MF followed up 4 months after reference check with a Caveat. How do I respond?
I went through a full interview process with a MF buyout fund about four months ago, all the way through reference checks, and was ultimately told they were going in a different direction. The process had gone very well overall, and I was confident I would receive an offer, so the outcome was disappointing.
For references, they reached out directly to my (then-current) group head, who connected them with two VPs. I had worked with both relatively infrequently, and I did not have a strong relationship with one of them. In two other processes where I ultimately received offers, I was asked to provide my own references, so when this opportunity fell through, I suspected the reference checks—particularly the one with the VP I didn’t get along with—may have played a role.
Four months later, the Principal who runs recruiting reached out to reconnect and asked if I was still interested. During our call, he explained that they had wanted to hire me, but a reference mentioned one or two instances where I worked with a VP/Director I felt was incompetent and made that view known to others. He emphasized that my technical skills and mental aptitude were viewed very positively, but culture is important to them, and he wants me to reflect on this feedback and circle back before moving forward with next steps (which is an offer in my opinion because they wouldn't have circled back out if they didn't like me and wouldn't have given me a chance to respond if they thought it was a deal breaker).
He asked me to take a few days to reflect and follow up. I’m very interested in the opportunity and want to approach this thoughtfully so I don’t lose out a second time.
My initial thoughts are:
- Focus on reflection and growth, even though I don’t recall a specific incident
- Emphasize learnings and how I would handle similar situations differently
- Offer two to three additional references (VPs I worked closely with during my second year and who have served as references successfully in other processes)
- Avoid denying the feedback outright or deflecting blame onto the VP
I’d appreciate advice from others on how best to handle this, as it feels like a fairly atypical situation and I haven’t found much guidance online.
Agree with all 4 points - good plan
Bump
Few questions:
Good questions. See below:
- The previous process was for an immediate hire which they filled already. I had a longer notice period so when they ran references, they just decided to go in the other direction given the specific feedback and the longer lead time. The process now is more for summer 2026 / with a longer lead time (afaik)
- yes, I ended up starting my PE stint at an UMM fund so now this would be more of a lateral move instead of directly after banking
My takeaway is the reference comment gave them pause enough to not wait for the longer notice period given immediate hiring need but now that they have the capacity for a longer lead time hire they are circling back.
Ok helpful. Two more:
Seems like you've got it figured out with the bullets
My 2c - grass isn't always greener. I'd stick with the seat you have (especially as your promotion path might actually be more assured) and complete your program unless you genuinely think the specialization is limiting to your long-term career aspirations.
My reasoning if curious:
As I said above, the ONLY reason I'd switch is if you really don't like your specialization and think it limits growth or future prospects 3-5 years down the line. Unless it's like real estate or something, I don't really see a specialty that would pigeon hole you this early.
Thanks, this is super helpful. While I agree that switching for prestige doesn't make a ton of sense, my primary reason would in fact be the sector specialization vs. a generalist seat. To avoid doxxing myself, you can assume the sector is real estate (or something just as niche). In my mind, after I wrap up my associate stint at my current firm, I'll be too specialized to be considered for other sectors (such as tech, industrials, healthcare, etc.), given my banking stint was also in the same sector as the one I am currently covering. While this would be an early lateral, I would be able to use this as a springboard into more generalist investing. If I get the promotion in my current seat, that's great but in a situation where it doesn't work out, there aren't many comparable seats within the same sector.
I agree with SaaSchimp. I would add as a reason that you’re deploying successfully and that’s really all that matters right now. It’ll be very easy to be sidelined at the MF or to simply not deploy.
That said, that wasn’t your question, and if you still want to take the job your only move is to eat some humble pie. It sounds like you know the person and don’t get along, so it’s not totally out of the blue they gave negative feedback. Just address it head on or overdo it a bit even if you think it’s unfair because they want to see ‘maturity’.
Now for the out of the box option, if you’re leaning ‘no’ you should probably politely but firmly close the door vs. start fishing, but for shits and giggles it’d be interesting to see when you turn the tables on them. People want what they can’t have and these guys are deal junkies. You could say that you appreciate the opportunity, would like to stay in touch but that it’s going super well where you are and you’re not inclined to move but that you can maybe talk in a few years. That might actually make them chase you harder so make sure you get the balance right subject to what you’re trying to achieve
I’d also say pretty weak they claim to be so big on culture but don’t communicate openly or have a dialogue when they get some gossip they don’t like from the schoolyard - one for them to reflect on.
For what it is worth the MF team is also actively deploying capital, probably at a similar pace to my current team. I mentioned this in the above comment but my primary motivation would be to switch out of a niche sector into more generalist investing.
I also agree that the way to clear this hurdle is to exhibit learnings from this feedback and to show I can grow through this feedback loop. Do you have any tips? I was initially thinking about offering 2-3 additional references but I think that might be interpreted as a defensive move and me trying to disregard the reference checks already done. I think there is a fine line between sounded fake and sounding genuine through the reflection and I want to avoid it being interpreted as the former.
Yes but there’s a difference between the team deploying and you being part of the deployment (and that’s obviously the only thing that matters). You’ll be new, other Associates will see you as a threat and you start with an asterisk behind your name
Anyway sounds like you want to move regardless, which is your prerogative. Without any context so here’s a generic example - I would just acknowledge the feedback, admit it didn’t work as it should’ve, and then make it very situationally specific why the combination of that person AND situation is a one-off (ie implying no pattern or behavioural issue - it was a specific fall out where you stood on their toes and they’re a bit spiteful) and what you’ve learned from the experience. For example, you spin it in a way where you can chalk it up to your in-experience of how to deal with a difficult person (still your fault so not too defensive, but one of being a bit green and inexperienced which you’re allowed to be).
For example, “I had difficulty adapting to their communication style and management style, not having had exposure to that type of management before (ie imply difficult person without saying it). Working with people who have that management style isn’t my favourite, but I can now recognise the situation that occurred and I have better ways of dealing with it (ie yes I’m part to blame but that person is special). I’ve discussed with peers and have learned from them how they approached similar situations in the team (ie I’m not the only one who had issues with this dude). I probably should’ve done that sooner or recognise the situation sooner (ie mea culpa). It was a bit of greenness on my side and I’ve taken it as a good learning experience (ie I get that I fucked up, but it was my inexperience, not my personality). I’ve since worked with similar management styles without any issues (ie don’t worry, it won’t happen again)”. By making clear it’s a one-off it’s an open door for them to ask for more references vs you having to offer
I would say though you must’ve really pissed someone off to get a bad reference, or they’re very spiteful. Most people would just decline to comment
Best of luck. Let us know what happens.
on everything if some balding principal told to me 'reflect' on feedback he understands zero of the context of im coming to work for you to personally ruin your life
Voluptates illo est occaecati quae est. Sed aut quos consectetur repudiandae atque. Ut vero amet velit cum suscipit.
Velit fugiat iusto veritatis adipisci quod ipsum iure sint. Delectus et totam incidunt suscipit non.
Dicta sit recusandae ipsa sint voluptatem illo eius. Occaecati et tempore praesentium vitae doloribus. Nostrum eos sed et. Ab aut blanditiis id ut minima atque qui. Voluptate et eius necessitatibus eos. Non doloribus non sint voluptate pariatur. Sequi porro eius quos est.
Enim labore debitis magnam est velit. Earum a enim qui eligendi voluptatum est.
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...