Re:Working at Goldman Sachs Suuuucks, Leaked Internal Survey...
by tomatocracy on Sunday March 21, 2021 @01:58PM
(#26532399)
It's not that those roles are much harder to get as such. It's that the most effective way to get those roles is to work at GS (or an equivalent) first.
Re:Working at Goldman Sachs Suuuucks, Leaked Internal Survey...
by Latour on Sunday March 21, 2021 @02:24PM
(#26532613)
What's the difference between hardness and effectiveness in this context?
Re:Working at Goldman Sachs Suuuucks, Leaked Internal Survey...
by tomatocracy on Sunday March 21, 2021 @06:07PM
(#26534587)
There are quite a few other routes in to these roles (start as a graduate, lateral hire from consulting/industry, internal moves, etc) and I don't think they really see stiffer competition or higher calibre candidates than you'd see for a front office role at GS or another bulge bracket IB.
However if you start at GS/another IB then you get plugged into a network where you see a lot more of these opportunities without having to go out to look for them as much. It's partially a numbers game so the more opportunities you see the better the chance of landing one.
A very large, say property developer, might hire GS for its fundraising needs, but a GS grad wouldn't want to work laying bricks. He might want to work as CFO or someone very close to the CFO, but those roles are much harder to get than working as grad for GS.
So it's not just about what the grad wants, it's also about what he can get.
This shouldn't be controversial. Anyone who's been in the industry knows that people move "up" from IB to their clients. Of course everyone wants that, but again such roles are harder to get than IB.