Q&A: SVP with 15+ YOE BB -> MM -> MC (all M&A): A Long & Strange Trip

Has the CFA/CFA Network carried weight / helped the transition to consulting/corporate side?

Good ask. I've never leveraged the formal CFA Network groups (e.g., CFA Society of New York--formerly New York Society of Security Analysts), but I have cold connected with other Charterholders where the CFA common ground helped enable the initial conversation.

To your question and with focus on the CFA Charter. Please correct my understanding, but I think by 'transition' you mean 1) help procure interviews & jobs in consulting and/or corporates and 2) provide you with useful on-the-job knowledge. Assuming that's the correct interpretation, these are my thoughts.

Consulting

Before we start, let's get this out of the way. I've never heard of the CFA as a requirement to get into Consulting. It is somewhat comparable to IBD; being a Charterholder probably won't hurt you, but it won't really help you/give you the leg up when applying. The CFA exams have limited breath (e.g., finance but really more AM/PWM/building blocks for securities research), but high depth. Consulting is a bit more generalist. Mastering cases, knowing the Consultant Toolkit (e.g., MECE, Structured Reasoning, defining the Problem, Frameworks/Approaches, Best Practices, Excel/PPT), strategy maps/scorecards, Porter's, TAM, etc. are all really the foundational knowledge.     

Consulting has a number of sub-service lines under the broader umbrella. Some service lines may value CFA (e.g., Valuation, Financial Due Diligence/Quality of Earnings) others may not (e.g., Operations, Technology, Risk). But I assume you're asking about Consulting proper at the MBBs and EYP/Strat&/etc. of the world (e.g., Strategy). In my experience, being a Charterholder was beneficial, but limited to having 'good optics' aka looking good to clients / helping sell engagements. For interviews, it just added extra comfort that I knew--or could quickly learn--corporate finance technicals used during commercial due diligence (a very common engagement for MC). On the job, it helped me scope financial due diligence questionnaires, understand the basic accounting needed, and--to some extent--financial analysis. But really, the list of generalist competencies I mentioned earlier and having deal experience from my Banking days was vastly more important during interviews and on the job.

Corporates

IMO--having never worked in corporates--it depends on the role/firm. In general, I don't believe I've seen many job requirements stating CFA as a 'must have'. I could see it being helpful for Corp. Dev., FP&A, in-house Valuation teams, Treasury, etc. but--again--the Banking experience, in my mind, would be more valued and also as a catalyst for C-Suite aspirations.

How was the process of switching out of IB at a more senior level?

Relatively painless, actually. Being more senior, I leveraged my network and connected directly with Partners. The interview process with senior-level consultants was more focused on my ability to generate business/lead teams. I would note, however, that some of the junior folks (e.g., Associate Consultant to Engagement Managers) did drill into technicals/consulting cases and I got the feeling some of them weren't warm to former Bankers. I can understand this as Consultants sometimes work with Bankers on engagements and Bankers don't always treat them well (myself included when I was on that side). 

Once on the job, I had a bit of a learning curve, but it wasn't onerous. 

Do you look at any other roles/ was it easy?

Yes. I talked to PEs and seeded/through A round start-ups.

PEs basically had this to say, 'You want to come in as a Post-MBA hire with no prior PE experience? Hmm that's a head-scratcher and not what we normally do'; 'What about this Operations role at XYZ portfolio company?'; 'We really need in-house analytics for our deal team. Can you do that?'; 'We have some middle-office valuation roles open'. Needless to say, we were a little far apart. I could complain and make all the excuses in the world (e.g., I was an Analyst during the 2008 Credit Crisis and missed the boat, these PEs don't know what they're talking about), but I don't blame them at all. These are all very fair challenges/suggestions given my background and seniority.

The start-ups were more interesting, but the ones where I had traction were just a bit too risky for me at that point in time. I had a family, mortgage, etc. If I had that traction in my mid-20s instead of mid-30s, then I would have taken those roles without thinking twice. The TC had equity, the roles were exciting, and--to me the greatest qualitative benefit--actually building something.  

For context, I'm a charter holder and on the IB flywheel. Thinking of staying on the wheel another 1-2 years but trying to craft an exit strategy / prepare for that process

I hope this was helpful. If you need help on exit strats/prepping that's more tailored to you, PM me and let's see if we can work something out. I want to be respectful of your anonymity.

Why the switch from IB to MC

I, somewhat, indirectly answered this in a comment on another thread here https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/does-anybody-regret-not-picking-…

In short, by the time I was in my late 20s I wanted a change and something not as time-intensive as M&A Banking. The MC role I interviewed for was senior, sector/client coverage was top-tier to me, base compensation was very competitive though I admit the drop in bonus was a bit of a shock, and the relative flexibility of the job (e.g., work from anywhere, travel or not unless required for the case/transaction/engagement, focus on results over facetime) just made more sense to me at that age. Even more so today as I have a family and value the time I get to spend with them.   

and how did you do it (just networking or did you do an MBA)?

Networking. Connecting with Partners and just having the conversation. Meaning, I rarely--if ever--tried to sell them on the first couple of calls/conversations. It was mostly just connecting, sharing backgrounds, and creating new contacts. If there was overlap or something meaningful we could talk about that would lead to a job opportunity, great. If not, the worst-case scenario is I made a new contact / learned more about another business. For my current role, I walked through my deals, managed/originated revenue, industry/professional contacts, etc. to basically build the case for coming in at a senior level. Some MC firms didn't bite, but many I pitched did and I ultimately choose the one that fit me best. 

MBA is--obviously--a mechanism for a career pivot. For consulting, however, you typically get bucketed into level 2 (Consultant) or--maybe--level 3 (Engagement Manager) roles. I was aspiring for something more senior so pivoting post-MBA didn't make sense for me. 

While I'm top bucket at my bank, I'm realizing that I'm not really a deal junky and was thinking about MC. I appreciate that you were still in some kind of M&A advisory in MC but was the work more stimulating than in IB?

Also indirectly answered in the thread I posted above, but I'll color that answer in a bit more here. Stimulating--in my simple mind--is a combination of the following; 1) high tempo, 2) intellectually challenging, 3) strong team, 4) clear and measurable goals, and 5) stakeholder understanding of the deal and willingness to execute. To me, MC and IB kinda lack in 2) and 3-5) can be really floaty. MC can sometimes be highly stimulating (e.g., live mega-deal, highly engaged client, best MC team deployed), but also incredibly dull (e.g., internal admin, thought pieces/white papers on a topic that's been covered to death, selling a service that isn't my cup of tea aka operational improvement strategy).

IB I guess isn't so different, but at least the internal admin is comparatively lower. I was an Analyst through VP on the Banking side, and I can safely say--IMO--VP was much more stimulating than Analyst/Associate because I love quarterbacking mandates, holding training sessions for Analysts/Associates & building their skillset, cultivating open communications where Analysts/Associates can raise their hand to tell me I'm wrong/should be thinking about something differently, supporting/developing business with MDs, facing CEOs/CFOs daily on live mandates and potentials (e.g., client relationship management), etc. In MC, I have an office off the floor, the engagements are bifurcated into workstreams/tasks where I'm told by senior Partners to mostly delegate, and my conversations with clients are very manicured. While in IB as a VP, I insisted on sitting with Analysts/Associates on the floor and standing shoulder-to-shoulder with them on deals to execute. Delegation to me is boring so I developed client materials (CIMs, MPs), deal models, etc. instead of doing non-value-add stuff like dumping everything on my Associate or being a glorified deal calendar/roadmap, and I could approach clients with transaction ideas or just talk about their business or just talk about whatever they wanted to. To me, that was much more stimulating.

TLDR; IMO MC work is more stimulating than IB Analyst/Associate level work. IB at the VP level is more stimulating than MC   

Possible to make the switch to MC at the VP level?

Yes. Not just possible, but probable. I did that very thing.

I detailed this a bit more in the above answer, but IMO you need to build your business case to come in at that level (e.g., runway/timeline to revenue).

How did you enjoy the work vs IBD?

Also talked about this a bit in the above answer, but no worries as you asked this before I replied to the other comment. It's a gray area where there is no clear winner. Each side has its pros & cons. MC: really enjoy live deals and the collaboration with other service lines can be incredible (e.g., leveraging the knowledge of the broader firm) when in Banking, I found any time you'd try to get information from another desk people weren't exactly chomping at the bit to help you out. In MC? Most of the time people are happy to help. IB: Being on the deal team was just incredibly enjoyable to me... most of the time... Also, I can remember the first time I saw a deal I worked on hit financial newspapers (e.g., WSJ, FT), first large deal closing meal, first big origination, etc. that's probably--IMO--the best the job gets qualitatively. 

As a college student, I've been trying my hardest to get internships in the hopes of finding a career in IB. However the only tangible offer I've received is from a small VC firm.

Sorry to hear that. It's a competitive and demanding endeavor with a significant time commitment. So I can empathize. But let's double-click on a couple things:

Banking internships

- What is your school (can give tier if you want to be anonymous)/major/GPA (general range)?

- Expand on what 'hardest' means here. Did you exhaust networking? Did you exhaust the IB population (e.g., BB, MM, EBs, etc.)? Did you do your homework on every firm/firm's recent deals/people you're meeting/technicals/etc.? Did you ask for constructive feedback after hearing 'no' from interviews and did you objectively work to correct those issues you could control (e.g., lacking technicals)? What does your career office have to say? You don't need to answer these questions, I just want to get an idea of what your definition of 'hardest' is  

Current VC offer / 'Bird in the hand'

- By small VC do you mean small AUM or small # of employees? Perhaps something else?

- What is the vintage of the VC fund? Is it prestigious? 

- What is your role at the VC (e.g., deal team/investment role or--at your junior-level--analytical work, or non-investment role)? If investment side, then--first off, congrats!--what are your concerns (if just the following question you had re: VC -> Banking translation, that's OK)?

Does a VC internship translate well into an IB internship? And if so how comparable are the two?

I found these threads to be very helpful:

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/would-a-vc-internship-be-helpful…

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/vc-to-ib-0

I'm sure there are others.

As for my two cents:

VC -> Banking Translation

- I think your VC internship--dependent on the prestige of the VC, your performance there, etc.--may be a very interesting experience for more specialized IBs / boutiques. If you're on the tech side, then I don't see why you couldn't leverage that to Banking. Perhaps more on the ECM side, but still it is probably translatable 

- Get as close to tangential IB work as possible; modeling, due diligence, valuation, etc. Try to shadow VC investment team members on deals where you soak up everything

VC Banking Internship Comparison

- One thing to keep in mind... If you get extended an FT from the VC (not a bad problem to have) and you accept then, later on, want to go to banking, I would not be surprised if Bankers were very skeptical on your willingness to stay in banking for the long term which may influence your candidacy 

- VC likely is less finance 'heavy' than IB. VC has lots of sourcing, market sizing, business model feasibility/scalability, founder diligence, etc. IBD--at a glance--is more deal diligence/finance 'heavy'

- Basically, VC invests directly into companies, IB serves as intermediaries in various transactions. Revenue/profits/returns, therefore, are earned in very different ways. Mindset is also different; VC: think like equity, IB: win a mandate, how do I structure this deal in a way that has the highest probability of close, close.

In summary, there are likely some technical overlaps and you'll be gaining good financial/deal experience, but the two fields are--inherently--very different models with very different goals/mindsets.

Hope that helped and I'd recommend also looking through WSO for more info. There is a ton of good discussion on VC/IB internships, Path to/from VC from/to IB.

Good luck and--again--congrats on the VC offer. 

Thoughts on MBA vs. Law School at a top school for finance?

In general, I would assume MBA is the better mousetrap to pivot to finance. I am assuming finance here is FO sell-side/buy-side at financial services firms. In terms of flexibility, I think you could argue lawyers can more readily work in many fields MBAs can, but the opposite isn't really true. Could be a consideration if you're not going to a top-tier MBA program or want more freedom in case finance turns out to not be for you. Granted, some people really leverage non-target MBAs and get their dream job, but--even they would admit--it is a much harder path. JD in that case could make more sense.

Let's not sugarcoat it, JD is not for the timid. My wife is an attorney (now General Counsel or GC) and--frankly--I have no idea how she does it. It is a grueling degree and legal jobs can be painstaking. Anyone that's been a book-runner or Target/Buyer advisor can probably attest that the folks at places like Skadden, Cravath/Swaine/Moore, Kirkland & Ellis, etc. do not have a 'cushy' job by any means. Tip of the hat to them for dealing with management teams that couldn't--for example--fill out & verify the S-1 box if their lives depended on it. 

One last thing before I get to RE, I could see a JD that focused on corporate M&A being very valuable to the M&A product side of IB. You know the 'legalese', regulation/law, can find value-altering benefits (e.g., tax equity, deal structure, financing structure), etc. which--in my mind--is a nice differentiator that could be plug/play.

TLDR; MBA--if top-tier--is most traditional/path of least resistance. JD can offer more flexibility/differentiation when leveraged appropriately

  (If you could also provided as much info towards real estate finance) which is better/more helpful etc?

Disclaimer: I'm not an RE expert. I know things like NOI, cap rates, triple net lease, etc., but I'm a complete amateur in that field beyond prospecting a couple single/multi-family rentals on the side (read: this guy doesn't have a f*cking clue about RE). 

I'll let those in RE chime in to correct my understanding, but I could see MBA being more valuable in RE finance. Just look at the MBA Real Estate Club at NYU Stern. MBA programs literally have RE concentrations and networks. Do JDs and specifically for finance as well? I don't know if it is as prevalent. Again--like finance in general/M&A--there is a lot of 'legalese' in RE documents that you'd have to understand to act as the principal of your RE firm. But--in my experience--most REs hire outside counsel or have in-house GC do this stuff. They aren't really part of the deal team, they just handle the legal side. Meaning, JD may just be nice to have over completely critical unless you run your own shop without outside counsel. 

TLDR; MBA is--again--likely the preferred choice for RE finance, but JD does have its place/merits  

I'll chime in on the RE side. I would say direct experience is the most important as you advance in your career, but assuming you're thinking about breaking into RE, I've seen a good amount of people with an MBA or sometimes MSRED background from my experience working at a real estate fund manager. Although at the junior level, the very typical path of the analysts/associates at the real estate fund manager I worked at is 1-2 years RE investment banking or investment sales at a top end brokerage (e.g. Eastdil). I see a specialized use case for a JD but unless you know exactly what in RE you want to do, I'd recommend against it. 

It also depends where in the value chain (developer/operator -> fund manager/capital allocator -> fund investor) you sit. At the project GP (i.e. the team actually leading the project), track record is probably the single most important variable. Having an MBA/MSRED is nice, but if you've never developed a project before you're not going to get any traction versus the guy without a college degree who has been developing projects for the last 10 years. At the project LP side (i.e. capital allocators like fund managers and institutional groups that invest directly), you're not in the weeds of every project and so your focus is more on investing rather than executing. You can lean on your in-house general counsel and external counsel for the actual legal review and JV agreements tend to look pretty similar after a while. On the deal and fund term sheets / agreements I've worked on, my role was to understand the big picture and make sure our counsel understood and incorporated concepts correctly in the docs. Also it's important to have a very large relationship network to source deals, and a lot of people view an MBA as a way to build their network. I see a lot more people at the fund manager side with MBAs.

Note: one caveat is that while capital allocators are not in the weeds, you still need a real estate asset management team (not to be confused with the more generic asset management industry - this isn't the same "asset management" term to describe what BlackRock does. Disregard the link that takes you to "what is AM." That's not what I'm referring to here). I've actually seen a fair amount of senior people in asset management with a JD. The asset management team is to make sure that the JV partner is executing on the business plan and to adjust the business plan if the market changes. Sometimes that means getting into really hairy situations like kicking out your partner and taking over the development role, or in debt investments foreclosing on the equity. It can help a lot if you are very comfortable navigating the legal paths to restructuring a business plan. I've never worked a distressed real estate debt manager but I'd assume a JD would be viewed positively there.

At the fund investor level, it really depends on where you work. Some places are very dynamic and entrepreneurial such as family offices and some endowments, and people who work there are very similar profiles to people at a fund manager. Other places - especially US public pension plans - are incredibly sleepy places and in some states your salary is prespecified on a ladder scale like any other government job. They often rely on investment consultants (Aon/Townsend, Willis Towers Watson, Stepstone, Aksia, Wilshire, etc). At an investment consultant, signaling and credentials are very important so the vast majority of people I've worked with there have a CFA, MBA, or both.

Advice for a freshman that wants to get into IB? Craft a profile that is attractive to investment banks, and how to prepare for interviews for the internships. Is somewhat general, but Im just asking for what was your plan when you were in college and how did you manage to land a position in M&A. Thank you.

In general, I think these threads have a lot of good content on landing IB and preparation: 

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/what-is-needed-to-get-into-i-ban…

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/qa-investment-banking-intern-sea…

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/preparing-for-an-ib-internship

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/investment-banking-interview-que…

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/investment-banking-analyst-15-th…

In terms of my personal experience:

When I was approaching IB jobs in the mid-2000s, the process was a bit different. For example, a summer IB internship wasn't an absolute necessity at most firms and classmates--mostly--didn't start considering internships until the Summer before Junior year. Now? That thinking appears to be very antiquated by both IBs and students. 

My Plan (Starting Middle of Junior Year)

1) IB Knowledge: I didn't major in Accounting, Finance, and/or Business. I was a dual major in Economics and a 'soft' area (e.g., Poli. Sci) so I bought Investment Banking and Valuation books from Wiley along with scraping the internet for example models, pitchbooks, etc. to learn as much as I could. I'd be lying if I said this wasn't painful

2) Role Knowledge: Since I went to a decent school--but not a target--and never interned at an IB, I networked with Analysts to VPs that I had any--no matter how remote--connection with (e.g., same undergrad, same hometown) to learn about their first-hand experience. I had a lot of radio silence, some unhelpful conversations in hindsight, and a few very good connections that really helped shape my understanding of how to enter IB 

3) Mock Interviews: I took practice modeling tests (very basic) and connected with alumni that are--or were--in IB that offered to mock interview me. I told them to be very critical and direct. First few times, wow... I bombed completely. At that age, I was the worst kind of idiot where I thought I was right about everything and everyone else was wrong. This process was a humbling experience  

4) Experience Rebranding: By the end of my Junior year, I realized my background was probably not the best 'fit'. So I joined a school investment club for my Senior year, bolted on accounting/math/finance classes, took an IB 'Bootcamp' 4-5 week program over the summer, and connected closely with other students looking to get into IB (gave me a wealth of info and considerations. Some of these people turned out to be very close friends) 

5) Resume Prep: Anything even remotely related to IB I highlighted. I got resume samples from others that were in similar positions and got down the format, tone, etc. I drafted a cover letter showing my interest in & potential to perform in IB 

6) Opportunity Identification: I researched the recruiting cycles and kept a running list of all the places I applied. I then--and this is slightly controversial--tried getting emails of hiring managers, HR, whatever to connect with a real person over a portal. I'm sure doing this shut the door at some places that have a very defined process, but I did have some success with this method. Also, those that helped me in step 2) were also invaluable resources for getting me in front of people. It's been said a lot on WSO, but networking's importance is paramount. And I followed up on everything within 48hrs if I heard nothing back

Landing the M&A Role

I interviewed at any IB that offered me that opportunity. Didn't care about the prestige as long as it wasn't a 'guy, laptop, and a dog' type of shop. Didn't care if it was Lev Fin, DCM, ECM, Industry-specific, M&A, etc. I just wanted 'in'. Didn't care if the role didn't have the best exit-ops or if I'd be grabbing others some coffee. 

This all sounds great, but my traction was not exactly smooth. I got flat-out rejected or straight-up ghosted during the process before even getting an interview. I had interviewed at 5 firms (2 of which I got to the last round) and they never came to fruition. I felt very deflated at this point as my hopes were so high. But--as this can be a numbers game--very late in the recruiting cycle I landed 3 interviews; 2 BB and 1 MM. I remember being cautiously optimistic and I 'dialed-in' to learn everything about these firms/the people/the role/and how to be a 'good' Analyst.

BB 1 

- 1st round: On-campus. Got absolutely drilled on technicals. One Analyst said I talk too much during the interview (no kidding). My behavioral/fit went very well. Was invited for round 2

- 2nd round: Flew out to be on-site (unusual to be on-site for a non-superday IMO). Made sure to keep my responses direct and efficient. More technicals (signaling to me there may have been a concern during round 1). Was invited to Superday

- SD: Flew out to be on-site the next day. Spent the night going over technicals, firm background, people I was meeting with, etc. Of course someone random that wasn't on my schedule popped in to talk to me and it caught me a bit off guard. He and I got along, however (side note: be personable and professional). Then the whole post SD happy hour or meal thing (which is part of the interview don't ever forget that)

- Outcome: The day went well and... I was waitlisted... 

MM 1

- 1st round: Phone. Hardly any technicals just a bunch of fit, 'why banking', etc. questions. Call lasted for 20 mins with no guidance on next steps. Received an email the next day that I was invited for superday (no round 2 was also unusual IMO)

- SD: Technical question mayhem even from senior bankers. I nailed most of them, but the ones I didn't know I said, 'I don't know the answer, but I can find out and get back to you. Here's how I would think about your question'. One VP I said that to responded very favorably and joked how many candidates had BS'd their way through questions they clearly didn't know (side note: don't ever pretend to know an answer you clearly don't know. You'll get drilled and die on the worst hill imaginable. This can be a dealbreaker for a lot of shops) 

- Outcome: Offer! I had more than just a couple of drinks that weekend

BB 2

- I'll spare you all the bullets, but I got to superday and thought I completely bombed, but was extended an offer.

Decision

- BB just made the most sense from a career standpoint. Every person I talked to said BB was the obvious choice

- I liked the people at BB the most and it seemed like great exposure

TLDR; Do your homework, cast a very wide net, network as much as possible, learn from your mistakes, and don't ever... ever give up

Thoughts on Bulge Bracket vs. Boutique/Middle Market model?

Particularly for Associate + VP years.

Good question. My own two cents as I spent my Analyst/early Associate years at BB and my late Associate/VP years at MM.

Bulge Bracket

General Pros:

- Offer all product groups (M&A, lev fin, restructuring, ECM/DCM) and are vast in coverage. Tons of geographic presence. Supermarket of services to cater to clients. Lots of exposure to different areas of finance. Usually have more resources to outsource printing, research, graphics, etc. Usually face more brand name clients. Usually on larger more optically prestigious deals

- For any level in IB at BB, part of your compensation is having that brand name on your resume for life. Exit ops are typically very strong. BB alumni network is usually vast and spread all over finance/corporates/etc. Usually best compensation (though I know that is likely not always true in the current job market)

General Cons:

- Rigidly defined deal process most of the time

- More competitive

- Large teams may imply that you won't really have a visible role or could limit the quality of your experience

For Associates, BB--IMO--provides a lot of opportunities, good compensation, and an OK to good support model. Lifestyle may be not great if you had a 'bad' VP or sit on a brutal desk (looking at our friends in Lev Fin here).

For VP... things here get a little tricky. You'll likely be more execution than origination as--IMO--MDs at BB strongly guard their relationships/books and may view anyone as a threat. Some VPs may love execution and this is the path for them as the pipeline is rarely completely dry at BB. The path to MD may be littered with landmines; MD spot won't open/current MD won't retire for 10+ years; no firm need; not enough MD/senior IB member support for your MD case; etc. Thus, this model may have you die on the vine once you're at SVP type levels. In my experience, senior VP hires/resources are plentiful while VP1-2 are less so and usually are more in-demand. Meaning, you may get priced out or have too much experience to progress further. If, however, you get a clear path to MD and execute, the model allows for a ton of upside (caveat: if comp is deferred or stock-based with tons of vesting legal considerations, could be risky) and you'll have a massive pool to get candidates from. Not a bad model

Middle Market

General Pros:

- Usually more idiosyncratic events / more interesting situations over the standard broad/targeted sell-side M&A deals

- Can have better hours, but don't quote me on this

- More responsibility on deals / greater exposure to the full process / more meaningful 'facetime' with senior bankers/clients

- Bonus can be major if the desk had a good year while in BB--IMO and experience--your desk can have a great year, but if the IBD at large didn't, then your bonus could be 'rationalized' 

General Cons:

- Disorganized clients are not uncommon. More so than BB

- Less formal training

- Exit ops can be--but not always--limited

- Smaller the shop, the more it can be run by personalities. This is a double-edged sword

For Associates, exposure and accelerated career trajectory. Chances are you'll be performing VP level work by the time you're in your 3rd--and maybe 2nd--year. Open door policy most of the time. If you raise your hand, you'll likely get more responsibility. WLB can be better. You will absolutely get senior banker and client exposure. In short, the MM model can empower an Associate to punch above his or her weight. I won't go into all the 'cons', but the less structure/support in place can be jarring for some folks. If you get stuck with a jerk or bad team, it can be harder to move internally at MM than at BB (I get that moving around in BB isn't exactly easy, but there are more options it seems when compared to MM)

For VPs, MMs enable VPs to own their own book. If you're entrepreneurial, then MM could be for you. You may have a better WLB which--IMO--is more valuable when you start going through life milestones (e.g., marriage, kids). You could, arguably, learn more about the deal process and rationale. At this level, you're likely hoping to stay in IB for the long-term. Compensation at BB/EB and MM start to decouple in meaningful ways once you hit VP (sometimes at a considerable discount). If you're used to delegating and having a big support structure, then MM will likely disrupt how you operate.

TLDR; BB and MM both have their pros and cons. It ultimately depends on your work style, career goals, etc. To me, BB model is the 'safer' option most of the time (especially for Associates) in terms of comp/exit, but MM will give you exposure/flexibility. At VP BB can be a fit for some people, but MM could give you the autonomy and entrepreneurial platform to build a business. Fair warning, you get a ton of rope and you could be hanging at the end of it if things go sideways.  

Do you think it's worth it to jump from a LMM boutique to a BB or EB given the chance?

This is dependent on your experience at other firms to date, level, YOE, desk at the BB or EB, and career goals, etc. but--all else equal--yes. Not 100% sure what LMM boutique is, but unless you absolutely love it there and the firm shows they love you / has a sustainable model, then pivoting to a BB or EB can only help your career IMO. Also, going from BB or EB -> LMM boutique is likely much easier--with more bargaining power--than LMM boutique -> BB or EB.

Did you have a favorite city you worked in?

My entire career has been in Manhattan. By default, it is my favorite. In terms of client locations? Chicago, Boston, and LA were all great, but... I have to say Miami was my favorite. Why? NY is great in the Fall... Winter? Less so. The only thing I didn't like about Miami was the plethora of opulent lifestyles that probably would make Tony Montana blush. But that's a small--personal--annoyance for an otherwise fun/enjoyable place to be.

Thank you very much for doing this.

I am currently a senior but landed a role in an FLDP at a F50 starting this summer. I am currently deciding whether to invest into GMAT prep and improve other factors for getting into a decent MBA.

I also attended a non target. (Did not even have business accreditation AACSB)

I do have c suite ambitions but I don't see myself leaving this company. Yet I can't say as I am quite young and didn't start my role yet.

I was wondering if I should strive for a M7/T15 MBA.

You're welcome and congrats on the Finance Leadership Development Program. 

I never like this kind of answer to questions, but it depends. 

Some considerations on pursuing an MBA...

Strong reasoning (IMO)

- Plans for a career switch

- Current firm requires it for senior-level roles / the industry you're most interested in requires it (gatekeeping)  

- Current firm will finance the MBA (note: you still forgo 2 years of wages so I wouldn't think of this as 'free')

- You have post-undergraduate work experience and rationalized how an MBA will enhance your career going forward

- You're not a US Citizen but want to work in the US and see the student visa as a pathway to getting a work visa

- Reasonable networking opportunities/expectations

- Credibility: To your point, you attended a non-target undergrad. If people are judging your credibility, perhaps a top-tier MBA program would change others' perception

- Realistic Option Value: Exposure/developing a broader skillset expands optionality and--potentially--stronger opportunities in different fields 

Weak reasoning (IMO)

- Unrealistic career switch expectations (no experience or irrelevant experience -> MBA -> Mega-PE)

- Controversial/Potentially Unfair Criticism: Undergrad right to MBA. This may be my own bias, but whenever I see a resume from someone that went right from undergrad to MBA my first thought is, 'is this person unemployable? What was the decision for more school instead of a job?'

- Have financial constraints, no scholarship/financing options, etc. but happy to take on debt 

- Expecting MBA will give you instant executive presence

- Controversial/Potentially Unfair Criticism: You want to be an entrepreneur. If I were a VC, my first question would be, 'why didn't you invest in your business instead of the MBA?' 

- Indifferent to MBA Ranking Importance

For more information, I found these threads helpful:

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/is-an-mba-worth-it-1

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/mba-vs-msf

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/the-mba-degreebecoming-obsolete

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/ask-alex-at-mba-apply

How has attending a target MBA improved your career? Was it worth the price tag?

I can't directly contribute my career wins/trajectory to the MBA, but the MBA enabled the following;

- Augmented my lack of formal finance/business education during undergrad (as did the CFA exams)

- The MM I previously worked for was highly supportive / provided financing & guaranteed a spot for me upon graduation with a path to promotion

- My current firm--technically--requires MBA for my level and above. There are exceptions, but this is generally the rule

- Vastly opened my network in various industries which helped me win new clients for my firm

The price tag of the MBA for me was 0 (other than the opportunity cost mentioned earlier which--for me--was more than the cost of the MBA). In hindsight, we all have clairvoyance, 20/20 vision, your cliche of choice. If I had to do it again, I probably would have just settled with the Master's & CFA. 

At what level of seniority in IB, amongst them being AN/ASO/VP, did you start realising that the role would be transitioning away from technically based and towards procuring new business?

I had a basic understanding even as a 1st-year Analyst that by the time I hit VP, origination would start becoming an area of responsibility. It wasn't until my 3rd-year as an Associate that a couple MDs sat down with me to talk about my career. During this discussion, origination/client management/BD was a focal point. I had already helped with BD/pitches/etc., but this was an informal interview to gauge my willingness/potential to be in the origination vanguard. As a VP-1 to 2 I was solidly spending 20-30% of my time on origination. However, by the time I started VP-3 revenue targets became formal. My prior firm rated people as 'Market Perform' or 'Market Underperform' with a list of KPIs and earned/managed revenue was on it.

What were you thoughts on this and how did you see your colleagues and friends at other banks view this transition?

I'm not breaking any new ground here when I say a great Analyst/Associate can be a mediocre VP, and vice versa. I mentioned this in some above answers, but I love facing clients. RFPs/Bakeoffs/etc. aren't the most fun in the world, I'll admit, but winning mandates is. At first, I had nervous energy. A tangible number had been provided. Either you hit it or you don't. A positive spin--assuming the number is reasonable--is this KPI is objective and fair. No one can take it away from you if you hit it. 

As for my colleagues: Most were excited, some had 'cushions' (Meaning, the MD on the deal would give them sales credit and just wanted them to execute) and didn't care much about it, and others quickly realized that origination wasn't for them when they were on the hook for numbers. Some had short learning curves, others long. After the first 12-18 months, you know if origination is your fastball.

How difficult is it to bring in a deal (from what you've seen), do you have to know a lot of CEO/CFO/PE partners?

New strategic/corporate clients that have never transacted with the firm? Can be challenging. Courting, relationship building, value proposition, RFPs, bakeoffs, etc. Then--even if you win the mandate--if anything goes sideways, then the first impression is 'this may have been a mistake'. Losing a prospective client isn't great, losing a current client is devastating. On the other hand, sometimes prospective/current clients call you for help. In this event, the sales funnel has been compressed.

PE/Financial Sponsors/Smart Money/etc. Look. They know they have the power and understand what Bankers do (most of them were, at one point in time, Bankers). They will push on your fees, have your DCM/Credit team jump through hoops to fill/help with the stack, etc. and say, 'do you have any idea how much business we've done with you (your firm)? Don't like our terms/deal/timeline? Ok. I'll go across the street'. I'm not saying all of them are like that (most are actually highly humble/reasonable in my experience), but it happens. 

In short, I found I have more leverage engaging corporates than financial sponsors during origination. 

Network: Knowing CEOs/CFOs/PEs is clearly important, but the strength of your relationship is more so. This is a relationship-driven business and--cliche time--it takes years to build trust and seconds to destroy it (eagerly awaiting all the 'ok, boomer' retorts). IMO, annuity (repeat) is better than transactional (single) business which means serving your client, maintaining the relationship, bringing value/ideas to the client, and continuing the conversation. I would also say building a network of lawyers, accountants, business brokers, etc. is important. You never know when they'll have a client with a potential transaction. The referral play is important. On the other hand, you may have executed with clients you cover so often that origination becomes serendipitous.  

How difficult do you think it would be to go from a well-known but smaller MM firm (below Blair and Baird) to a BB or EB in 2nd or 3rd analyst year? I'm really thinking about UMM PE as a goal and am certain that lateraling would help me out a ton in getting there. I know the basics of networking, behaviorals, technicals, but am unsure about how realistic this jump would be. Would it be better for me to just buckle down at the current firm, rather than stretch myself thin with little chance? 

In my experience, PE/PE headhunters usually pick IB analysts after their 2-3 year program and come in as pre-MBA associates, attend a top business school, and then return to PE as a post-MBA associate. I'm sure you--and others on WSO--know this tends to be the most common path. I would note that I've heard of headhunters courting analysts during their 1st year in some cases.

In terms of your question, the short answer is you can likely lateral now and make it for cycle. The current job market isn't white hot, but it is definitely red hot. 

The long answer: I would note some people have argued laterals have a comparatively more difficult time recruiting; headhunters use your old email (I know this is kinda silly, but it happens more than you think), PE firm wonders what happened during your 1st year to cause you to leave/lateral, chances are you won't get significant deals to talk about within the first 3-4 months of lateraling, etc. I, however, respectfully disagree. If you have a defensible rationale (switch industry coverage, product, regional location), proved you can sit at BB/EB and perform, etc. then I don't think it would be a big deal at all. And, let's face it, not uncommon--especially for BBs-- to have pretty high turnover/attrition which could open up spots. The critical thing to keep in mind is there is a less formal process than FT recruiting and getting another job won't just be based off your resume. You also need to have a pretty strong mid-year/year-end review at your current bank so the BB/EB knows you don't 'smell'.

Other considerations: I assume you sit on lev fin, M&A, or--maybe--DCM which--IMO--are the typical desks (in order of priority) PE tends to recruit from/look at. Since you're looking at UMM PE and your current firm is well-known in the field, would you be at that much of a disadvantage? I don't know if I'm there yet. If, however, your current firm is regional, you sit on ECM, have 0 alums that went to PE, etc., then your concern--given your goals--is valid.

Other threads that may be of interest to you:

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/lateraling-guide-for-investment-…

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/lateraling-from-mm-to-bbeb-outco…

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/how-difficult-is-to-move-from-a-…

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/just-broke-into-ib-as-a-lateral-…

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/possible-to-lateral-from-a-middl…

Good luck! 

Thanks for offering to do this. 

I'm a senior at a target undergrad who's going back to a BB IB for full time soon but similar to another poster above, I think I've realized my interests/skills are much better suited for consulting than banking and am looking to transition over in a few years. 

It seems like from what you said, networking was key for you when transitioning over, but how common/easy is it for full timers in IB to lateral over just purely through networking? Or do places like MBB typically put more value on hiring through the MBA pipeline?

I'm considering applying to some deferred MBA programs because of this reason but I'm starting to question if doing an MBA would be necessary or helpful since it'd be another big expense down the road. Thanks! 

You're welcome!

Congrats on the BB IB role. No small feat. On your realization--and I may be mistaken--but do you think/feel you have enough experience on the IB side to make that determination? Maybe you'll find you're very good at IB or--more importantly--enjoy it. Perhaps not.

In terms of IB lateral to MBB pre-MBA; IB -> MBB is significantly easier than MBB -> IB, but not a given. Networking is definitely an important component. MBB recruiters are typically very responsive and they can be great resources to get more color on lateralling, timeline advice, etc. From what I've seen in US MBB offices at your level; Bain usually hires once a year; McK & BCG; bi-annual for experienced hires. But--overall--the process is less structured/formal than the normal recruiting process aka based on need. During interviews, I would expect tougher technicals/cases (as you now have work experience) and to prepare a very solid rationale for 'Why consulting? Why now?' 

As for the MBA, I won't rehash the answer I gave above, but it all depends. Having a 2-3 year Analyst program followed by a top-tier MBA is definitely a solid path to MBB as a level 2 (Consultant) and--maybe--level 3 (Engagement Manager) if you stay in banking a bit longer. If you lateral to MBB pre-MBA, there's nothing that says you can't pursue an MBA (which the firm may pay for) and come back as a level 2 or 3. Bonus: if you find out you don't like consulting, leverage the MBA to pivot out. 

First off, congrats on making Partner and a successful career. Obviously a major achievement in a field that has limited seats entry-level and even fewer as you move up. Again, I'm humbled someone at your level on the buy-side would ask me anything at all.  

How did you manage WLB during your career? 

In IB, especially at the junior levels, WLB is very hard to come by. I've observed, however, that folks tend to overestimate their work hours per week. Rarely, if ever, did I clock a 100hr+ week. But--to be fair--when you sign up for Banking, you probably know what you're getting into. 

But to your question. During my 1st year as an Analyst, I did a pretty poor job at WLB and--in retrospect--was largely inefficient with my time management. During my 2nd year and beyond, I slowly built up the following to free up time;

- Automated admin, non/low value-add tasks: I developed/collected Excel/PPT templates, learned basic coding, and set up automated workflows to shift time from manual to analytical/value-add efforts. There's more to this, but I took a critical look at my most time-intensive tasks and worked to find aspects that I could automate/compress

- Collected all my VPs/MDs work calendars: This gave me insight into pockets of time for going to the gym, days where I could have uninterrupted work, days/weeks I knew would be light/heavy, etc. This helped me manage upwards

- Email time blocks: Unless urgent, spend 1-2hrs first thing in the morning and then 1-2hrs at 5pm on emails. Otherwise, I did not sporadically check emails. This had more benefits than just freeing up time

- Set expectations (easier as I progressed): For example, if I received a non-urgent email on Saturday evening, I would not respond until Sunday night. The goal of this--and other actions--is to set time boundaries

- Learning to say 'no': This is easier said than done, but it is a valuable skill for WLB

- Date night with my wife once every week no matter what

- Leave junior, the dog, etc. at home and spend time with friends every 2 weeks no matter what 

What was your biggest failure and how did you recover?

Biggest failure: Invested in a start-up post-Series A and helped with business development for 10hrs a month (part of the deal). I knew the post-Series A valuation was way too high and the business model was highly risky, but I let my emotions/desire to believe take over and I wanted the experience. During my time there, the business took on a large contract with strict procurement requirements and it turned out to be a major cash burn which--ultimately--sunk the company. The Series A investors pushed for the contract and then ran for cover when things went sideways. I always thought I was a major part of that failure as I didn't voice all my concerns to the founders or the majority investors as I thought it would hurt my reputation/get dismissed as soon as I spoke. Even worse? I didn't even spend the time to come up with potential solutions to the problems I did raise. I became very passive during--and after--contract signing. I still think about this today.

I used this experience--and story--to help land Board seats at two other start-ups and--more importantly--I promised myself if I identified a concern, I would validate my understanding, think through the downside, and come up with solutions instead of just offering more problems. Nothing like a bad experience to make you razor-sharp the next time.  

What was your biggest regret ?

Self-pity after my first job collapsed during the 2008 Credit Crisis. I turned down opportunities at other firms while I was on a sinking ship (e.g., ML, Lehman, Bear) and had sharp elbows whenever anyone would try to make light of my situation/help me. This definitely closed a lot of doors for me during a very tenuous time. I isolated myself and left myself with little choice but to go back for my Master's, see if things cool down, and try to pivot. Luckily all worked out, but my attitude and rigidness almost destroyed my career. 

How does a bank's overall strategy play into your work as a VP? How would you describe the strategy side to investment banking and generating fees? The extent of my knowledge would simply be "win deals" but can you talk about what it looks like day to day for an analyst /associate/vp?

Strategy & culture definitely play into it. For the latter, also echoing an answer I gave above after you asked this question, sometimes you have MDs that guard their book/only want execution. In that case, you have a firewall between yourself and origination. But I digress.

Overall Strategy Thoughts: A bank may have a 'field of play', 'big bets', 'Annual Operating Plan', etc. This tone from the top will--theoretically--trickle down and underpin sales activity. That may be great for some/most people, but--for me--the bank is for profit not for-specific-profit. Meaning, if I could carve out business and generate fees, did it really matter if I was 100% aligned to the core strategy (within reason, of course)? From a go-to-market perspective, we certainly had preferred communications / recommended materials, but we'd modify them to fit the pursuit at hand. Beyond revenue, however, I would pay close attention to the tone from the top's messaging on culture/execution strategy. Sometimes you need to read between the lines. For example, if the messaging was more focused on profits/margin over revenue, then that signaled--to me--to have more junior leverage (read: lower cost) on deals over a heavy senior banker presence and execution efficiency was top-of-mind. If the messaging was more focused on top-line, then that told me origination was likely the focus. 

Strategy Side/Generating Fees Thoughts: I mentioned this a bit in another answer, but any strategy that's impersonal (online marketing, email blasting companies) will not work. Referrals, quality of work on current/previous transactions, client relationship management, conferences, etc. (read: personal) are the best execution in my mind. To be more precise, the value-add/building the relationship--to me--is one or a combination of the following (not fully exhaustive);

- M&A/transaction idea-sharing with clients/prospects

- Providing market updates/current landscape to clients/prospects

- Meeting casually to talk about what the client/prospect has been doing and their future plans

- Not disappearing immediately after closing a deal

- Being 'on call' for clients

- Coverage, coverage, coverage

Day-to-Day for A -> VP on Winning Deals Thoughts: In my experience, Associates/VPs tend to have more hands-on opportunities than Analysts on winning deals. So I'll likely just focus on that, but I don't want to trivialize Analysts here as I know what its like to get a 9pm urgent email from an MD that just left a meal with a client and needs a 20+ slide deck on xyz environment to send the client by tomorrow before 9am. The day-to-day could also change if this is an RFP, bakeoff, etc. But I'll try to speak in generalities for a sell-side (not fully exhaustive).

Associate (examples in no particular order);

- Put together roadmap of high-level sales process/roadmap/milestones

- Market overview

- Put together a football field with an estimated range of the value of the company to be sold (value considerations. As a VP, I insisted on being part of this process and partnering with the Associate as opposed to just checking the work)

- Firm tombstones, qualifications of similar deals, etc.

- Qualifications/experience of deal team

- Seller positioning/competitive advantage

VP (examples, in no particular order):

- How the deal will be marketed 

- Will it be broad or targeted? Pros/cons for each

- Sourcing prospective buyers

- List of 'best' buyers

- Risks/obstacles in the sales process

- Strategic alternatives / Financial sponsor alternatives / etc.

- Summary of fee structure for the mandate

I would note that an RFP may ask for industry/deal specific things or sometimes a very bespoke request.

Then--usually--the deal team meets with the client and presents. MD/VP typically lead this. If we lose the sell-side? Well... now I know the deal and I may just look to pair up with a prospective buyer and act as the Buyer Advisor. This is--obviously--a much longer process with a lower probability of success, but can be viable if the deal makes sense for a buyer where the bank has a good relationship. Goes without saying--of course--but you still need to respect all confidentiality, conflicts, etc.  

Last thing, aside from the usual suspects like Rosenbaum and Pearl, do you know of any books on investment banking-particularly any on being a good senior manager in IB or the science of m&a / strategy from a banks perspective. Thanks! 

By Senior Manager in IB, I think you mean VP, Director, or MD, but this is just taxonomy hairsplitting. 

Rosenbaum and Pearl is excellent and very practical. If I exclude the Graham, Lowenstein, Cohans, etc. of the world, then it limits the options. Books I've found are helpful (though are not necessarily related to Banking in any capacity);

- M&A: An Insider's Guide to the Purchase and Sales of MM Business Interests, Roberts 

- Applied Mergers & Acquisitions, Bruner

- 48 Laws of Power, Greene

- The Hard Thing About Hard Things, Horowitz

- Podcast: I've heard some interesting things on 'M&A Science Podcast', but can be hit or miss, IMO

I'm sure there are others, but I tend to learn from my own--or others--experience within the industry. I find books are helpful, but only up to a point. To get the real granularity/nuance/unofficial of being a strong manager/understanding IB, you really need to be in it.

Sorry I can't be more helpful on this ask. 

Currently a college senior who will be returning to a top group in IBD (GS TMT/MS M&A) but I have always wondered about consulting and if I would learn more in MBB. I come from an entrepreneurial background (exited my first startup) and eventually want to go back to entrepreneurship thinking during or post MBA. Do you think that at the analyst level you learn more in MC?

Congrats on making it to a top firm/desk. That's a feather in your career cap.

I may be biased here--and not to negotiate against myself/my career because, based on the info you provided, you'd likely be a good MBB candidate/someone I'd find valuable--but IB will enable more for your career and goals, IMO, than MC. Level 1 (Associate Consultants) typically build decks, support level 2 (Consultants), gather data, etc. and rarely--if ever--get much of a say/exposure to company strategy/analysis. Not saying IB Analyst life is much different/better and the MC experience isn't 'bad' by any means, but I think you'd learn more valuable experience as an IB Analyst over the equivalent in MC. 

My two cents on entrepreneurship/MBA--also gave similar thoughts above--what value would the MBA add, in your mind, to your career as an entrepreneur? You've exited a start-up, will sit at a marquee IB, and are--clearly--driven. Maybe there's something I'm missing, but I don't see MBA as a mechanism for entrepreneurship. You--the founder--are the mechanism.

Would there be a point in doing 2 years in IBD and then 2 years in MBB or would 2 years in IBD + 2 years in MFPE be better?

Both paths can be great. Given your goals, 2yrs IB + 2yrs pre-MBA PE Associate--IMO--is best. Assuming the entrepreneurship route doesn't work out/you don't like it/whatever, IB & PE experience (especially at top shops) will give you a leg up for the remainder of your career. Also, I think most people would understand the rationale of coming back to financial services after trying your hand at a start-up. If you went to MBB post-IB, you may have a lot of probing questions (e.g., 'why did you leave Banking in the first place?') and--likely--this would close a lot of doors at PE shops (especially for deal teams) or PE may try to brand you as 'an operations guy'. Again, not necessarily a bad thing, but maybe your desires run a bit deeper. 

I may be giving too simplistic of an answer here, but I'll defer to you. 

Thank you for taking the time to answer all of our questions.

I am 2 years out of graduation with a 3.16 from a semi-target in NY. I have a big4 internship on deals but no finance-related experience besides my degree and business frat. 

Haven't been working, but fully overcame my health issues post-grad and am now pursuing recruiting. Currently honing my behavioral and technical skillsets so I can network with alumni and possibly land a boutique or MM. With 2 years gap and a subpar CV, what can I focus on to make this happen? Thank you in advance.

You're welcome! I'm happy to give back to a community that's provided me with more value than I could hope to equally return.

I'm sorry to hear about your health issues but very glad to hear you overcame them.

Take the following with a grain of salt. There is clearly more to your career--and you as a person--than what you've provided, but if I just go off the data alone, these are my thoughts.

- GPA/School: Observation: I assume your GPA is on a 4.0 scale. It's my experience and understanding that your GPA may be below hurdles for entry-level FO roles at BB/EB and--likely--most MM IB shops. Typically--IMO--that cutoff is 3.5. Your school is 'semi-target' which also may be a challenge. I would note, however, that NY (assuming NYC/greater NYC area) schools like Fordham, Brauch, Yeshiva, etc. do place folks in FO roles in NY and--though maybe not as much as target schools--have a strong alum presence in finance. 

Perspective: I think you're smart to target boutiques/MMs and that you're going to network. That sample of the IBD population and effective networking may very well be your best bet at landing a role. I assume you're looking at places like D.A. Davidson, Ziegler, etc. 

- Experience/Internship: Observation: In terms of directly translatable FO finance experience, I think you should be prepared for FO roles/shops to discount your Big4 internship if they even consider it at all. It's a harsh reality and I'm sure is unfair, but it may be reality.

Perspective: Without knowing what desk you sat on at the Big 4, I'll have to speculate. Were you extended an FT offer? Or--and excuse my ignorance if I didn't put this together--did you get an offer, but due to health issues, you couldn't accept? Big 4s do have broker/dealers underneath their corporate umbrella and do have investment banking/capital markets teams. It is my understanding, however, that these desks are limited in classic Banking services scope (i.e., primarily M&A). Big 4 isn't, for example, committing balance sheet to deals/capital placement. Unless I'm completely missing something. Regardless, could you network with folks on the broker/dealer side at the Big4 you interned with to land a role? Could be an interesting route to explore as you could lateral out of Big 4 to a more traditional IB firm. Please note, this is not an easy road. Other Big 4 desks (e.g., Financial Due Diligence, Valuation) could potentially lead to IB, but--in my experience--this is very rare and you'd likely have to take a step-down in title/come in as junior to anything banking related. 

- 2 Year Gap: Observation: Typically--and I don't personally know why this is the case--gaps are viewed poorly. But you have a very valid reason. 

Perspective (Recruiters): Headhunters typically have specific mandates they need to fill. Anything that doesn't fit the box, they don't spend time on. Think about it... what are their motivations/incentives? They get paid on placement. If they can place someone in a week, get the commission, and move on to the next candidate or spend weeks trying to help someone that isn't what their client wants and hope they may get a commission, it doesn't make sense for them to help. Basically, your background/career is misaligned with the motivation of the Headhunter. Do not view this as 'well I must be a bad candidate', you just may not be a fit for their box. 

Perspective (Firms): I would be very hard-pressed to think of a firm that would put you at a disadvantage because of health reasons. You'll have to voice-over what happened, but any firm that would view health issues as a negative is probably a firm you don't want to work for.

Where do we go from here? Some considerations...

- Reengage the Big 4 for a banking equivalent role

- Network with alums and others at boutiques/MM shops

- If financially feasible, chase FO internships

- Find a finance-related job, work 1-2 years, enter a top MBA program, pivot to FO finance

- Join professional organizations/communities and network to find job opportunities 

Potential areas to focus on/explore

- Investment Banking training classes

- Teach yourself everything you can about banking. You will have to know more than people from target schools

- When you go online, train yourself to go right to WSJ, Bloomberg, Dealbook, etc. and soak up all the information possible. Basically, know the market and 'whats going on in finance'

- Teach yourself to build DCF, accretion/dilution, LBO, etc. models. Do this enough times until it becomes almost second nature

- Networking: If you're lucky, 10% of those you reach out to will respond in a meaningful way. 5-10% will lead to real interviews. Scrape this forum and others to learn how to appropriately network. There's an art to it. Don't just randomly connect with people on LinkedIn and say 'love to buy you coffee'. Come with value, don't start with asking them for a favor, make a real human connection, and--even if it sounds hollow people will appreciate it--offer what you can do for them (e.g., introduce them to someone in your network) instead of what they can do for you. Make them love you

Good luck and you'll get there. Don't be afraid of the hard work it takes, own it. Treat each failure like you wear it on your sleeve; dissect it, learn from it, grow. Temper your emotions on any success until you land & accept the offer.

I just accepted an IB DCM Analyst job at a very small bank in SF that does like 90% DCM. I have no prior IB experience at all, just one year wealth management experience and I know I'm extremely lucky that they are taking a chance on me. What should I do to maximize my experience at this job and leverage it in the future given it's a no name place?

Congratulations on landing the role! You may already know a lot of the following, but here are my thoughts on experience maximization;

Being a 'good' Analyst

- Efficiency and quality of work. Completing tasks on time with minimal/no errors

- Proactive disposition. Example: Client you're covering releases Q with earnings, you summarize findings/results and circulate to your team

- Being able to grasp the "big picture". Meaning, get a sense of what senior bankers are looking for, how they want things done, etc. A lot of times clients--and bankers--ask for one thing, but this leads to another thing. Being able to anticipate the next ask/deliverable is key

- During the first 4-6 months, Analysts are climbing the learning curve ladder. So the best you can do is nail down your technicals, fully understand Excel/PPT, the structure of deals/filings, transaction timelines, etc. 

- Attention to detail

- Keep your Associate happy / make his or her life as easy as possible. In short, the Associate is your 'client'

Personal/Professional Growth

- Think like a sponge. Take every opportunity to learn, shadow high-performers in the office, do your homework

- If you don't understand something, raise your hand. Not doing so or--worse--doing something wrong is a time/value waste. Just try (read: make sure) you don't ask the same question twice and you did your own diligence to find the answer before asking

- Try to understand the 'why' you're doing something beyond just the 'what' you're doing. Concept, concept, concept... Otherwise, you're just a keyboard/calculator 

- Don't be a jerk. Spend time with your team outside of work. Be amicable to 'get along' with everyone in the office. Be willing to help others even if you get nothing in return. Believe me... come round table/year-end discussions time, people will remember. Also, be very careful of the fact humans are tragically flawed and typically recall the most recent information they received (aka Availability Bias). Thus, the phrase 'what have you done for me lately' has merit here and will be remembered during round tables. Step in front of that, which brings me to my next point...

- Any deal/project/etc. you get put on, keep an active list of the following; 1) situation/deal, 2) your assigned tasks, 3) action you took to complete tasks, 4) results, and 5) what you learned/where you could improve. Don't think of this months after a deal. Keep a running 'near time' list. This will help with your deal sheet, your 'story', and your growth. Leverage this during year-end reviews   

See this thread for--IMO--one of the best summarizations of being a 1st year I've ever seen:

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/investment-banking-analyst-15-th…;

Right now, my ultimate goal would be to work at a hedge fund, but I recognize I might need to lateral to a BB bank first. How should I approach this in the future coming from a small place? As someone who I'm guessing did some hiring, maybe you have some insights for how I can win over the seniors at bigger places later.

I like the motivation! Before we get started, the hedge fund world is a very broad industry (long/short, event-driven, thematic, market neutral, distressed, arbitrage, credit, fixed-income, global macro, alpha capture, quant, etc.) with a wide range of roles (investment side, non-investment side). Granted as a junior this may not be material, but whatever HF strat you go for, it will--undoubtedly--guide your interview prep. 

I'll focus on the lateral to BB, but here are some threads that I think you may find interesting;

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/investment-banking-to-a-hedge-fu…

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/recruiting-process-for-hedge-fun…

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/getting-into-hedge-funds-from-ibd

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/best-way-into-a-hedge-fund

https://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/qa-3rd-year-hedge-fund-analyst

Lateral: Small Boutique to BB

On the BB side, I would also put EBs into your target, but to your question. I partly talked about this in another response earlier in the thread, but let's run this down a bit more...

- Role/Level Rationalization: I've heard of BBs that view themselves as superior to even elite boutiques (PJT, Evercore, Perella W, etc.) and may discount your experience. Meaning, you're currently an Analyst-2 and they'd view you as Analyst-1. Something that may happen and you should be prepared for it. BBs are typically pretty rigid in their recruiting processes, but as a lateral things are a bit more informal (see my above answers for more)

- Networking: Create a list of firms/groups you're targeting based on things like pipeline, firm reputation, etc. Do you want a specific industry? Specific product? Either way, it is absolutely critical to remember that one-off lateral job openings typically don't get posted online. You'll have to network. I would target networking with people that 1) lateraled to firms/groups you're interested in, 2) come from less traditional backgrounds (e.g., small/no-name boutiques), 3) those from your undergrad/alums from your current firm, and 4) Associates at firms/groups you're interested in as they are likely running point on the process to get Analysts. Lastly... follow up a lot. Lateral roles can come out of the blue so follow up every 1-2 months to see what the landscape is

- Reasoning for Lateraling: During interviews, you will get drilled on why you want to make a move. Perhaps this is the most critical question for laterals. Write out your reasoning in a clear, logical, and concise way. Do this until it becomes so natural that you don't even need to think about it when asked. Whatever the reason... don't unintentionally 'lie' or say things like, 'well I don't like my current shop, deal flow isn't great, and your BB is doing better things'. You need to be a bit more unique and so positive on the move that you'd defend it with your life. 

- Technical Mastery: You just don't know how to do a simple LBO, DCF, etc., but you can teach it to others. EPS Accretion/Dilution? Child's play to you. You can talk about tax equity and structures at a deep level along with methods to get a better return. EPS cushion and synergies are just a given to you and you know the conceptual components to a high degree. Basically, if there is anything you are not absolutely 100% confident in, you take that as a challenge and work to dominate it. Strong technicals for laterals aren't just a 'nice to have', but an absolute requirement

This isn't a silver bullet. The process is less formulaic than FT recruiting, but keep at it and build your brand (aka what people say about you when you're not in the room) like it is the single most important thing you've ever done.

Good luck and--please--keep me posted on your progress. 

When you were a banker, how did you ensure you got paid well consistently? Outside of just doing good work but in terms of managing senior folks and review process etc

Interesting question. You're right to call out good work as that's the lion's share of ensuring top-bucket come bonus time. This may be overcomplicating things, but I want to split this out between Salary & Bonus with more focus on the latter. Why? Salary is largely based on market rate & firm competitiveness. Granted there may be some shops that try to 'buy' talent by offering high-end salaries, perks, etc., but they are the exception, not the rule. And sure you have some negotiation leverage here (e.g., lateralling to a better paying shop, coming in at a more senior level in a new shop), but it isn't easy to do as it is to say. Bonuses are where things tend to be a bit more elastic. So let's look through that lens. Some things I did/considered when trying to--at least--not be bottom-bucket...

Managing Upwards/Expectations Examples

- Always be transparent with your internal supervisor/client (e.g., Associate, VP, Director, MD). Meaning, if you can't meet a deadline, raise it along with your reasoning, how you can mitigate deadline risk going forward, etc.

- Under-promise & over-deliver, but not the opposite 

- Own your mistakes, learn from them, and never place the blame on anyone else (there can be exceptions to this, but they need to be really good ones)

- Avoid asking the same question more than once

- Responsiveness. You want to be known as someone that responds quickly/appropriately and works late. Yes... this is kind of unfair and falls under 'facetime', but it's a reality, especially at the junior levels. Even more important? Develop a strong barometer on response priority which is a combination of urgency, seniority of the person making the ask, client, etc. Just responding fast without fully digesting the ask and the audience is a losing game

- Your job is to make the lives of the people senior to you easy. If you do this, you'll have friends during year-end

- If appropriate, ask for more speaking roles/client interaction and over-prep for any opportunity afforded. This shows that you're punching above your weight. Don't raise your hand for everything, however. You want to be involved in a situation set up for success, not the opposite 

- Take detailed, but efficient notes. Don't be a court stenographer, but get down action items, takeaways, etc. This will save your skin in more ways than one

- Don't be a suck-up or kiss a$s, but do be friendly. It takes 5 seconds to be polite

- Learn how to say 'no'. If you don't, burnout and perception of poor performance are right behind you

Review Process Examples

- 'Ring the cash register'. If you got great feedback from an Associate or other senior member during a deal or--best yet--a client, don't let that go unknown. You don't want to gloat, but you should rightly get credit

- Build a brand as the person everyone goes to for something specific (e.g., Analyst that best understands debt/abc industry coverage/xyz client). Be careful though... some not-so-scrupulous individuals may take advantage of you here 

- Own everything that comes into your world. A colleague forwarded you a model, deck, MP, CIM, etc. and asked that you just file it/kick it along to a senior person? Nope. You're now the owner in that process. Make sure any file reflects you as 'top-bucket' before sending along

- Had a not-so-great review or below your expectation? Get the feedback, listen to it and respond objectively (again, don't blame anyone here or get emotional. Even if you're right, it'll make you look bad unless you have a serious & legitimate grievance) and be practical/tactical to make sure it doesn't happen again. The next review cycle demonstrate how you learned from the feedback and became better. Everyone loves a comeback story

Other Considerations

- Luck: Top-bucket folks usually get good staffings/are set up on deals that will be successful. Sometimes you get a choice in this. Most times you don't. If you get put on a bad deal or aligned with a poor-performing team, then you may largely have to damage control. You could be amazing, but you'll get drowned out by not-so-great projects or bad managers or a bolt of lightning... I'm being facetious here, but luck does play into this... as it does a lot of careers. This is outside of your control, so don't worry too much about it, but do be aware of it and focus on what you can control in a bad situation

- Stong Senior Banker Alignment: Once you join a firm, you'll get a good idea of the unofficial 'pecking order'. Who are the top performers? Who is coasting? Who is underperforming? Try to gravitate towards the top. If a senior banker has a great year, then the banking team that executed for him or her--almost always--will as well. This again may be outside of your locus of control 

- Read Between the Lines: Sometimes you just aren't a fit for the firm. Instead of being direct with you or putting you on a performance improvement path (which is the first step in getting terminated), you'll get a low bonus or mediocre raise or be passed over for promote or whatever. I don't agree with this management method, but some places just avoid conflict. Follow the data and your gut then try to find a home where people appreciate the value you bring

- Is My Added Effort Really Worth an Extra x% Bonus: A valid concern in my mind. And I'd be lying if I said I didn't think about this. You need to look at the practical benefits. Does top-bucket mean 100s of hours of extra work a year, similar exit ops, similar promotion ops, etc. but only translates to an extra few bucks this year before the process starts all over in the next fiscal? You need to really be committed/love the role/love finance/love banking and--more importantly--see the incremental benefit. I'd plead the 5th if my firm asked me this point-blank or give some canned answer like 'well of course it's worth it', but you're an adult. What value do I get from lying to you or myself?

I know I colored a bit outside of your question's lines, but hope this was helpful.   

Thanks!

Saw you talked a lot about MBA and found it quite helpful. Undergrad GPA for sure is crucial for MBA admissions. If not getting an MBA, I am curious how important your undergrad GPA is once you have say 3+ years of work experience when you apply for lateral positions.

Thanks. MBA can certainly be helpful. It's just best to think about it like a tool to enable a certain goal (e.g., career pivot, supplement/improve knowledge/credibility) and if the benefits outweigh what you're forgoing (e.g., 2 years of wages, 2 years of direct experience) coupled with the program expense. Not all benefits are quantitative, but it should probably be--IMO--a consideration.

On GPA in general: My thought is there isn't really a general rule on GPA importance. Typically, if you're a recent college graduate with minimal work experience, then firms can really only go off of your college experience and GPA is definitely a KPI or--at least--your major GPA if your major is directly aligned to the field you're applying to. Once you hit 3+years of solid experience, however, GPA becomes less relevant and your accomplishments at work are probably the most important thing. But if you legitimately got top marks (e.g., 4.0, A+), then noting this can only help you. One observation: I have encountered some firms that are real sticklers about GPA and even SATs (e.g., DE Shaw) and will ask for those metrics even for very senior hires. 

Complicating this are factors like target vs. non-target. If non-target and you had a good GPA, you may want to leave that on to differentiate yourself. But not a necessity.

On your question: I would say undergrad GPA is less important than your experience for lateral positions, but should likely still be on a resume/application. Why? You're still early in your career and may not have enough experience which may beg the question 'why did you exclude your GPA?' during the conversation on your rationale for lateralling. Though unfair, people may automatically assume you removed your GPA because it was low. 

My perspective: Unless the GPA was low, then include it if you're still early in your career and considering a lateral. Later in a career (5yrs+) without an MBA? Probably not that important and only include it if it was remarkable (e.g., 4.0, A+). Would I hold a 'bad'--or omitted--GPA against you? If technicals were lacking or you had a negative mid-year/year-end review, then I'd probably consider the low GPA as a piece in the pattern and practice of your performance and an omitted GPA as something we need to uncover during interviews. Thus, I would likely view it negatively. If, however, you have a great GPA it could make up for mediocre technicals (this is a big maybe because technicals are so critical for laterals) with an OK mid-year/year-end review, I may just view that through the lens of your lateral rationale where maybe you just got unlucky. Not a negative view, but not exactly a positive one either.

Is it acceptable to leave it off your resume and what do you see people do most of the times.

For Banking: Once you hit Associate, there's probably no need to include GPA on your resume and--frankly--your education section on your resume should be towards the bottom. When I was reviewing resumes, about 80-90% of Analysts had GPA on their resumes (100% for 1st Year Analyst applications as it was a requirement and trending slightly down for laterals at the 2nd & 3rd year). Maybe 40-50% of the non-MBA Associate lateral resumes I reviewed had GPA.

For Consulting: Once you hit Level 2 (Consultant), there's probably no need. I would note, however, that most Consulting resumes I reviewed had GPA on them. This dropped off significantly for Level 3 (Engagement Managers) without MBAs where maybe 30-40% had GPAs on their resumes.