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...

This is an interesting post and I do (generally) agree with OP's sentiment that the quality of analysts and fresh from banking associates today is worse than pre-COVID, while also acknowledging that OP may be a bit too "old school" at the same time.

Coming off a red eye so maybe not the most coherent post, but throwing out some thoughts below:

• I think the context matters for when these associates are leaving at 6pm on a Tuesday. Are the associates and OP actively working on something together, and then the associate decides "this can wait" on their own volition to hit up Soulcycle, or is OP just expecting that if he's in the office, the associates should be too? For OP's sake I hope it's not the latter. Also - are they doing this 1-2 months in the job before earning the team's trust, or is this a year into their associate stint? Call me old fashioned but there's no way I would've dipped to go work out early on in my first post-IB stint in PE - forced myself to wake up early to fit my workouts in, or I'd go later at night if needed, but that's just me. But then if an associate has proven their ability to execute and deliver good work without being handheld, unless timing is critical there really shouldn't be any harm in them going to get a workout in
• If there are clearly communicated deadlines and priorities for important deliverables such as IC materials that a partner is waiting for - agreed that associates should be prioritizing those (assuming OP isn't just providing comments like periods at the end of footnotes)
• There are some things that should be nipped in the bud immediately - being off video, the travel stuff, scheduling calls - that is low hanging fruit and should be addressed immediately (whether by OP or by those higher up the food chain)
• Curious how much context is being provided when feedback is given to the associates - I'm hoping OP is educating the associates that they're asking them to say, schedule calls, because of the commercial judgement they have, vs. associates just feeling like they're being told to do something for the sake of doing something
• I do think there is a greater sense of entitlement and a more pervasive attitude problem with new grads. To be clear, not saying most new grads are entitled or have an attitude problem. But regardless of why (whether it's the difficulty in attaining the same quality of living as in years past, seeing peers in cushy tech jobs / stupid influencer roles), there does seem to have been a noticeable shift. A lot of "this is beneath me" / "I don't care" type of a view IMO, and seeing this at my new firm too. What's painfully clear is when you genuinely come at things from the perspective of giving advice, not even generating more work. For example, there are analysts at my firm who haven't been performing well and the seniors on the team are asking the mid-level folks to help with their quality of work, and now I'm talking like they can't even take notes correctly. Analyst sends me and another sr. associate a draft of their call notes before being sent to their group head, and it's legitimately in paragraph form only (no bullets), with a ton of mistakes (wrong company names mentioned for example), no structure / organization, and spelling / grammar errors. Feedback is hey, these might be great for your own notes, but this is what we would do if you're trying to provide a useful, succinct summary for somebody senior - maybe organize things by broad topics, use bullets, this is the correct company name, etc. Let us know if you have any questions, happy to help clarify / work things out with you live if it doesn't make sense, take your time this doesn't need to be a today thing if you're jammed, etc. And then the analyst just sends the notes straight to the group head afterwards with maybe like half the comments (at most) addressed? Like I just don't get it, even the most basic things like adding new sections and breaking into bullets weren't fixed. Just seems like a fundamental disconnect
• I love that generally speaking the world has moved away from 5 days mandatory in-office. Flexibility of remote work is great, and I'm a big proponent of the hybrid model. But I think everyone here has to admit (even the most jaded juniors) that you just inherently learn less, especially for those that did the majority of their banking stints fully remote. Lose out on 1) overall discussions and business context of things from your normal office convos / being pulled into a room quickly to chat on things (maybe why people care less?), and 2) the live / hands-on training provided by the more senior analysts and associates. Juniors seem less prepared than they used to be, from both a soft and hard skills perspective, and when combined with the above point on attitude it's just a bad combo overall
• I don't manage people directly after moving back to PE, but I did in my prior role. I do think some of the comments here are clearly from people who've never had to actually manage somebody vs. just executing / was an "IC" (individual contributor). I'm not talking about analysts overseeing interns or a 3rd year analyst serving as an associate on a deal, but like true reporting lines or being the clear deal QB. Associate 2 in IB-M&A had a great comment above that it's not always the VP trying to be an asshole, maybe they're getting insane pressure from their higher up, and then suddenly that VP is the one that's "fucked up". Sure, maybe that VP should communicate better or if they have a track record of saying everything is urgent when it's really not, but there also is the onus on the juniors to contextualize things and if say, an IC is coming up, maybe they should decide on their own not to go to bottomless brunch with their friends that Saturday if they know IC is on Monday and there are a lot of deliverables outstanding
• OP - don't know the dynamics of your firm and how you're seniors treat you, but taking over workstreams for associates is just enabling the problem. Advice I got from my higher ups when I did manage people was to not do everything myself, even if "I could do it more quickly, and better". Otherwise the associates don't learn and progress, and you'll end up killing yourself and it won't be sustainable. Curious if you've given any feedback to your higher ups and what they've said about the situation, and it might be on them to step in to make clear what expectations are
• I think this just validates that the PE firms recruiting so early is dumb as fuck. Harder to weed out bad candidates, and sometimes it's not even the candidates fault really since how are you supposed to know what you want do exactly that early on into your first job out of college

Like most things that are discussed on this forum, there is likely a middle ground here.

I want to start by saying I managed incoming analysts a bit at my BB since we were so understaffed post-COVID (I joined pre-COVID) and played associate a lot. When I was in PE, I didn't really manage anyone besides interns (we had two--one go-getter and one who was a bit more aloof / worked less hard). Also will add that in my time as an analyst / associate I was top bucket / above target at each review, so hopefully means I get a bit of credit with what I say below.

First -- I think a lot of the complaints are fair, but could be quickly addressed via conversation rather than a long rant on WSO. For example:

• I never realized it was poor form to be off video on calls; obviously, depended on the context of the call (an internal deal team catch-up vs. a legal DD call -- obviously be camera on if your VP / Partner are on for the deal to catch-up but do you need to be on camera for a DD call).
  • Main reason I'd want to be camera off is so I could multi-task and work on more pressing items, not to scroll on my phone
  • When I started my latest role, I was told early on when I was expected to be on video and when not -- my point: correct the behavior early on through a easy, low-key comment on how the associate should join on video. People don't just assume the right expectations right away, need to be coached
• Again, context matters here, but I'm frankly surprised about the amount of pushback I saw to someone working out during dinner time
  • Yes, if you are waiting on partner review / comments to get a deck out 24 hours before IC, then all your plans should be off or at the very least you should be within a 5 minute response window; I don't think anyone here disagrees with that
  • But, why is it a big deal if someone wants to work out at 6pm and finish the rest of the days work at 7pm when they finish (again, if not rushing to get something out)?
    • Anyone who has ever consistently worked out knows working out right before bed is ineffective as its hard to get your body up for the task, and on the backside it keeps you up longer as it messes with circadian rhythms; having said that, I had plenty of midnight (or later) workouts once we got something out (moreso in banking than PE)
• Asking for timelines is very fair. Sometimes it just involved asking what to work on first so you can create a to-do list.
  • Context matters (again), but ASOs asking what to prioritize isn't the same thing as pushing back
• If associates don't get carry, they just really aren't that incentivized to buy into the firm. I understand your firm promotes from within but what is the timeline? 2+ years as ASO, 2+ years as Sr ASO? After doing 2 years of banking, it's hard to sign up for 4 more years of grinding to finally get carry / be incentivized / be part of the team
  • I reached this point myself --> once I realized I didn't want the lives of my VPs, I focused less on earning a promotion (my shop was more 2 and out though, to be fair), and just getting my work done at a reasonable time, while taking a bit of time for myself each day (namely, to work out)
  • I no longer had an incentive besides the bonus --> a one-time event that was heavily taxed so the incremental penalty of being at / below target was minimized
    • When you don't have an incentive and are working in a negative work environment, hard to enjoy your work
• I understand associates shouldn't expect to plan weeknight dinners that often, but are they allowed to at all?
  • I never planned dates / dinners until I was a second year ASO, but the first time I did it was a first date and I was asked to leave to go home and work on something (it was not that urgent, for a small add-on deal) at 8pm on a Thursday. This was one of the first times I pushed back, and said I wouldn't be able to work on it until 10pm that night because I had plans. VP originally said he was busy too, but when I said I needed 2 hours apparently he wasn't that busy because he logged on immediately and did it.
    • While I was thankful for him doing it, it created a certain level of mistrust because he clearly wasn't busy if he couldn't wait to hop online. Nonetheless I thanked him for covering the next day and explained why I was busy; he said he was okay with it
  • One trend I notice is that you mention they should take their dinners on their weekend but in the same post you claim about associates trying to plan work around their weekends --> again, context matters, but if they aren't allowed to prioritize personal plans on the weekdays OR weekends, then are they allowed to at all?
  • I agree with you that the pay levels imply that you will need to be on call for most, if not all of the week, but I do think most associates expect a slightly better lifestyle than banking
• What does your WLB look like when you are and are not on a live deal? My favorite VPs would be much more respectful of my time when we weren't on anything live; with that said, one of my PortCo's was always looking at add-ons so I was always on a 'live deal' in other VPs point of view. When you are always ON its harder to differentiate between the real fire drills and the false fire drills (so added communication helps)
• I think PE firms brought some of this on themselves with recruiting early --> remote work has meant less training so now you are hiring based mostly on resume and interview skill, nearly 2+ years in advance of the start date
  • When you get recruited this early, then hear nothing from your firm until you start (similar to what happened with me), why are you expected to feel part of the team rather than a resource?
    • I.e., no happy hours or coffee chats with current ASOs or VPs while I was in IB. I was expected to hit the ground running after being incredibly burnt out during banking (I was asked to start ASAP after finishing banking)
    • No training at all and was frequently reemed out in my first 3-6 months for making mistakes; has to be some learning curve, right? Getting yelled at makes no one happy and certainly doesn't incentivize staying at the firm
  • Remote work has allowed people to create better WLB; this is a PRO but has led to some cons, mainly response time / accountability
    • Communicating expectations early on about when you are expected to respond is key here, if there is a clear rule in place and someone is still choosing to break it, you know they are either purposely ignoring it or may be personally struggling with the workload (not always coming from insubordination)
• Do you try to spend time in culture-building activities with ASOs? Making work seem like more than just getting assigned stuff to do, rinse, repeat, sleep, and actually trying to cultivate a tolerable work place?
  • Again, if ASOs are feeling like a cog in the machine, they aren't going to be enthused by a potential promo in 4 years; rather, getting their work done as fast as possible so they can get sleep / workout / try to see friends
• This may be controversial, but a lot of associates come into PE thinking it will be better than IB. If PE firms were more upfront about expectations, this may help attract better candidates
  • For me, I regret doing on-cycle because I didn't have time to diligence my firm enough; would've preferred to go somewhere smaller where culture was more important
    • I have friends from school and IB that are still in PE and they would often tell me my firm had bad culture compared to theirs
  • In your defense, if a new associate is completely unwilling to put the job first for at least a month at a time (on a new live deal), then you are right that they shouldn't be in the industry
    • I personally have noticed less candidates are interested in this going forward and are okay earning less to have a better WLB. Don't think that's a bad thing, but doesn't mean you should get a PE job and just slack
• Personally, I began taking a bit more of a step back when I became a second year, and found my work product actually improved. I think there is a balance from forcing yourself to be online 24/7 and setting boundaries that should be explored
  • If ASOs are never getting breaks, then I see why they'd want to take as many chances for breaks as possible
• Completely agree with your point on admin calls
  • I'd straight up ask my VP if he wanted me to schedule or if I could go through his admin. Sometimes I could go through the admin and other times it did require a finer touch. 
• On Ubers -- my firm did not have a easy way for ASOs to expense things; it made more sense for VPs to call Ubers for that reason (as they had corporate cards). Just playing Devil's advocate here, but maybe associates don't want to book things as they have to put it on their personal card? Given the unsteady nature of the comp, cash flow management can be harder in Tier 1 cities.
• There are definitely things that your associates are lagging at; I do believe you there. I think when you have these conversations you have to be upfront with them
  • I had one of these meetings with one VP at my PE firm; he thought I was checking out on him but it's actually because I was grinding on another live deal; good EQ / communication should be able to address this
    • I don't want to get too specific on this one, but he titled the meeting as if it would be a normal course diligence planning session, then sprung it on me that he wasn't pleased with my job performance. I felt completely blindsided and frankly disrespected by this approach, when I brought up how busy I was on the other deal he didn't believe me. He went to the staffer behind my back and tried to get my taken off that deal, to which the staffer (thankfully) said to the VP that he'd have to do more work to cover me (this was for a small add-on)
• Brings me to another point --> associates really aren't incentivized to work on port co work that they didn't get to invest in / do the deal for
  • Have no incentive on the exit, so it makes sense why ASOs would push back on these
  • Starts to feel like banking 2.0 where you are just processing stuff, which frankly I get why that causes a negative response
• The worst part of the job for an ASO is not being able to control his / her own schedule. Is there anywhere / any way you can find ways to let them have a bit of control?
  • This again makes PE feel like banking, which really is a bummer as an associate who has already grinded for years
• Are you asking ASOs to do things that you don't know how to do? One of my VPs would always do this and tell me to ask another associate how to do it--this would make us all angry and create a negative flywheel effect

I definitely typed a lot up here and really most of it is pro-ASO (not sure if that is fair, I'll admit). I don't mean to take sides (since some of the stuff you mentioned is very ridiculous), but it's unclear what steps were taken to clear things up with ASOs. Could you have an all-hand VP-ASO meeting to address some of the red flags and implement best practices? Has there been one-on-ones where these were brought up? 

Associates want to feel apart of the team, but when it's often left to the incentive of the fund itself it becomes difficult. I get that when you were an associate you may have been more gung-ho about the job, but frankly it may just be an industry shift that requires a bit more hand-holding / apprenticeship type management to get associates up to speed. Some people have the view that "it's just a job" and lack the overall desire / buy-in for the fund that VPs and up often do, since so much of their comp is tied to performance.

Agree with the above points and to try and be more neutral, I think the issues above mainly come down to lack of communication and poor timing (most people can do these jobs once you've gotten to this point). As an associate, you should be taking notes, being proactive, responsive during work hours and during fire drills, etc. That being said, if you don't like how Associates don't call the Uber or you see them not taking notes, remind them that it's their responsibility to do so instead of bottling it up and tanking their review later. Some of my past experiences are when employers give you no feedback and then at the end of a year end review, they just tell you all the areas where you did wrong without ever giving a heads up prior. That just creates a situation where you want to leave (despite me checking in every so often and not getting anything).
 

One potential solution is maybe creating more check ins between associates and vps (once a week or every few weeks) so everyone is aligned on tasks, assignments, etc. My managers in banking did that and while it sucks to lose time to that, it saves a ton of time on the back-end so there's no confusion. 
 

At the end of the day, each person wants to make each others life easier, so have to be more positive / invested in that versus just writing people off completely. That being said, acknowledging that some people won't change or grow into their roles. 
 

A lot of good points were made here and heavily agree with rubio above.

Sounds to me like you're experiencing life with a first-year associate straight outta banking who probably never worked any other job.

The thing is, this associate is trained in banking where the only way to live is to use downtime or weekends to do non-work related stuff. It's not about when work ends but rather when you can go undercover for a while to do what you gotta do.

Sounds to me like you need to have an honest conversation with the associate and tell him that it's not IB anymore.

Lots of the stuff you're mentioning here like to be on-video is just a thing that you almost never do or is awkward to do in IB. We literally have calls with 60 people on and not a single person on video...

It might help to put yourself into their shoes and see what you can do to help the person get better accustomed to how things work in your fund rather than being angry and ranting on WSO. I understand it must be frustrating but it won't solve itself without being a bit proactive. Your job as a VP is for the first time to also be a people manager and as much as that might suck, you gotta start being empathetic and work with the situation you have rather than wishing it to be different.

I'm sure the associate can do more than just NDAs with the right approach, no?

Certainly

You sound bad to work for. Try communicating better.

Being mad because they want to exercise at 6pm makes it hard to take the rest of what you say seriously