Analyst Perspective During An Interview
Curious to hear what an interview feels like from an interviewer’s perspective.
Few questions I thought of:
What’s your first thought when you first see the interviewee?
What do you guys think when the candidate can’t answer your technical questions?
Feel free to add to that by sharing your thoughts / what you’re thinking of while your interviewing an intern?
"What's this kids chill to pull ratio like"
If I see McCoy's name it's an auto offer
McCoy fucked my mom!
5:5 or auto ding
Interested to hear about this as well. I like to try to make some sort of personal connection off the bat, but I know the interviewer knows they need to start with the behaviorals/technicals. Also, what do you (analysts or otherwise) think when a candidate sort of messes up the answer, but then get it correct with a little bit of coaching?
Not sure if others will agree with me, but I feel like in general, when you're on the other side, you don't really think much about the interviews. It's just kind of something you have to do in addition to the many other tasks on your plate. I'm just making sure that there aren't any major red flags, especially as an analyst when you don't have a big say in the final decision. I don't usually feel a particular way about an interview unless the candidate was either extremely impressive or massively unprepared / not a fit.
In terms of messing up an answer, I'll only ding you if it's a basic question that you definitely should have known (i.e., the $10 depreciation question). If I purposely ask something trickier and you don't get it, I won't necessarily ding you if you did well on the other questions. If you get it with a little bit of guidance, and I feel like you had a good thought process getting there, then I'd give you some extra points. Now that recruiting has been pushed so early and we're literally interviewing students who are less than halfway through their college careers, I personally don't hold extremely high / stringent standards when it comes to technical questions. More just ticking the box that you have a good understanding of the fundamentals. I think I leave the interview with a better impression if you are personable, easy to talk to and don't make the interview awkward.
this is such a helpful, genuine answer, +1 to you
Would just echo this is how I felt, especially doing virtual interviews instead of OCR.
agreed. perhaps this goes without saying, but I’ve found that even with the more difficult questions, if one candidate can’t solve the problem / needs significant guidance and 5 others knew the answer immediately, then I’m more inclined to go with those that could solve it.
I’d be interested to hear anyone’s thoughts on that.
I don't see a case where I wouldn't go with those who could solve it immediately? It's going to be relative at the end of the day. Seems obvious, unless I'm missing something?
I guess it also would depend on that candidate's performance and how they compare to their peers in other aspects. There's other factors to consider, but all things being equal if that candidate were the only one to not be able to answer the question, then it would probably hurt his odds.
surprised there are not more vidconf questions on building rapport. but that is the most important thing. if you have an interview without a rapport you probably did not have the best interview of the day.
Can you expand on this?
I think what he's trying to get at is that if you walk out of an interview and think, that went fine I guess, you probably didn't do that well. Sometimes it isn't about you not messing up or isn't about you doing your best, sometimes its about how others do. When I recruited for SA I would walk out of every interview thinking, "man I nailed that" even though I knew I probably didn't get it. If they're interviewing a bunch of kids, chances are other kids are gonna walk out of it thinking they nailed it and, if they're right, they would get it over you if you thought "eh it went fine." This field is so competitive that you can nail your interviews but if others do better you won't get it. So why would you ever get an offer if you only did okay or felt like you didn't really connect with the interviewer?
I think I agree with the above. My ratio of interviews is like 80% answered every question correctly but not enough rapport, 20% clearly messed up on questions, 10% answered every question and also there was a significantly positive vibe.
I've only gotten offers from that 10% category.
nice math man
What's your first thought when you first see the interviewee? +points if you're wearing anything on a Litquidity/Arbitrage Andy/Leveraged Loyd starter pack meme
What do you guys think when the candidate can't answer your technical questions? - don't care unless you're dishonest about having performed a task which required said technical - get sad if you can't answer an easy technical with hand holding
I currently have an intern who is interning at my bank + another bank. Saw a thread on here asking the double internship question, and i advocated for it if possible. Might be my current intern, regardless he/she is solid so i don't really care and won't notify anyone
Incoming Investment Banking Summer Analyst at Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley
My thoughts after interning one guy for 3 months straight back when I worked for a stock exchange, and signing up to have another intern soon at my small bank, as well as interviewing and resume screening candidates for 3 different places per requests of HRs and VPs/MDs I made friends with (I am in a small market with low power distance):
The petties peve number uno is reading a CV and not seeing any mention on why the candidate is interested in finance. Ton of irrelevant bullshit internships and side-jobs like English Second Language Teacher, but nothing finance-related. And you still gotta reply to these candidates so they don't view you as a horrible person or something (I personally always try to stay nice).
Again on motivation - a lot of kids want to get a job in fynancee just cuz they think it's cool, and can't really tell why they are interested in it - might say how they liked the Wolf of Wall Street movie, and keep telling bshit like this.
What I like - relevant MOOCs (yes, MOOCs), at least a kid did something on his side and likes learning stuff, definitely a research report to see if they know their shit.
For MOOCs - please don't list all 100+ MOOCs you took, just list couple of relevant subjects and add a note with mentioning you learned it at Coursera, EdX, etc. - in case you don't have this coursework at your college.
Agree with most of the above. Given how early recruiting is I don’t have high expectations for technical questions beyond the basics, which in my mind include high level valuation methodologies and relevant multiples for the industry.
I also put more emphasis one what deal(s) and companies they find interesting. It doesn’t take experience or classes for candidates to show a genuine interest, do research and form opinions.
saw a post about building rapport and was wondering if anyone could expand on that. not to be some socially awkward intern but how would you do that? easy ways seem to be similarities in school, major, hometown, sports, Greek life, clubs, or the interests part of the resume. but, what if none of this applies here. it sounds weird but just being a normal person seems to work in having a friendly interview but not developing that connection in 30 minutes.
Put your hand on top of their hand, or when the hand shake comes tickle their palm with your index finger... They;ll know you mean business
Not to make you sound like some socially awkward intern, but you should already know what this feels like
Having a successful 1 on 1 presentation to a judge in highschool (Deca, stock pitch, etc)
Litterally meeting a bro and talking with him for a few minutes
definitely understand what a good interview feels like ... just hard to connect when the interviewer is not a bro. my question was then what?
I’ve always hated technicals. Anyone with half a brain can memorize them the day before without truly understanding them. I have more respect for someone that admits he does not know the answer, and grinds through the question with a little hand holding than someone that memorizes the answer from a guide (it’s very easy to tell).
I like to ask very open-ended questions that don’t have a right answer to see how the candidate thinks. You can then ask multiple follow-up questions to see if the candidate has genuine curiosity. This allows for a more comfortable setting which helps me gauge how you’ll perform on the desk
I like this approach a lot. Rather than seeing if someone can memorize stuff (which isn't even a core skill of IB), you want to test their critical thinking / logic skills and their interest / thoughtfulness when it comes to finance. These are the types of things that will keep analysts motivated during those tough times when they're getting crushed on multiple staffings. It's also much better when you're working with people who are actually interested in their work rather than those who are just in it for the money.
If you're asking a technical in such a way that it can be answered by someone who rote memorized the answer the day before, you're not asking a good question.
Have you ever had an interview / interviewed someone before?
Laboriosam consequatur qui eveniet deleniti. In voluptas animi amet velit. Beatae ut et tempore repellat eius.
Totam quae ab eum et id a. Harum similique molestiae distinctio magni velit omnis hic. Natus maxime aut cupiditate sed nemo aspernatur.
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...
Itaque est ea hic voluptatem cupiditate culpa incidunt. Quas quod tenetur iste. Repellat non mollitia enim et excepturi qui. Sit dolore est adipisci ut atque corporis maiores.