4 ms·

Kudos on making something of yourself from humble beginnings. You are now privileged.

fakedang 6y ago
I am inclined to agree with the top comment, partly from my own experience. In college, I was a sub-3 GPA student with not-so-great internship experience, although I did cofound a startup. Yet I was able to reach out to some of the "privileged" you mention at the top of the totem pole - firm partners, founders, etc. Heck, I literally connected with MBB partners simply by shooting an email to them to meet and chatting with them. I don't even know what one guy even saw in me, but he even persuaded me to apply and referred me for an interview (which I was able to crack thankfully), which is a big deal considering they have to give clear reasons as to why they are referring you. And this was not in a backwater with a few guys but a major global financial center. I got my first good internship and subsequently my first job in private equity because I was an idiot who decided it would be a good idea to wait outside an office building an entire day so that I could show an MD the financial models I had built (after shooting an email obviously). And this was in white shoe finance, so I'm sure the barriers are much lower in tech. Edit:- Apologies if I sound like I'm using a lot of anecdotal evidence/ grand-standing, but I had to disagree with that comment, and the best evidence I had was my own, although there are a lot of similar stories in the Street. Edit 2:- I should add this too, since it is highly relevant to the linked topic. The people who referred/hired me later mentioned that a key reason for them taking me on was my startup experience, which was what the original link's author would call a "side project".
- sillysaurusx 6y ago
  Yet I was able to reach out to some of the "privileged" you mention at the top of the totem pole - firm partners, founders, etc. Heck, I literally connected with MBB partners simply by shooting an email to them to meet and chatting with them. To be clear, I would always 100% recommend trying your approach. It's how I even got my start, back when I was 17. It really does work. But it's also more effective when you're a young, wide-eyed student. People see in you what they saw in themselves: a young person, eager to learn and to do a good job. The older you get, the more strings that attach. And you lose the charm of being a young ambitious person. People have more history by which to judge you. No one expects a sub-3 GPA student not to have resume gaps, or a degree, or leadership experience, or any of the expectations that come with age. It's just a fact of life. Even if it's technically ageist, I'd rather play the game and win, not argue the game isn't fair or that it should change. The moment I read bottom-feeder, "bottom-of-the-totem-pole, recruiter," etc, my recruiter buddy from St Louis immediately popped to mind. We weren't friends outside of work, but he placed me at two big financial companies over the course of two or so years. When I was fired from the first one solely due to showing up late (because undiagnosed narcolepsy), I was worried the recruiter's firm wouldn't want to do business with me anymore. I shouldn't have been worried at all; they care about their cut, and I cared about not running out of money. But I probably would have worried a lot more if I had secretly thought of him as some bottom-feeder loser, rather than a key who could open a door that was mutually beneficial. Because (a) business partners can sense when you think poorly of them, unless you're really, really good at hiding it, and (b) it would blind me to the fact that I needed him. He was a cool guy on a personal level too. Had a house, dog, family, took me out to lunch a couple times, etc. He was doing better than I was at that point, for sure, even if I was in a stronger position long-term. I guess the takeaway is, do the cold-email thing if you can (twitter DM works shockingly well for this); if not, try to find someone you know who might be looking; then recruiters as a fallback plan. But boy oh boy, if those "bottom-feeder recruiters" weren't there for me, I would have been screwed. :) The privilege is simply thinking that you're better than the recruiter doing his job, or the woman at the store bagging groceries, or anyone else. A little twist of fate, being born to slightly different parents, not having the right mentor in your life, not having access to a computer when you were young... any of these things could easily have put you in their shoes, almost regardless of inherent ability. So it was just super shocking, I suppose, to hear such "honesty" about my cool recruiter buddy with a dog.
  - fakedang 6y ago
    I think it goes without saying that your personal connection with the recruiter encouraged him to work extra hard to get hired. Some recruiters are really good - though I haven't used them myself, I know a number of folks who used them to their advantage. Of course, it's all about how much the recruiter likes you too - if they are indifferent to you, they will not put in that extra mile. I don't think recruiters ended up recruiters due to familial circumstances though - many of them I know worked in the same fields they help recruit to, and largely pulled out due to burnout or some other unintentional consequences. Also it is to be noted that recruiters are usually the only way forward once you reach a level of seniority - you won't be able to cold-email after a while. My comment was largely targeted at the above comment which said that it's only possible through being part of the privileged.
rimliu 6y ago
I feel that the world "privilege" (like many others) has lost its meaning.
- TeMPOraL 6y ago
  It has. The well-meaning use of the word is trying to convey a sentiment that your views may not work for people who are less well-off or in various dire circumstances. Which is a good point to make, in context. However, in the common use on the Internet, this word very often just stands for "you're better off than ${some group}, so your opinion is invalid and you should repent" dismissal/personal attack combo. Which makes knee-jerk reactions to its use, if not justified, then at least not unexpected.

I am inclined to agree with the top comment, partly from my own experience. In college, I was a sub-3 GPA student with not-so-great internship experience, although I did cofound a startup. Yet I was able to reach out to some of the "privileged" you mention at the top of the totem pole - firm partners, founders, etc. Heck, I literally connected with MBB partners simply by shooting an email to them to meet and chatting with them. I don't even know what one guy even saw in me, but he even persuaded me to apply and referred me for an interview (which I was able to crack thankfully), which is a big deal considering they have to give clear reasons as to why they are referring you. And this was not in a backwater with a few guys but a major global financial center. I got my first good internship and subsequently my first job in private equity because I was an idiot who decided it would be a good idea to wait outside an office building an entire day so that I could show an MD the financial models I had built (after shooting an email obviously). And this was in white shoe finance, so I'm sure the barriers are much lower in tech. Edit:- Apologies if I sound like I'm using a lot of anecdotal evidence/ grand-standing, but I had to disagree with that comment, and the best evidence I had was my own, although there are a lot of similar stories in the Street. Edit 2:- I should add this too, since it is highly relevant to the linked topic. The people who referred/hired me later mentioned that a key reason for them taking me on was my startup experience, which was what the original link's author would call a "side project".

sillysaurusx 6y ago
Yet I was able to reach out to some of the "privileged" you mention at the top of the totem pole - firm partners, founders, etc. Heck, I literally connected with MBB partners simply by shooting an email to them to meet and chatting with them. To be clear, I would always 100% recommend trying your approach. It's how I even got my start, back when I was 17. It really does work. But it's also more effective when you're a young, wide-eyed student. People see in you what they saw in themselves: a young person, eager to learn and to do a good job. The older you get, the more strings that attach. And you lose the charm of being a young ambitious person. People have more history by which to judge you. No one expects a sub-3 GPA student not to have resume gaps, or a degree, or leadership experience, or any of the expectations that come with age. It's just a fact of life. Even if it's technically ageist, I'd rather play the game and win, not argue the game isn't fair or that it should change. The moment I read bottom-feeder, "bottom-of-the-totem-pole, recruiter," etc, my recruiter buddy from St Louis immediately popped to mind. We weren't friends outside of work, but he placed me at two big financial companies over the course of two or so years. When I was fired from the first one solely due to showing up late (because undiagnosed narcolepsy), I was worried the recruiter's firm wouldn't want to do business with me anymore. I shouldn't have been worried at all; they care about their cut, and I cared about not running out of money. But I probably would have worried a lot more if I had secretly thought of him as some bottom-feeder loser, rather than a key who could open a door that was mutually beneficial. Because (a) business partners can sense when you think poorly of them, unless you're really, really good at hiding it, and (b) it would blind me to the fact that I needed him. He was a cool guy on a personal level too. Had a house, dog, family, took me out to lunch a couple times, etc. He was doing better than I was at that point, for sure, even if I was in a stronger position long-term. I guess the takeaway is, do the cold-email thing if you can (twitter DM works shockingly well for this); if not, try to find someone you know who might be looking; then recruiters as a fallback plan. But boy oh boy, if those "bottom-feeder recruiters" weren't there for me, I would have been screwed. :) The privilege is simply thinking that you're better than the recruiter doing his job, or the woman at the store bagging groceries, or anyone else. A little twist of fate, being born to slightly different parents, not having the right mentor in your life, not having access to a computer when you were young... any of these things could easily have put you in their shoes, almost regardless of inherent ability. So it was just super shocking, I suppose, to hear such "honesty" about my cool recruiter buddy with a dog.
- fakedang 6y ago
  I think it goes without saying that your personal connection with the recruiter encouraged him to work extra hard to get hired. Some recruiters are really good - though I haven't used them myself, I know a number of folks who used them to their advantage. Of course, it's all about how much the recruiter likes you too - if they are indifferent to you, they will not put in that extra mile. I don't think recruiters ended up recruiters due to familial circumstances though - many of them I know worked in the same fields they help recruit to, and largely pulled out due to burnout or some other unintentional consequences. Also it is to be noted that recruiters are usually the only way forward once you reach a level of seniority - you won't be able to cold-email after a while. My comment was largely targeted at the above comment which said that it's only possible through being part of the privileged.

rimliu 6y ago

I feel that the world "privilege" (like many others) has lost its meaning.

TeMPOraL 6y ago
It has. The well-meaning use of the word is trying to convey a sentiment that your views may not work for people who are less well-off or in various dire circumstances. Which is a good point to make, in context. However, in the common use on the Internet, this word very often just stands for "you're better off than ${some group}, so your opinion is invalid and you should repent" dismissal/personal attack combo. Which makes knee-jerk reactions to its use, if not justified, then at least not unexpected.