Well it's that time of year. I've started getting requests from headhunters/recruiter to provide references for my analysts. However, some of them aren't exactly top bucket. I'm not worried about the top bucket guys, I'm more concerned about all the other spectrum of analysts. Looking for advice from people who have been in a similar situation. What do you do? How do the following considerations affect how you give a recommendation?
1. If you know the recruiter well (was my former analyst, very strong / top bucket) vs. not at all (some rando calling you)? Do you feel like you stake your professional reputation on a reco?
2. Analyst being recommended is ok but not great. Technical skill is appropriate for their current level. They are getting the hang of it, but aren't super stars. They are additive to the team, but need considerable guidance.
3. Analyst being recommended is terrible. No attention to detail. Weak technical skills. Do you tank them?
Part of the problem is that this process seems to get kick started earlier every year. Makes it tricky to get a proper read.
SB's for insightful comments / responses.
I would just tell HH's which guys you are close with and do good work so perhaps they get bumped up and get an extra interview or two.
Regarding formal recommendations, just say you're happy to provide one once a given interview process is close to making offers. If someone has made it that far in the process, the PE firm probably likes them enough and hopefully the analyst is good with you (otherwise why put you down as a reference) and you can talk about their positives. Since the PE firm has already advanced this person to an advanced stage of interviews, they probably already like the analyst so I don't think you're really putting your reputation on the line (also I think you can be a little more candid if a personal relationship exists).
How do analysts manage to stand out with barely 4 months on the desk? This process is insane
Agreed. It's difficult. Combination of luck and skill. Mostly luck. Some analysts got staffed on deals which happened to announce during their short tenure.
Is there anything that you can do as an analyst to influence your staffings? Is it ever appropriate to just flat out tell your staffer that you're interested in working on a targeted sell-side process?
I'm curious, how would banks compete against PE firms to try and retain the best talent? What characteristics define superstar analysts?
I think you'll notice that there has been a push by banks to retain talent. However, I think this is hampered by the early PE recruiting process. Analysts usually have their PE offers before they are even paid their first bonus. Also, I think the PE Associate role is very different from the IBD Associate role. I feel like the people who really want to be career bankers (not just saying that in the interview) are the ones who tend to be A2A promotes (and climb the chain very quickly) but it seems like they are relatively few .
I'd definitely chat with the (#2,#3) analysts and give feedback of where they are development wise vs where they should be or need to be.
Simple questions to ask them 1x1: Where do you see yourself in 1-3 years? Is it here in IB or PE, and what skill set do you think you need to be successful and how would you rate yourself today? What is your plan of action for closing the gap?
Monitor improvements and if they don't seem to make them in ~1.5/2Months then you have your answer.
In my experience if they're calling you, the analyst has already made it past several rounds and they probably like him/her.
Unless the analyst was total crap with poor work ethic, I'm on the side that suggests supporting your colleagues/friends. As others before mentioned, so much of who gets noticed/gets a good reputation in IB is based on luck anyway. Plus, helping your analysts succeed will only enhance your network and bank too. Its a small world.
For type 2/3 analysts - I think you could always say something along the lines of - yea they are on the team, which clearly shows they are smart, blah blah blah, but its really too early in their cycle to provide meaningful feedback.
You aren't throwing them under the bus and the recruiter will read through the lines to tell they aren't a super star. Plus to your point, it really is very early. I'm sure some kids get off to a slow start but become much better over time.
I think this is all helpful advice. I'll just add re: #3, no you absolutely do not 'tank' them. There is 0 upside to negatively talking about someone you really only have limited experience with to even begin with. But even if you did have significant experience working with them, at worst you decline to support, but never tank anyone.
This should just be a general LPT: do not ever speak negatively about other people. It only has downside and ultimately makes you look bad. Listen to other people's bitching, smile and nod.
How do you become a superstar in 4 month? You bring coffee to MD every morning or what?
Voluptatum nulla totam quod accusamus. Dolor enim nemo sunt quos ipsam voluptates ullam. Aut aliquam est ut vitae molestiae est. Reiciendis facilis exercitationem iusto dolores aliquid deserunt porro.
Autem deserunt illum sapiente officiis numquam aut. Necessitatibus fugit aliquid vel a laborum nesciunt. Sint occaecati quam praesentium tenetur.
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...