Is it just me or are PE Associates garbage these days?

Typing this up from the office on a Friday night because I'm covering for two separate incompetent juniors right now. It's especially a problem with the last two classes. It's comical how little I can trust them with - even basic analyses or admin work are riddled with errors (let alone important things like models). Plus, no responsiveness, no initiative, no drive to succeed, or even a basic motivation to get better at their jobs. All of which is fine - we all have dud associates now and again - but it's accompanied by this aggressive, borderline hostile attitude and entitlement that gives me zero faith that they'll get any better. Friends at other MFs have had the exact same experience and we're all at a loss.

Comments ( 124 )

  • Associate 1 in PE - LBOs
1mo

Sounds like nobody cared to train them well, including you.

  • 16
  • 6
1mo
Five Star Man , what's your opinion? Comment below:

None of the juniors seem to give a shit anymore. It's really a problem for our group as well, despite hours of training. The only feedback is they want higher comp, better hours and more exposure. They don't really seem to understand how the world works.

Not a ton of helpful advice, but you're not alone.

1mo
Croupier , what's your opinion? Comment below:

I mean, the buck has to stop somewhere. I've seen colleagues put in bare minimum effort in their IB analyst years, knowing they have PE offer in hand. Then PE hits, and they learn very quickly that it's tough to build a career when you're only ever putting in 50%.

1mo
[email protected] , what's your opinion? Comment below:

Five Star Man

None of the juniors seem to give a shit anymore. It's really a problem for our group as well, despite hours of training. The only feedback is they want higher comp, better hours and more exposure. They don't really seem to understand how the world works.

Not a ton of helpful advice, but you're not alone.

Hire me

1mo
BigData24 , what's your opinion? Comment below:

There's a corporate culture shift going on, and Gen Z is driving it. Things like job-hopping and preferring salary to experience used to be frowned upon, but when an entire generation does it, it's kind of hard to ignore. Broadly speaking, everyone's goal has always been to produce more output from less work, but it seems that the newer generations are leaning towards the latter half of that goal (in all industries, not just finance).

There are basically two ways to think about this behavior. The first way is to conclude that Gen Z is lazy and entitled, unwilling to do the kind of work required to be successful. The second way is to conclude that Gen Z is the first generation that actually understands their self-worth in the marketplace and won't put up with the old ways of rampant employer abuse. In my experience, both views are pretty common, and the dividing line is usually age / seniority. Of course, seniors and management are upset that juniors aren't putting in the same effort. On the other hand, juniors don't really see work as anything more than a means to earn a paycheck, so they couldn't care less either way.

If the culture shift continues, then maybe we really will see reduced hours and better comp. But if employers can hold out long enough, maybe Gen Z will be brought back down to Earth. Personally I think the juniors will win, at least in finance. Finance simply doesn't have the same appeal it used to, and most of us see it as "waste a few years of your life doing mind-numbing soulless work in exchange for the ability to quit and move to a better job later on".

A large portion of my peers choose to avoid finance entirely, due to its nonsensical culture that is hyper-fixated on wearing fancy watches and acting subservient to your boss, and its poor work-life balance ("what life?"). The result is a dwindling talent pool where employers have to make more and more concessions, since there is no alternative. It's not like my generation is dumb, it's just that the smart ones are actually smart enough to know that they will be properly valued and respected elsewhere.

  • 11
  • Associate 2 in CorpDev
1mo

Thats because even when you chase consistent comp increases and are in the 95th percentile for your age, you still really dont make that much. If you arent in the top 2% for your age you should absolutely continue to chase higher salaries. Look at what the 90-95th percentile makes at age 30 now relative to those in the same bucket in 1980. This isnt Gen Z shit this is basic human logic

1mo
NahFAM69 , what's your opinion? Comment below:

Have  you tried giving them higher comp, better hours and more exposure? Lol

Nah
  • 2
1mo
Five Star Man , what's your opinion? Comment below:

They're at the high end of comp, probably better than most of their peers. Hours-wise, nothing I can do to change that, I don't have them run around putting pitchbooks and other bullshit together, I push on the client as much as possible without fucking up the entire deal. Exposure-wise, you're just not going to present to the CEO or board as an associate.

In summary, they've got it pretty good.

1mo
auto , what's your opinion? Comment below:

And have them stick around instead of leaving to become someone else's problem?

Most Helpful
1mo

What entitles you to have beast juniors who basically do your job for you and make your life easy? Are your skills sharp enough for the juniors to respect? Do you give them opportunities to shine and go to bat for them? Or are you giving them admin b*tchwork that you don't want to do, taking credit for their work, are not that smart yourself, then making surprised pikachu face when they want nothing to do with you?

Usually it goes around, comes around with these things in my experience.

  • Analyst 1 in IB - Cov
1mo

surprised pikachu face was good. thank you for brightening my day

1mo
auto , what's your opinion? Comment below:

But juniors doing grunt work for their superiors is how the world operates.

last thing anyone wants is not leaving office at decent time because you're checking that low-level munchkins aren't fucking up.

1mo

You're confused as to how the world actually operates vs. how you wish it would operate. The world operates on supply & demand and incentives. Juniors take a deal to eat shit sandwiches for a few years in exchange for establishing their careers, earn some cash, and, most relevant to you, to learn valuable skills from their seniors. If you can't get juniors to your satisfaction, either one of two things are happening - (1) you're not delivering on your end of the bargain, so you can't get worthwhile people to do the work for you or (2) your expectation is skewed unrealistically on what a junior brings to the table vs. what you are offering to them.

Finance jobs are some of the freest forms of labor markets there are out there. The market is efficient and shit employers get shit employees and vice versa. This is the equilibrium you can either accept and work with, or find ways to improve upon the status quo by offering a better bargain to the market.

  • Works at Other
1mo

IME guys like that (always at the VP / SVP level and never making it beyond - I wonder why) really aren't sharp.

But they'd like to think they are.

They aren't good with people.

But they'd like to think they are.

They aren't even good at corporate finance

But they'd like to think they are. And they get real mad when you catch their mistakes and tell them privately.

Sure bro, keep presenting to the IC with the wrong equity cheque because you don't even understand how equity roll works (true story of a man similar to OP).

  • 2
  • Investment Analyst in PE - Other
1mo

Maybe offer appropriate pay and you'll get the level of talent you want…fucking twat

  • 6
Controversial
  • Works at Bank of America Merrill Lynch
1mo

This is a wild hypothesis. You are thinking that there might be a competency and motivation problem amongst juniors at megafund PE firms in the last two years. And to steelman your argument, let's say it's because of Gen Z, lower talent in banking, and a drop in skills due to Covid. Gen Z is basically lazy and unmotivated. Talent in banking is lower because of tech and Covid stifled skill development. Does that sound right?

Ok, now let's go through the counter view. Gen Z may or may not be less motivated overall but do you really think that the ones who were high achievers in college, demonstrated an ability to grind in banking, prepped for PE recruiting, and self selected to banking 2.0 in MF PE land are unmotivated? Similarly, even if talent has dropped in banking, do you think it's dropped amidst the top candidates? Has your GPA, SAT, banking group preference, and target school standards changed? Probably not. Lastly, Covid may have impacted soft skills/presence but there was eventually a flurry of M&A activity, so hard skills and know-how should not have dropped.

So what's happening? A couple different things come to mind.

A) You are a bad manager and people are not motivated to work for you.

B) Your firm has recruited poorly and you are looking for confirmation here and amongst your VP peers at other funds.

C) You have changed your expectations the further removed you've become from your associate years. Mistakes are unavoidable and even the best performers make them on occasion. Basic ones are never good but sometimes they are not as elementary as you think because you are so removed from the weeds of the work.

1mo
reformed , what's your opinion? Comment below:

I can tell you haven't worked with analysts pre and post covid.

I get that as an analyst, this probably isn't what people want to hear, but the last few years of analyst classes have been terrible across the board. Think it's a combination of a few things:

- Not having real internships in 2020 made it harder for firms to filter out people who had no interest in the job and similarly people who would have realized this wasn't the job for them didn't have the summer to figure it out

- increased volume in 2020 and 2021 led to firms taking analysts who never would have met the minimum threshold at any other point and people with obvious flaws / attitude problems

- second years (and junior associates) got burned out in 2020 given extraordinary volume and reduced staffing leading them to have less interest in recruiting and less interest in developing the next generation

- WFH made it harder to ramp up and learn

You saw a bunch of posts over the last few years complaining about an overall deterioration in quality among analysts.

Now the lower quality analysts have moved on to PE . It will all normalize over the next few years as the job market gets more competitive and deal flow normalizes.

Array
  • 22
  • Analyst 3+ in IB - Gen
1mo
reformed

I can tell you haven't worked with analysts pre and post covid.

I get that as an analyst, this probably isn't what people want to hear, but the last few years of analyst classes have been terrible across the board. Think it's a combination of a few things:

- Not having real internships in 2020 made it harder for firms to filter out people who had no interest in the job and similarly people who would have realized this wasn't the job for them didn't have the summer to figure it out

- increased volume in 2020 and 2021 led to firms taking analysts who never would have met the minimum threshold at any other point and people with obvious flaws / attitude problems

- second years (and junior associates) got burned out in 2020 given extraordinary volume and reduced staffing leading them to have less interest in recruiting and less interest in developing the next generation

- WFH made it harder to ramp up and learn

You saw a bunch of posts over the last few years complaining about an overall deterioration in quality among analysts.

Now the lower quality analysts have moved on to PE . It will all normalize over the next few years as the job market gets more competitive and deal flow normalizes.

May be it will normalise. I do think it's more nuanced than that though.

IB / PE have low acceptance rates even in normal / good times. The lack of apprenticeship model may have made things worse over the last two years or so (with the effects now being felt in these industries) but I don't think things will go back to being the same across the corporate world (IB / PE may just about be fine).

I say this because I do think WFH / Covid has allowed a variety of different perspectives to creep in to the working routine. Most of all the hybrid work routine, a need to create a well defined boundary between working hours and personal ones etc. I think that now that the veil has been lifted, and that most juniors have witnessed this first-hand, I think this will never go out of equation in terms of being a factor of consideration in choice of careers and also in terms of how much loyalty any corporate role garners from this generation.

If you ask me, I think they have it right. If I were to do it again, I would much rather keep my physical and mental health in check, care about learning the important stuff (not working group lists but PF synergy adjustments on bolt-on platform etc.), fully capitalise on upwards reviews and legal / professional mechanics to ensure I do not get exploited (yes, with seniority comes greater accountability and responsibility)... the list goes on.

I do think though, IB / PE may be OK. They may not go back to the old times (thank god!) but due to the small number of spots and attrition / replacement rate, they may be OK. A down market may allow seniors to wrest some of the employee momentum but what happens when things pick up? Sure, not 2021 levels but even if they pick up reasonably the likelihood is that juniors will be back to expecting (demanding) what they had / or heard their peers had in normal times.

I just feel like the cat is out of the bag. Personally, I am quite happy. Also cannot wait for automation to ease up the job (that's a whole another discussion for another thread and boy is that going to be fun).

For what it's worth, I just made Associate 2 (A2A track) so not my first time around the block :)

  • 6
  • 1
1mo
DBisntaBB , what's your opinion? Comment below:

I mostly attribute this problem to the headhunters / interview process, in which the characteristics of motivation and drive are lower priority than they should be. Headhunters used to be able to trust GS /MS/etc. to funnel in the best candidates, but over the past 5 or so years the over-focus on things that don't matter such as diversity stats and what school someone went to has led to the analyst classes being lower quality, and therefore the PE associate candidates being lower quality.

You want kids who are responsive, have drive, a hunger to get better? Hire the 4.0 finance major from Penn State who is at WB Chicago instead of the political science major from Brown who is at a BB . Hunger can't be taught - modeling can.

1mo
reformed , what's your opinion? Comment below:

I don't agree with this.

Banks have always focused on students from top schools, this isn't a new thing. PE firms (and LPs) also have put an increased emphasis on diversity - this isn't really unique to banks at all.

Array
  • 7
1mo
DBisntaBB , what's your opinion? Comment below:

We are saying the same thing on your comment for the increasing emphasis on diversity - my point was, everyone is focusing on this which is resulting in hiring practices not focused on important traits. If banks are first filling their classes with people not qualified, and then PE funds are further choosing to want a diverse class vs. just the best available talent, the problem is on both ends. And models don't care what gender you are, they just get done correctly or not.

  • Associate 1 in IB-M&A
1mo

This 100x over

1mo
tellmehowtoplay , what's your opinion? Comment below:

DBisntaBB

I mostly attribute this problem to the headhunters / interview process, in which the characteristics of motivation and drive are lower priority than they should be. Headhunters used to be able to trust GS /MS/etc. to funnel in the best candidates, but over the past 5 or so years the over-focus on things that don't matter such as diversity stats and what school someone went to has led to the analyst classes being lower quality, and therefore the PE associate candidates being lower quality.

You want kids who are responsive, have drive, a hunger to get better? Hire the 4.0 finance major from Penn State who is at WB Chicago instead of the political science major from Brown who is at a BB . Hunger can't be taught - modeling can.

truth. the obsession with target schools and firms, nepotism, diversity, "networking" has what made this class what it is and i think it's going to get a bit worse.

you think Timmy who's uncle used to be a partner at GS will be open to being taught by a "lowly VP"? or Brenda who's told that "the future is female" and not to take "mansplaining" who got in through the diversity program? or Leticia who's dad's an entrepreneur and just wants her to get a job so she'll stay out of trouble and in better company?

Hire those who are hungry to learn, willing to put in the hours, willing to put their pride aside, and maybe you'll get better juniors.

Unfortunately, then more of the analysts will be asians or indians who wants to keep their visa and continue working in the US but still, they'll have better fundamentals and won't bitch quit after 2 weeks or months.

Array
  • 6
1mo
dinganddong15 , what's your opinion? Comment below:

Taking someone who is from a tier 2 school and is hungry to succeed >>>>>>Harvard kid who has never had to worry or grind in his/her life.  You can even see this in managers (public/private) where partners went to no name schools and had to prove they were worthy vs. being handed it.

  • 5
  • 1
1mo
Aerfally1 , what's your opinion? Comment below:
dinganddong15

Taking someone who is from a tier 2 school and is hungry to succeed >>>>>>Harvard kid who has never had to worry or grind in his/her life.  You can even see this in managers (public/private) where partners went to no name schools and had to prove they were worthy vs. being handed it.

This, all day every day.

  • Principal in PE - LBOs
1mo
DBisntaBB

I mostly attribute this problem to the headhunters / interview process, in which the characteristics of motivation and drive are lower priority than they should be. Headhunters used to be able to trust GS /MS/etc. to funnel in the best candidates, but over the past 5 or so years the over-focus on things that don't matter such as diversity stats and what school someone went to has led to the analyst classes being lower quality, and therefore the PE associate candidates being lower quality.

You want kids who are responsive, have drive, a hunger to get better? Hire the 4.0 finance major from Penn State who is at WB Chicago instead of the political science major from Brown who is at a BB . Hunger can't be taught - modeling can.

I was the Penn State without the 4.0. I endorse this post wholly. Hunger cannot be taught.

  • Associate 1 in PE - LBOs
1mo

Have you heard of diversity? Compresses returns when you hire people based on what they look like vs skill. Heard it from across the board IB , PE and even consulting

  • 3
  • 10
  • Associate 1 in PE - LBOs
1mo

Yeah man, returns get compressed because of the 10% of juniors that are diverse instead of the 100% of seniors that are white males.

  • 21
1mo
Green_Bananas , what's your opinion? Comment below:

What about people who got hired because their dad knew someone? How dilutive are they to returns?

"I'm going to make him an offer he can't refuse."

1mo
FinEA , what's your opinion? Comment below:

The people that blame minorities instead of the people whose dads run as an LP for the firm certainly love pushing down.

  • 2
  • 1
  • Associate 1 in PE - LBOs
1mo

Some of you above probably haven't been in banking the last 2+ years, and holy shit the general competence / drive of analysts has fallen off a cliff, not painting a broad brush, still plenty of powerhouses/rockstars among the ranks but it just seems like the overall bar has fallen a lot - 2020 grad here so I'm talking about my peers / the interns and first years I worked with in banking (not some disgruntled associate/VP). My PE associate class somehow hired a kid who didn't know sumif() and another who didn't know how to populate or add parties to a first round VDR (both coming from strong banks). So yeah, OP isn't talking out of his ass. There is something to be said about the kids who will struggle and spend friday nights / weekends suffering through the steep learning curve IB / PE presents, I'm doing it right now and yeah it blows dick at times but I'll be better for it a year from now. I know that's not allowed to be said in 2023 but can't hide from the real world forever.

  • Associate 1 in PE - LBOs
1mo

How is it bad if someone doesn't know how to add parties to a VDR? There are a large number of providers. Takes 30 seconds to show them.

1mo
PommesQT , what's your opinion? Comment below:

Well I figured out all of this shit myself in my analyst years in a toxic environment and still disagree hard with OP's opinion.

Yes, I get dud juniors / interns. You don't necessarily get them all the time. People may not be good but they can be hungry, so they can be trained. And they're usually not hostile.

Being hostile / aggressive as a junior is a last resort because it's not accepted, period. Most juniors aren't idiots - if you're an asshole but you're a competent asshole, they'll still work with you and show obeisance to get your backing and valuable experience (lord knows I've done that)

A hostile / aggressive junior is one who wants absolutely nothing to do with you and two of them doing so suggests that OP is a dick at work who probably isn't actually good at his job.

  • 3
  • Associate 2 in IB - Cov
1mo

OP, I hope this doesn't offend you, but the current crop of IB analysts and PE associates just dont really care about your "profession" like your generation did.

Working 90 hour weeks and missing weekends/holidays over deals where you are just throwing debt on boring businesses and laying off people to generate "synergies" isn't attractive to gen z.  And why would it be?

Oh, but you gain valuable experience!  So they can go do more boring deals at a corporate later on making half the pay?

Oh, but the pay is so good compared to everyone else out of undergrad! (except inflation sucks, cost of living and housing is phucked, and tuition bills are out of control).  Many have simply just stopped caring when everything seems so stacked against them.

Have you actually set foot on a college campus lately and asked the top students if they are interested in IB or PE?  Most will laugh at you.  All they have to do is google "IB/ PE Culture"and the results are all about how terrible it is, How soulless the leadership is, how firms will just lay you off in a heartbeat before bonuses after working 100 hr weeks all year.

Another common thing you will hear is why work 80 to 100hr weeks just to make some boomer extremely rich.  It's a fair statement.  Perhaps if they spent 100 hours a week trying to do something for themselves the results could be interesting.

Or, why not just go to med school if you going to work so hard?  People actually respect doctors, and they essentially work for themselves, aren't at risk of layoffs, and can at least look themselves in the eye that they are helping people as public servants.

IB and PE is for people who fail to have better options now.   You will disagree with me, but it's true.  The bar has been lowered.  And the ones who you ARE getting in understand how crappy it is, and frankly don't care either.

The only people who reach out to me to get into finance now (Im at a top BB) are all internationals that barely speak english and have visa issues , kids from non targets, and people who were grabbed by the diversity council to interview and don't even know what IB is (and frankly dont care about it once I tell them).  I'm not making this up.

Whether you contributed to PE having a horrible culture is not apparent to me, but you need to understand that recent grads simply don't respect the profession like you did.  You can either work on fixing the culture so they do care, or continue to enjoy flaky kids from The Ohio State University and Wuhan University as your future employees.

  • Associate 1 in PE - Other
1mo

Definitely agree with most of your comment, but I would not say that IB / PE is only for those who don't have other options. I'm someone who chose PE over getting my physics PhD at a top three program or joining a high potential startup. If you play it the right way, finance can provide an extremely stable career path with high earnings and intellectual stimulation. Definitely a lot of attractive aspects still.

  • Associate 3 in PE - LBOs
1mo

If you're making such strong assertions, what are some actual examples of jobs which have a risk adjusted same earnings potential as finance? Not talking about 'lbe Facebook's next savant and you'll work 40 hours per week and a BJ at lunch'. Talking about real world programs with significant hiring needs on a yearly basis

  • Associate 2 in IB - Cov
1mo

any job in tech.  Software engineer, data science, product management.

higher pay, less risk, less hours, better culture

there are signficant hiring needs for this.  if you can prove you are highly technical (no...not stupid IB / PE "technical"...im talking really engineering), you will always be in demand.

try and tell a software engineer or data science guy to work an all nighter (wont go over well).

  • Business School in CorpStrat
1mo

Agree with a lot of your points, will counter the logic medical graduates work for themselves. Very rare, private practice is down and most doctors aren't entrepreneurial at least earlier in their career, most of them are drowning in debt. But still can find a decent job working for someone else with a good WLB. The downside is most people I know who went that route in medicine either love it or hate it / bored with their career.

1mo
SunTzu , what's your opinion? Comment below:

You clearly don't know much about medical field. Private practices are barely a thing, therefore meaning you don't make your own schedule. General practitioner field is dying. Many fields in medicine you are on call or working night shift well into your 30s/40s. The best WLB fields in medicine are the most competitive in education. Dentist might be the exception- they have somehow manage to charge insurance companies out the ass while working 3 days a week.

Life is more than dollars
  • 1
  • Managing Director in PE - Other
1mo

Dentistry is also a McJob. Good luck finding a nice town to setup practice in.  They are cranking out dentists and they are working for corporations making $115k a year with a shitload of debt.  If you aren't taking over family practice lookout, shit is bad. Orthodontics similar, it's not a pretty picture.

  • VP in IB - Cov
1mo
SunTzu

You clearly don't know much about medical field. Private practices are barely a thing, therefore meaning you don't make your own schedule. General practitioner field is dying. Many fields in medicine you are on call or working night shift well into your 30s/40s. The best WLB fields in medicine are the most competitive in education. Dentist might be the exception- they have somehow manage to charge insurance companies out the ass while working 3 days a week.

Ironically private equity has a major role to play in why practicing medicine or dentistry sucks today

1mo
Jaded Rainmaker , what's your opinion? Comment below:

I am sure right now you think you're smart and what you wrote makes perfect sense but in due time, you will hopefully realise how immature you were.

A bit like how I was in school when I didnt want to "memorize stuff" because I thought I was above it.

Obviously you are proving OP's point.

To OP: personally, I try to hire smart, mature, hungry and hard working young people, even if they tick fewer boxes based on CV. That would be my advice to you: try to push that inside your organization.

  • 2
1mo
xtrensity , what's your opinion? Comment below:

1. Smartest people no longer going into finance due to hours, compensation, lifestyle, etc.

2. Prioritizing hiring based on characteristics that don't improve your ability to do the job - race, sex, sexual orientation.

3. Goodhart's Law regarding recruiting; process is so structured you can have people who are functionally retardid just rote memorize stuff to get the role.

  • 3
  • 1
1mo
PommesQT , what's your opinion? Comment below:

It's a pride thing. I'm from the traditional track, but I've suggested hiring from the non-traditional track before, ie. from Big 4 accounting / corp dev, especially if they're willing to take a few years back.

Response from a SVP (who was himself from a Big 4 accounting firm ): bUt I dOn'T tHiNk wE'lL gEt ThE sAmE TaLeNt.

This was a good shop but not a MF and they were wondering why no one would take a low-ball role in the hottest job market ever. They basically thought that top bucket AN3 / ASO1 kids from GS / JP /MS would be lining up to take an AN1 role in our firm. Joke.

Response from an MD complaining about difficult ASO recruiting: but but but I only want candidates who have been vetted by BBs and other MFs .

k cool then.

  • 5
  • Associate 3 in PE - LBOs
1mo

Like a few others have mentioned, remote work, lack of interest in finance, and receiving a buyside offer 4 -5 months into your analyst stint with minimal reps reduces the motivation, all of which carries over when you move to PE . As far as people saying diversity, let's be real a lot of these firms hire 1 diverse candidate every other year lol. i just went and looked at the firms my friends work at and I hate to say it, there isn't really much diversity there lol. I've realized the diverse candidates i've worked with have all been super impressive, whether it be the hardo girls (sorry a lot of them can be hardos lol) or the Hispanic/Black (who usually come form targets) have been sharp. I've certainly worked with some well polished non diverse kids who just were not good. They studied the guides but could not really form independent opinions. I think a lot of it comes down to covid/remote work, lack of interest in finance, and just not as motivated

not sure why my text is discolored

  • Associate 3 in IB-M&A
1mo

Classic prisoner's dilemma. PE funds instead of taking time to vet candidates carefully like they should for any investments, they FOMO themselves over banking analysts that are a few weeks into the job. I agree with the sentiment that PE firms did this to themselves and I think this will result in recruiting timeslines being pushed back and longer recruiting / screening cycles a la Silverlake.

  • Analyst 1 in IB - Cov
1mo

I wish there wasn't such an aversion to firing. Not trying to be a dick, but sometimes letting people go is in both parties' interests.

Also, it would make every employee feel more entrepreneurial: "I'm running a business that has one employee and my product is my work output". Otherwise there is zero skin in the game .

Show me the incentives and I will show you the behavior.

  • 2
  • 2
  • Associate 1 in PE - LBOs
1mo

Said by analyst 1

  • 2
  • 1
  • Analyst 1 in IB - Cov
1mo

Haha yes an analyst 1 that thinks it would help me be more entrepreneurial

  • 1
1mo
GrandJury , what's your opinion? Comment below:

I've definitely noticed IB analysts, IB associates, and new PE associates these days have a much wider range in their competence / incompetence in the post-COVID / WFH era. Have had to deal with a terrible associate(s) as well.

On the flip side, as we complain about the new crop of juniors, it's probably fair to do some self reflection for us newer VPs/Directors and figure out how COVID and WFH stunted / changed the way we developed our soft skills, leadership and communication styles just as we were ascending into these new roles that require more people management.

1mo
nirav.m , what's your opinion? Comment below:

Given the increasing amount of digital distraction, it is not easy to get high quality, very focused and committed pool of talented resources. Also, since lot of the info is available on the internet freely, they don't want to put too much efforts to learn these concepts in depth. It is increasingly important now to have a strong screening, filtering and vetting process to get quality talent and also have structured & continuous learning and training sessions to upgrade their skills. Have timely mentoring session to provide them career guidance and how this strong foundation will help them later in their careers. You can use evaluate outsourcing options for low-end work so that the team is only focusing on high-value work. Need to work on finding long-term solution rather than looking for short-term fix.

1mo
Restless , what's your opinion? Comment below:

1) IB nowadays is seen as college 2.0: 1) People have no clue what to do with their lives; 2) So they might as well do something that keeps options open. Therefore, many current analysts don't have the same hungriness and attachment to their job as people who went into banking in the 90s. Also, meaning > money (=less ambition in becoming rich, so less dedication to their work).

2) Nowadays IB classes are built in the following way:

- 1/3 best merits from the entire application pool

- 1/3 women (best merits from its pool)

- 1/3 diversity (best merits from its pool)

Mainly, only 1/3 are considered for their grind and I would say that those are the ones who perform. From the rest 2/3, a maximum of 20% may be at the same level as the performers. So you have ~ 50% of people who shouldn't even be in IB (and afterward in PE) when considering better candidates from the entire application pool left out because the corporate governance report to stakeholders needs to reflect that "we empower" / "we advocate for equal treatment" / "we offer equal opportunities".

  • 6
  • 3
1mo
rabbit , what's your opinion? Comment below:

This isn't just isolated to PE , the bankers here will tell you we're seeing the same. Garbage is a strong word, I would characterize it politely as unfocused.

The candidate pool is now a solid chunk of exit opps kids who have an eye out the door before they even start. There is no focus, there is no grit, there is no real desire to learn anything beyond the bare minimum required for buyside / corpdev / tech interviews or whatever the cool kids are doing these days.

The flip side of the conversation is that the job is soul crushing, the hours suck and kids want to be doing something else. That's fine, people don't want to do the whole "put in their dues" bit anymore because there are easier paths, it is what it is. No judgment. As an A1, you really miss the forest for the trees and are not a part of any of what I think are the fun and fulfilling parts of the job.

Banking / PE really really REALLY aren't for everyone and the days of informally expecting at least a year or two commitment for A1s are long gone. We switched up our recruiting to (a) accommodate that and (b) filter out kids who have an eye to leaving for PE before they even start. Have no issues whatsoever with anyone who has ambitions and plans for their career path, I have an issue with hiring kids who come in with a plan to exit.

  • Associate 1 in PE - LBOs
1mo

There aren't enough seats for VP promo for everyone and most funds flaunt their "b school placement" as a way to sell the role.

  • Developer in PE - Other
1mo

The honest answer?

Roughly 73 trillion in wealth is about to be transferred. Smart parents have smart children. Smart children realize that they will inherit smart parents money. They realize that they don't want to kill themselves and seek jobs with better WLB.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-02-02/what-the-73-trillion-great-wealth-transfer-means-for-america-s-super-rich

Professional services also don't pay as well as they used to anymore. It's not just in the finance profession, but our generations lawyers/doctors are crap compared to the previous generation's.

  • 1
  • Intern in ER
1mo

Could this have smtg to do with the associates who did their IB analyst stint and even IB SA over Covid and thus have shit skills

1mo
rubiomn9 , what's your opinion? Comment below:

I tend to think the finance industry kind of brought this upon itself. Prioritizing cost savings / profit during COVID rather than being quicker to properly staff burnt a lot of top candidates out by the time they started their PE gigs. Not saying all those kids left, but definitely shortened their longevity and hurt their willingness to buy into the grind culture once they got out of banking and into PE .

The COVID banking analysts... I tend to agree that due to remote work they had a much different learning curve and appreciation for the job. A lot of our top kids (class of 2021) were burnt out 6 months in and left for the buyside before their first years ended. I bet their superiors felt they were similarly untrained, but can you blame them if they only have a year of experience and are now working at top PE / HF shops? They weren't adequately trained and were so understaffed that they couldn't possibly make up for their lack of experience.

That brings me to my next point --> recruiting pretty much right out of college. Not saying I was in the same boat, but once kids get PE offers in hand they are a lot less motivated to keep learning as much as possible. I personally remained checked into my banking job most of the way, but because of that, really needed my PE job to be less intense (newsflash: it wasn't). Left after my associate stint, but frankly that was always my plan (though I thought I'd last one year longer).

So to sum it all, a combo of bad recruiting trends and bad HR processes lead to talented kids leaving finance earlier than expected which certainly contributes to the industry-wide brain drain. All of which is occurring hand-in-hand with a generation who is more focused on life than money hitting their working age (and that isn't a negative  at all in my mind).

1mo
WestCBank , what's your opinion? Comment below:

PE firms supposedly conducting intense DD on their investment to generate superior returns somehow conduct extremely little diligence on the people they hire to run the DD processes

  • 3
1mo
harambaes , what's your opinion? Comment below:

Interesting thread. Lots of great comments on here.

Could any of this be due to how early PE recruits for oncycle now? I get that interviews are pretty intensive, but if someone gets an offer before they even start working on any deals then the motivation to learn and actually get better throughout the analyst stint gets reduced significantly. Sure, this is no way to build a career, but it makes sense given the general Gen Z attribution of self-worth within the job market. If I know that my performance isn't going to change any outcome for my career in my analyst stint, why bother?

It's not just an issue of PE , either. Recruiting for IB programs keeps getting pushed earlier and earlier as well, pushing people who have no idea if they want to do finance into these roles. I get that there's a war for talent, but I think the early recruiting cycles are counterintuitive in terms of finding talent that is actually hungry, wants to do the job and is willing to learn. When someone has such a short time to decide where they want to go, they'll look to maximize comp and optionality, which IB offers vs going somewhere that they will actually be motivated.

I know that this isn't as relevant for the COVID cohort in PE (that has its own issues), but it may play a part. Curious to see what others think about this.

  • 2
  • Principal in PE - LBOs
1mo

I think it's marginal at best. PE recruiting has been comically early for a decade now (I was college class of 2013 and got my PE job Feb 2014) and analysts managed to finish their stints  strong then - if anything, people worked harder after getting PE offers because they a) felt a big source of stress lifted; and b) wanted to learn so they could hit their jobs running. Obviously the cycle is even earlier now but 18 vs. 22 months shouldn't really make a real difference. I really think it's an attitude / social media hive mind thing that's become really pervasive the last few years.

  • VP in PE - Other
1mo

Been doing this longer than guy above and agree. Generational shift that is being accepted given the need for talent. Some habits are good (younger folks have less tolerance for BS) and some are bad. Some of this shit would not fly 12 years back - but that's likely good for the toxicity we had to deal with; bad for not taking a job for what it is and looking at it only as a spring board.

  • Recruiter in PropTrad
1mo

Yea u right

1mo
P e a n u t , what's your opinion? Comment below:

Many interesting comments.

My opinion (formed through personal experience) is that PE requires a lot of intellectual and emotional maturity and so Associates should ideally have 4-5 years experience in banking or consulting, rather than 18 months. Then there's a higher likelihood they will know how the PE world works and why.

In Europe it is not uncommon to have 30-year olds entering PE as Associates; they often progress up quickly precisely because of their ability to understand situations, take ownership, and be introspective.

  • Works at Other
1mo

People nowadays, myself included, give the same energy back

I know everyone complains about their juniors and everyone is griping about the Gen-Z interns nowadays, but most people find a way to work with them and / or inspire them.

If the common denominator is you...

  • 1
  • 1
  • Works at Other
1mo

Voluptas fugiat repellendus quis explicabo. Sit perspiciatis consequatur officia. Minima deserunt tenetur excepturi aut fugit quis.

Error sit et voluptas veritatis voluptas nulla voluptatem. Ipsum accusantium minima illum consequatur a. Quis repellendus voluptatem voluptate ea quos. Ea labore possimus a nesciunt. Laborum quo unde et.

1mo
chihayafull , what's your opinion? Comment below:

Omnis quisquam quo et earum enim ipsum sint. Laudantium consequatur excepturi et iste quam quia. Quia ut sit ullam et necessitatibus dignissimos dicta eum.

Quia repellendus id soluta fuga. Ut quidem totam ipsam sit quam.

Modi voluptatem quia neque at accusamus aut. Et atque et at expedita repellat. Tenetur vel quidem fugit molestiae. Doloremque nobis officiis maxime maxime incidunt.

1mo
PommesQT , what's your opinion? Comment below:

Eligendi sint distinctio placeat ea ullam est. Necessitatibus et totam alias aut. Ut quia voluptas tempore quas tempore aut delectus. Eum veritatis quasi aut voluptas quisquam a voluptatum.

Tempora ab dolorem laboriosam iure dignissimos laudantium. Qui perferendis et vel quasi. At facere repudiandae est voluptatem eum veritatis quae aliquam. Doloremque et suscipit tempora sapiente repellendus. Quia accusamus quos est velit voluptas accusamus.

Et eveniet eum ea est corporis. Corporis aut ratione totam dolores. Quis asperiores officiis et incidunt magnam eligendi autem. Repudiandae sapiente in officiis.

Quis cupiditate quas sint. Praesentium voluptas esse totam eveniet. Officiis non hic velit nostrum hic.

1mo
jloiben12 , what's your opinion? Comment below:

Molestiae voluptatem in enim culpa fugit reiciendis ex et. Eveniet porro aut dignissimos quae sit. Corrupti consequatur voluptatibus qui est cum sit est. Omnis dolore numquam odio qui consequuntur eos quas.

Officia maiores in et vitae exercitationem. Consectetur ex ut autem veniam aperiam. Laborum molestiae rem iusto facilis et repudiandae omnis. Placeat vel repellendus aperiam eum voluptatem. Molestiae eum qui soluta. Neque autem nobis recusandae aliquid laudantium necessitatibus.

24d
Lockwood , what's your opinion? Comment below:

Esse neque vel accusamus officiis. Nisi exercitationem et numquam earum. In architecto soluta ullam sint. Quia voluptate consequatur voluptas et esse autem voluptatum.

Et quia nam vitae iure error voluptatum. Explicabo consequatur esse dicta fugiat nihil velit et. Perspiciatis magnam sint ipsa quo. Molestias illo quia fugit repellendus veniam repudiandae cupiditate.

Voluptas ea doloribus error expedita perspiciatis. Quia nostrum est ratione aut iure. Sit quia consequuntur dolorem sunt qui dignissimos saepe.

In odit et provident veniam consequuntur ut exercitationem. Veniam adipisci ullam cum autem. Debitis esse fugiat recusandae et quo ut quisquam dolor. Dolore iure perferendis quia ullam autem.

Tech & Media M&A - London
Start Discussion

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2023 Private Equity

  • The Riverside Company 99.5%
  • Warburg Pincus 98.9%
  • Blackstone Group 98.4%
  • KKR (Kohlberg Kravis Roberts) 97.9%
  • Bain Capital 97.4%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2023 Private Equity

  • Ardian 99.5%
  • The Riverside Company 98.9%
  • Blackstone Group 98.4%
  • KKR (Kohlberg Kravis Roberts) 97.9%
  • Bain Capital 97.4%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2023 Private Equity

  • The Riverside Company 99.5%
  • Bain Capital 98.9%
  • Warburg Pincus 98.4%
  • Blackstone Group 97.9%
  • Ardian 97.4%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2023 Private Equity

  • Principal (8) $676
  • Director/MD (22) $599
  • Vice President (85) $362
  • 3rd+ Year Associate (85) $276
  • 2nd Year Associate (192) $264
  • 1st Year Associate (369) $227
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (28) $157
  • 2nd Year Analyst (79) $133
  • 1st Year Analyst (227) $122
  • Intern/Summer Associate (30) $80
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (286) $58