PE isn’t the best way to get into b-school

Have some associates in my cohort wrapping up their app cycles and wanted to address this, especially with regards to H/S (where our firm has had decent success historically). A lot of bankers think once they land a PE gig with a ton of alumni from those schools, the next five years of their lives are set. For various reasons, among the overrepresented industries, even if you’re at an MF, PE doesn’t stand out at the top per-capita compared to consulting or even tech products. There’s a decent argument you’d even rather be a standout in one of the leadership management programs at a reputed F500 than be “just another” MM / MF associate if the goal is purely MBA admissions. I’d still recommend taking the PE job for general optionality, signaling, technical experience better post-MBA options, better non-MBA options, etc. but let’s get some things straight.

  1. H/S classes stay real steady at 950 / 400 ish every year. The % of this cohort that comes from PE / VC / general buy-side also stays relatively constant in the 16-18% range. However, in a booming economy like we had pre-covid and like we’re starting to enter now, bigger and bigger funds to accommodate more and more deal-flow naturally means bigger and bigger class sizes. That means more applicants industry-wide for the same number of seats every year. PE also tends to be one of those industries that’s not as susceptible to cyclicality i.e. the kids who were going to apply will likely still apply instead of foregoing and recruiting for a lateral in a boom cycle, partly because they can always afford the “vacation” (and want it) and just recruit afterward.

  2. Schools are really focusing on diversity these days, and the PE pool tends to be white / ORM / male. To the extent that even the number of seats stays the same, this is a headwind for most “typical” PE applicants, again, fighting for fewer slots.

  3. The PE thesis for going to b-school is...fine. Like yeah, you did some models, interacted with management a little bit, realized there’s so much more about the business beyond finance you want to learn before you step back into the field and actually sit on Boards as a VP, work collaboratively with management, hold their hands month-to-month, blah blah blah. Not a terrible play. The issue is most cultures at PE shops, especially big bad buyout companies, are not one of the associates doing jack shit operationally. Yeah, you can lie and say you had some great product mix idea that you said in the corner of a management meeting to the CFO that ended up being the catalyst for more growth but...come on, no. At best your Partner or operating team suggested that, and you’re out here modeling. Even internally, you can talk all you want about how many weighty thoughts consumed you while making IC decks (hell, you may have even spoken once), but the issue there is that most shops that actually give you discretion on go/no-go decisions or actual strategic and structuring matters are the type of places that are grooming you to be a direct promote. The overall oomph for why you need an MBA just isn’t there compared to the more “real” operational problems consulting and tech people face (though trust me, I don’t think they’re doing big-brain management stuff either). Your handling the legal or consulting “workstream” (sending out calendar invites and dial-ins) doesn’t stack up. Your analogs at those other industries also get nominal promotes in their 3rd year while you’re a 1st-year associate, which means they often get to, you know, actually manage people by the time they’re applying to a management program.

  4. The “soft stuff” at most PE firms is ass. I’ll just compare with consulting to illustrate. MBB gives out superlative awards (including “quick” promotes) like candy, whereas being a good PE associate means you might get a nice rec letter and deal-flow. When it comes to nonprofit work, MBB definitely has a more centralized system of getting junior folks involved (including with work projects), whereas big bad PE firms tend to be a lot more decentralized (rich guys contributing to good causes with their own money on their own time). Again, your like helping plant a garden at a community center once at a firm event doesn’t compare to the consultant who can take on real work with a struggling local opera house or even the government for some noble cause. The same thing when it comes to firm-building / diversity; the bigger consultancies and tech firms have myriad affinity groups and diversity initiatives that juniors can serve on and help out with, whereas the nature of on-cycle recruiting is that PE associates are “lucky” to even be one of 12 interviews a banker is going through to get hired. Good luck building a tangible record with that little exposure.

  5. ECs / post-work. My sense is most PE VPs want to do a good job writing letters for their associates so they can get into their alma maters, but they seem to be kind of passive about the overall application process. Consultancies, on the other hand, seem to love their feeder status and will hook up their juniors with nonprofit (usually BS fundraising roles, but sometimes better stuff) roles and connections outside of work. Also, the secondment model means consultants can spend a year actually doing operational work while PE associates claim they have “insight” into it while modeling, and usually, MBB will support a move to the next job (really common to see government, social capital, startup, nonprofit work, even going home and starting your failed startup) for a year or two pre-app that’s just plain more interesting than the average 2+2 IB to PE guy. My feeling is the schools are looking for more interesting profiles and vulnerability or whatever in the overrepresented camps, and having that “alternative” experience really helps build out the story in a way big bad PE really doesn’t.

A caveat to all the above: the pipeline is still going to be fine in toto, the industry is going to send a ton of people to school every year, and honestly at most non-H/S/W schools, just going to a good bank and good shop with good stats is going to be fine. I’m just trying to calibrate expectations as to why, especially for non-diverse applicants, coming from “the path” is no gimme for HBS or GSB admissions like it’s sometimes portrayed to be, or you might think it is when every mid-level to a senior person at your firm seems to be an alum.

 

I agree with this post somewhat, but I’ve never understood why some people set getting into one of the top 3 mba programs as their ultimate goal in life. Do these programs, along with the rest of the m7, offer distinct pedigree and competitive advantages? Of course. But if you’re already experiencing success in ib/pe, particularly with a team you enjoy, I always question why one would trade this. Let’s face it, you need to go to college nowadays so I understand the emphasis on going to a target school, since you’re essentially taking the “better” path of a required route (I.e obtaining an undergrad degree), but the opportunity cost of an mba is so substantially higher, especially for those in financial services who intend to stay in the industry.

Before anyone comments, I’m aware that some firms require mbas, but I’m mainly referring to a few friends I knew from college who planned their lives around getting into these programs despite having jobs they very much enjoyed (relatively speaking, this is ib/pe; after all) only to come out with less $$$ and opportunity more or less equal to what they had prior to enrolling.

 

OP. This is accurate, and the credential is losing must-have status given a more robust direct promote and lateral-then-promote market these days. That being said, I think there's two factors: 1. after grinding for four years, I really think a lot of PE associates want a vacation without losing career trajectory, and an MBA offers exactly that; 2. spending time with only other overworked finance types as friends can make people jaded, and sometimes you just want to talk to someone *happier* from marketing or product who actually had a life and may just be happier. also good networking in case you want to switch to industry. I think those considerations are underrated relative to just getting the achievement on the LinkedIn.

 

Be black and rich, you mean. But if you're black, chances are you're poor, which means chances are you're not getting into a top b school.

Edit: Bring it on with the MS. I can guarantee that the average MBA candidate, at least within the T15-20 and definitely within the M7, came from a significantly wealthier household than the average American. Because, duh, coming from a rich family gets you places in life. And African-American households have statistically low incomes.

 

Because you only have a "net" leg up in admissions if you're one of the relatively fewer black people who grew up rich. The number one way to get into a good b school or good job is to be born rich, and then you can start to get into whether it's "better" to be black or white or brown or whatever.

Let me ask you this: If you could choose to be born in America, and could choose to be born white or black, which would you pick? And let me clarify that you will know nothing from your current life, and that you have a completely random chance to be born into any white or black family.

 

If you are smart enough to land a job at a MF, I guarantee that you will have an easier time getting into B-School by being a top performer at a large F500 such as Visa, NVIDIA, PepsiCo, PayPal. 

My brother and I have friends who landed roles at these firms out of ug in: Product, Partnerships/BD, Marketing. All of them are now at H/S/W/M. Came from semi-targets. Not saying these people are smart enough to be at KKR, but I am saying that they made it to top schools while working at 'vanilla' F500 firms. 

 

I generally agree with this but also the growth in class sizes at consulting firms shouldn't be discounted. Generally these firms have been growing/hiring more than say, a decade ago, so the white/asian male straight from consulting is also going to have a harder time. Honestly, the best differentiation I have seen is something like consulting->industry -> B school or IB->industry/IB->PE->industry to B school.

 
Most Helpful

Eh, that was a lot of words to not really say anything, much of which isn't even really accurate. One point out of the gate - in a booming economy all sectors flex up yet admission hold constant, PE would be effected no different. Also in a booming economy less people go to bschool because they can get direct promotes so there are puts and takes.

In regards to consulting/tech - something that I never understood until going to bschool, is there is some what of a wink-wink with firms and schools in terms of admissions and hiring. Ultimately schools want candidates placed into jobs. That is their number one concern. So if you hire in droves, like the consulting firms (and more recently tech), the payback is admitting their applicants into school. Also, along those lines, its why its at least in part probably easier to get in if you're sponsored because its one less person to worry about getting a job. The same goes for good PE/VC firms with active alumni that recruit on campus. Its a you let our kids in...we'll recruit you on the back end. 

Really though, posts like this are silly because there is no magic formula. Certainly going to a PE fund, a top on even better, will not hurt your chances of getting into school even on a relative basis. People should do what interests them most and let the cards fall. This constant trying to optimize your life for things you have no control over isn't an intelligent way to approach career planning, nor life. If you do what you enjoy most you'll be the most successful. Full stop. 

 

MBA is a joke:

1. Real value from classes is extremely low. People are just reading cases and talking for the sake of talking. You can practice speaking at work on calls/meetings and be better off, cause at work what you're saying actually matters, and these case discussions are pointless, people are just talking to earn participation points.

2. Value from networking for somebody who comes from banking/PE is questionable. You'll be the most successful in the class. A bunch of people there will be diversity hires who wouldn't get there if they were not black/latino/female. And even non-diversity people will be from shitty strategy jobs from F500 and even lower, and from failed start-ups. You can get these jobs without much effort from non-target schools, and people who spent 3-5 years on these jobs have little to share compared to people from banking/PE/consulting. It's no surprise that these people go to do MBA so they can get a shot at banking/PE/VC/consulting. But why would you go there from banking/PE? You would think why the heck do the top schools take these people? The schools believe that this way they achieve diverse and collaborative environment. Like, if they get people from all different industries and from all sorts of companies, you can all learn from each other. I'm personally quite skeptical of this view. I'd say the class would be much stronger if everybody was from BB IBD and PE MF, but Harvard will admit a black lady from Verizon instead and some dudes from Exxon and BP.

You can networking with more interesting people by just reaching out to them on LinkedIn and grabbing coffee. There will be a great response rate for somebody from banking/PE. And you can do it for free - or you can pay $200k for a worse version of the same called MBA.

3. Value from recruiting is questionable. If you've done banking and PE (or just banking), you can recruit for any job you want. If you want to switch to the industry and do finance/strategy at F500 or a smaller company, you can do it. You wanna switch your bank or fund, you can do it. You wanna move to VC / AM / Consulting, you can do anything you want. Headhunters will help you move if you need help. They'll be eager to help you for free - or you can pay $200k to recruit in the same stream with people from Verizon and Exxon/BP.

 
Funniest

Sounds like somebody got a below average GMAT and is now trying to vent rofl

Career Advancement Opportunities

May 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Lazard Freres No 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 18 98.3%
  • Harris Williams & Co. New 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 04 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

May 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

May 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

May 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (20) $385
  • Associates (90) $259
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (14) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (67) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (205) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (146) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
6
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
9
Linda Abraham's picture
Linda Abraham
98.8
10
bolo up's picture
bolo up
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”