysts care. My VPs care. My associates do not care at all.

I think you answered your own question: although they joined, they didn't care.

That is because a big part of PE recruiting is dead set on prestige --- which is also true in investment banking. When people recruit for PE, they have to "fit in", and on top of that they better go to one of the targets. That essentially fills the pipeline with lots of wannabes who don't exactly love PE. The system is essentially weeding out some high-quality, non-target school/bank candidates who actually like this stuff. 

I would answer but I just don't care

I love how these loser seniors complain about junior's time allocation yet they find time to come here and whine like a toddler instead of spending time with their juniors giving thorough instructions on how they want analyses done.  You are the problem - take a look in the mirror buddy.  No wonder everyone is leaving

I suggest you make investing in each deal (or at least each deal the associate works on) absolutely mandatory.  And make that clear to any applicant who wishes to join your firm before they sign on.  That will weed out those applicants who don't care to join you to make money together, and will make sure that every employee cares A LOT about each deal they do, and what they can do post-investment to make the portcos successful. 

"Show me the incentive and I'll show you the outcome” - Charlie Munger

We are coming off a period where junior talent was at a premium. Buyside, tech, and tons of exit opps for kids a few months into their banking gig.

Tides have turned. Tech has blown up, macros are weak, and the status quo is shifting back tbh.

Not a lot have accepted this new reality or even begun to understand that the pendulum is starting to swing, and that junior talent doesn't have the same leverage they did a year or two ago. The "children" of 2008 know how quickly the switch flips.

Case in point, look at the number of butthurt associates on here triggered by your post lol.

The PE industry is top-heavy, oversaturated and severely endangered by macro factors. Associates can feel this in their bones. Who can blame them for maximizing their comfort until they move on to something bigger and better?

If you need a new associate please feel free to respond to this message, will happily take their places and work out in the morning for that comp

hire more immigrants. they'll work 24/7 for this money. for an American from rich family with good background and work experience $300-400k is not unimaginable. they know they can find something similar if they get fired, so they don't feel scared to push back.

Sometimes I worry I am pushing the my juniors too hard because the industry has changed so much since I was in their shoes... Then I read posts like this one and thank god for not making me an asshole again.

As funny and entertaining as this whole thread is, I can see it being true. It’s the same in RE. Daddy’s kids get handed a job and don’t do shit all day. There’s guy and gals out there who still grind and love this business, but they’re few and far between.

Also, it’s not black and white. You can have a pissy VP and a shitty associate at the same time.

I'm an AS2 in MF PE. I was in one of the last pre-COVID / WFH analyst classes in banking. I'll caveat my post by saying that it's possible the VP is too much of a hardo and the Asso is also lazy.

I've noticed that the WFH era of banking analysts is significantly worse from a hard work/willingness to grind perspective. I think your first job honestly puts a standard on what you believe work norms are in this industry. This is exacerbated by weak recruiting standards at most of the top firms, especially the ones that come off as "nice". By that I mean, if you go to work for Apollo, BX, or KKR (not a comprehensive list) you kind of know what you are getting into but if you go to work at one of the other large PE firms that have a friendlier atmosphere, there's a higher chance that someone who looks great on paper sifted through the cracks. I can say this firsthand by experiencing three on-cycle recruiting processes since I started. The model tests have gotten easier (some are no longer a model and instead you are supposed to find errors, the amount of the template that's completed is higher, etc.). So you have a generation of associates whose first job experience was relatively easy (yes banking during COVID was hard but it also wasn't hard because as much as you worked, you also didn't have to show up in person to early meetings after a late night and you could take a break during the day vs. having to sit at your desk to look busy or go for a 15-20 min walk max to clear your head in Midtown) and who had lower hurdles to jump over to get their PE jobs.

The interview questions can vary a lot by the candidate as well as most PE firms have the mandate to increase diversity in their ranks from LPs. I won't say that diverse candidates are worse at the job at all but I will say that the chance you hire an Asian / Indian male who isn't proficient in accounting, modeling, etc. is much lower. Not to say those are the best associates either as executive presence and other soft skills vary a lot from person to person but you know that some people can just get the job done even if they aren't VP material off the bat.

I'm noticing this lack of interest in the job with some analysts I work with as well in OP's defense. I end up having to spend 2-3x the amount of time teaching/fixing / explaining how to do things on fairly basic tasks, which while I find frustrating, I understand because I was probably also annoying to work with when I started banking out of college as well. What's more frustrating is when you discuss a deadline for fairly basic work that comes in late or just isn't completed on a Friday afternoon (pre-6pm) and then done on Monday morning the following week. I don't like to think I'm difficult to work with and I enjoy my life outside of my work hours, however, I don't really know what to do when someone you are supposed to coach/manage decides to log-off at 5/6 pm on weekdays and doesn't work at all on the weekends. I don't require weekend work and definitely don't create fake deadlines unless someone more senior asks for something but when you start out you are going to be slow and so sometimes weekday work spills into the weekends or a little later at night. But after a few months of that you get faster and then you can fully control your schedule. I sympathize with OP on the lack of work ethic in recent grads.

Broadly though, I think anyone who is working in this industry should feel lucky to be here. A lot of the attitude of not willing to put in the time to do a good job is a sense of entitlement. There's no other job in the world that pays this well (outside of SWE / Tech PMs but that's likely to change). If you aren't willing to make that trade, then you should find a career that's more aligned with your ideal work-life balance. To think that you deserve to get paid 6x the median family wage in the U.S. and also not work harder for it feels kind of entitled. I know this is going to be a fairly unpopular opinion but you live with the choices you make. I think someone earlier in this thread referenced a social contract about what the employer offers vs what the employee offers. The other side of the contract is that this job affords a nicer lifestyle than most other jobs in the world so is it really that crazy that there are more stringent requirements to do it?

Ignore title, currently VP in UMM fund. Most glaring degradation of talent is lack of technical / modeling skills on the job where PE firms are essentially doing the entire finance training / ramp up process for their first year associates. At banks, that responsibility used to fall to 2nd / 3rd year analysts where 1st years would learn through observation of modeling, deck creation, ideation, ask questions, and generally learn what it means to work hard by first owning simple workstreams and ramping up into more complex aspects of the job. Remote work / WFH has absolutely set back the incoming classes putting much more pressure on PE firms to train these people up just to get to an average outcome. The fact of the matter is that PE VP's on a small 3-4 person deal team cannot generally handle the full workload of deal timelines + the invest the time to coach and train up first year assos in real-time on a deal. We've had to begin double / triple staffing assos just to give them an environment where they can learn with low / no stakes at the outset and aiming to hire 25-40% above our capacity needs knowing the throughput will be signficantly lower.

One data point: our HH has represented that model fail rates have increased from ~50% historically to 75-85% over past year or so. We toned down our case study signficantly to make easier for this exact reason and our own fail rates have gone up from ~40% historically to 85% in a fairly large same size over the past 2 months. The drop off perfectly coincides with the first IB classes that were fully remote to a tee and is a sample size of thousands of model tests administered annually.

I don't think lower pass rates on an easier case study means these individuals lack intellect or drive to do the job, they just simply do not know how to do the job at higher rates than pre-COVID. This puts a lot more pressure on mid-ranks to cover that gap knowing that lack of asso talent is not a valid excuse for poor or late work to partners...