4 ms·

False. It's not like people put "watered-down track" on their resume, and most investment banks don't ask for transcripts until after employment (as verificatio

False. It's not like people put "watered-down track" on their resume, and most investment banks don't ask for transcripts until after employment (as verification; they fire you if you don't have one, but this is extremely rare). Investment banks don't care about intelligence so much as the ability to go through hoops, follow orders, and game the system. In fact, if you look at their preferences as far as analysts go, intelligence seems to be selected against.

yummyfajitas 16y ago
Most students list difficult courses on their resume. They also ask tricky brain teasers on the first phone screen. It's not that hard to weed out the dumb ones. Students on the watered down track will never get into the front office. I've gone on IB interviews myself, and I've spoken to students who've done the same. They do focus on conformity and big company culture (I was definitely a bad fit at Goldman), but they also aim for a great deal of intelligence. I think you are basing your opinion more on politics and tribal identity than on facts.
- pw0ncakes 16y ago
  This is true of trader and quant interviews, but not when people are being evaluated for "soft skills" departments like IBD and M&A. A "tricky" brain teaser for IBD is: "What is the expected value of an 8-sided die?" or "If the Euro is worth $1.50 and a dollar is worth 100 yen, what is a Euro worth in yen?" Mathematically-illiterate but intelligent people (125 IQ; Ivy League non-quant major) will sometimes get these wrong on occasion, but they're not exactly hard questions by our standards. DE Shaw quant interviews, on the other hand, are tough, but the average wannabe banker will never get anywhere near one of those. This is what an IBD or M&A interview will be like for the average HN reader: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0yQunhOaU0#t=0m51s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0yQunhOaU0#t=0m51s As for intelligence in investment banking, it's an asset to be very smart (135+) if you're looking to be a quant or a quant trader (floor trading is dying) but it's generally to your detriment if you're looking for an analyst position, because the smart people tend to fail when it comes to the conformity aspect. If you tell a smart person that he needs to sacrifice his weekend in order to have X finished by Monday morning, he'll probably do it, but he'll ask (gasp!) why it was left on his desk on Friday afternoon instead of delivered to him earlier... and you just don't ask such questions if you want to make it in banking. Analyst programs are designed to pick out people with an unconditional work ethic: people who believe "deadlines are deadlines" and will never question why the work needs to be delivered in the way specified at the time specified, people who will toil for 100 hours per week and not care if their results are ever used or even relevant. This process tends to select against intelligence. Don't get me wrong: investment banks would obviously love to have someone with a high IQ and that sort of obedient profile, but that's a very rare combination. Not only that, but people with that sort of obedient makeup, while sometimes smart, are never creative or passionate.

yummyfajitas 16y ago

Most students list difficult courses on their resume. They also ask tricky brain teasers on the first phone screen. It's not that hard to weed out the dumb ones. Students on the watered down track will never get into the front office. I've gone on IB interviews myself, and I've spoken to students who've done the same. They do focus on conformity and big company culture (I was definitely a bad fit at Goldman), but they also aim for a great deal of intelligence. I think you are basing your opinion more on politics and tribal identity than on facts.

pw0ncakes 16y ago
This is true of trader and quant interviews, but not when people are being evaluated for "soft skills" departments like IBD and M&A. A "tricky" brain teaser for IBD is: "What is the expected value of an 8-sided die?" or "If the Euro is worth $1.50 and a dollar is worth 100 yen, what is a Euro worth in yen?" Mathematically-illiterate but intelligent people (125 IQ; Ivy League non-quant major) will sometimes get these wrong on occasion, but they're not exactly hard questions by our standards. DE Shaw quant interviews, on the other hand, are tough, but the average wannabe banker will never get anywhere near one of those. This is what an IBD or M&A interview will be like for the average HN reader: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0yQunhOaU0#t=0m51s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0yQunhOaU0#t=0m51s As for intelligence in investment banking, it's an asset to be very smart (135+) if you're looking to be a quant or a quant trader (floor trading is dying) but it's generally to your detriment if you're looking for an analyst position, because the smart people tend to fail when it comes to the conformity aspect. If you tell a smart person that he needs to sacrifice his weekend in order to have X finished by Monday morning, he'll probably do it, but he'll ask (gasp!) why it was left on his desk on Friday afternoon instead of delivered to him earlier... and you just don't ask such questions if you want to make it in banking. Analyst programs are designed to pick out people with an unconditional work ethic: people who believe "deadlines are deadlines" and will never question why the work needs to be delivered in the way specified at the time specified, people who will toil for 100 hours per week and not care if their results are ever used or even relevant. This process tends to select against intelligence. Don't get me wrong: investment banks would obviously love to have someone with a high IQ and that sort of obedient profile, but that's a very rare combination. Not only that, but people with that sort of obedient makeup, while sometimes smart, are never creative or passionate.