Tech banking -- > start-up exit --> VC?

So the consensus from the comments so far seems that taking a detour to a startup (how long do you need?) doesn't make someone a measurably better venture investor?

I've seen some senior venture roles require a mix of prior investing experience (any buyside - public, growth pe, vc) + prior operating experience at a startup (across any function - product, bizops, finance, corpdev). What's the thinking there?

I would think working at a startup would help you better identify which startups to invest in but I can't say that for certain. With that said, I know that tech banking to VC is a well trodden path that I wouldn't necessarily deviate from if the goal is VC. Unless you have strong confidence in getting a fairly high level (Director and above) position at a strong startup. And as far as ik that position needs to be the "right" position - Product, Engineering, Biz Dev, Operations etc. Not sure joining the accounting department at a startup would move the needle, for example.

Yeah you could make the jump to late stage/growth without working at a startup and even earlier stage investing but it's harder. But if you are looking to work for a VC doing seed to Series B-ish investments, it would help doing a meaningful startup stint for your own good. Credibility with founders is pretty important. A banker turned investor without having done startup work is a check writer and will never be looked at as a true partner to founders. More importantly, this relatability will help cultivate your network. I also believe it makes you a better investor across the board from seed to series D. A giant competitive advantage is your ability to understand the intangibles of a company and its potential journey. I don't think you get that from being on the outside not having lived the pains of being an accountable, impactful startup employee or founder.

We're clearly of different opinions here. I think people who actually work in VC should comment. What I do know is that I see far more tech banking -> VC types these days than just some guy who worked at a startup, hence my comment about being a high level employee. I think your sentiment was accurate a decade ago but VC is becoming far more part of the "path" (banking -> PE/VC/HF) than ever before.

I don't disagree with you unless you are saying that it's as easy to get to a great early stage investing role as it is to obtain a growth seat defined as Series C+ from banking. Moreover, my comments were more about career development than getting to a VC spot. Ignore my title as I'm speaking from being a Director of BizOps (fundraising, partnerships, product strategy, and "scaling" responsibilities) at a Series B company that's about to announce a Series C round. At this point in our company's journey, we prioritized the best financial and operating terms with this round of financing. However, I do know that we avoided check writers up to our Series B hence my comments. Think about it. All other things equal (name brand, network, success, like-ability, ect.), would you as a founder want to work with someone successful who has been in your spot or a banker turned "VC partner" with a few years of only investing experience? You know things will eventually go wrong and you need confidence that your VC partners are sympathetic and can give you trust worthy advice. 

I think your Seed vs Series B+ distinction is key. Thanks for the info. My background: currently a director of strategy/fp&a at a series B startup. How did you land your Biz Ops role, if you don't mind me asking? I am starting to realize I need to diversify my background away from Finance a bit.