Brown, Cornell and MIT Grads not considered good enough by recruiters • Hacker News Board

Re: Brown, Cornell and MIT Grads not considered good enough by recruiters

#21

Post by bane » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 2:48 PM UTC

tonydev wrote: post #11

bane wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That said, any company that won't look at me because I'm from MIT and not Princeton isn't the kind of place I would want to work anyway. I'm sure this sort of discrimination makes for great internal culture. Would you count Google in that statement -- with their notoriously discriminating hiring practices with respect to schooling?

The handful of people I know at Google are from a variety of academic institutions, ASU, UW, Stanford, and MIT to name a few. Most importantly, they're all passionate, creative hackers who take pride in their work – not riding the prestige of their education. The answer directly, if google decided folks from Stanford, Berkeley, Caltech, MIT were not good enough while those from Princeton, Yale, Columbia, and Harvard…

That's good to hear -- and sounds like an improvement.

I was having dinner with a coordinator of university job fairs about a year ago and she commented that Google and Facebook were among the worst companies she's ever dealt with respect to hiring practices due to a very large school bias. Many of the schools she works with complains that their students don't even get their resumes looked at. She also note that Microsoft used to be one of those as well, but with Google and FB vacuuming up everybody else they've had to cast their net a bit wider.

Perhaps times are changing?

Anecdotally, the most brilliant people I've ever worked with came from either state schools or CMU or Stanford or MIT (specifically). I've had very little success finding top-notch folks from other established Ivies. Not sure why that is.

I think pg's essay on schools really helps bring some data to that though. It really is the individuals that count.

Re: Brown, Cornell and MIT Grads not considered good enough by recruiters

#22

Post by mechanical_fish » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 2:56 PM UTC

weel wrote: post #10

The article starts, "Think your Brown, Cornell or MIT degree carries weight in the professional world?" But what on earth is the "professional" world? "Top law firms, consulting agencies and investment banks." In other words, what is being said here is that employers that emphasize pedigree and polish like to hire from schools that emphasize pedigree and polish. Next week, somebody can publish a study saying that emp…

From Gladwell's Outliers:

In the 1940s and 1950s the old-line law firms of New York operated like a private club. They were all headquartered in downtown Manhattan, in and around Wall Street, in somber, granite-faced buildings. The partners at the top firms graduated from the same Ivy League schools, attended the same churches, and summered in the same oceanside towns on Long Island. They wore conservative gray suits. Their partnerships were known as "white-shoe" firms – in apparent reference to the white bucks favored at the country club or a cocktail party, and they were very particular in who they hired. As Erwin Smigel wrote in The Wall Street Lawyer, his study of the New York legal establishment of that era, they were looking for:

"lawyers who are Nordic, have pleasing personalities and ‘clean-cut’ appearances, are graduates of the ‘right schools’, have the ‘right’ social background and experience in the affairs of the world, and are endowed with tremendous stamina. A former law school dean, in discussing the qualities students need to obtain a job, offers a somewhat more realistic picture. ‘To get a job [students] should be long enough on family connections, long enough on ability or long enough on personality, or a combination of these. Something called acceptability is made up of the sum of its parts. If a man has any of these things, he could get a job. If he has two of them, he can have a choice of jobs; if he has three, he could go anywhere.’"

Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose. At least nowadays you don't necessarily have to be white, male, or non-Jewish, and the definition of Ivy League has broadened a bit, but this clubbishness is how it's been for a century and more. What, you thought people battled each other to get into Harvard because Harvard's graduate TAs were such talented and dedicated teachers relative to the competition?

Re: Brown, Cornell and MIT Grads not considered good enough by recruiters

#23

Post by knackers » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 2:56 PM UTC

tomjen3 wrote: post #17

Alex3917 wrote: post #5

For what it's worth, crew and student government have always been the two most-valued extracurriculars. If you're a good rower then you can get pretty much any job regardless of which college you attended.

As somebody who has never been in the US, allow me to scream from the top of my lungs: why? What possible benefit would being a rower bring to working in an investment bank? I can see student government, but rowing?

I'm not from the US either but the answer seems rather obvious.

Leadership, teamwork, social skills etc...

Re: Brown, Cornell and MIT Grads not considered good enough by recruiters

#24

Post by Symmetry » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 2:58 PM UTC

weel wrote: post #10

The article starts, "Think your Brown, Cornell or MIT degree carries weight in the professional world?" But what on earth is the "professional" world? "Top law firms, consulting agencies and investment banks." In other words, what is being said here is that employers that emphasize pedigree and polish like to hire from schools that emphasize pedigree and polish. Next week, somebody can publish a study saying that emp…

And its not even true for all top consulting agencies and investment banks (I can't speak for law firms). I know that Goldman Sachs recruits pretty heavily at MIT.

Re: Brown, Cornell and MIT Grads not considered good enough by recruiters

#25

Post by tkahn6 » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 3:06 PM UTC

Here is a list of schools ranked by recruiters with an emphasis on engineering:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870455410457543...

MIT is on there, but the only Ivy on there is Cornell.

Re: Brown, Cornell and MIT Grads not considered good enough by recruiters

#26

Post by m0th87 » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 3:08 PM UTC

PostOnce wrote: post #7

I graduated from a community college, heh. College is a way for me to maintain social approval* while I learn, and I will then use my knowledge to build my own company & fortune. Working for other people is a guaranteed way to stay middle class. If you're worried about who is going to hire you, you're worrying about the wrong thing. Jobs are a way to obtain money, but not the best way to obtain it, if you're smart. *…

There is a subtle sense of superiority in this comment over people who simply want a job. Which is ironic given your identification of the disrespect people have toward the full-time hacker.

Re: Brown, Cornell and MIT Grads not considered good enough by recruiters

#27

Post by Alex3917 » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 3:08 PM UTC

tomjen3 wrote: post #17

Alex3917 wrote: post #5

For what it's worth, crew and student government have always been the two most-valued extracurriculars. If you're a good rower then you can get pretty much any job regardless of which college you attended.

As somebody who has never been in the US, allow me to scream from the top of my lungs: why? What possible benefit would being a rower bring to working in an investment bank? I can see student government, but rowing?

"What possible benefit would being a rower bring to working in an investment bank?"

Something about the nature of rowing tends to self-actualize people. Not everyone, but a good chunk of those who commit to the program. I think it's some combination of:

- The kind of people who enjoy waking up at 5am to work hard for something that will never make them any money.

- The massive time commitment (30+ hours per week) forces people to get their shit together.

- The ability to undergo extreme pain without showing it or complaining. ("Harvard doesn't care. Princeton doesn't care. Navy doesn't care.")

- Never making excuses. ("There's no asterisks in rowing.")

- The ability to recognize when a team is or isn't working together, and he ability to learn to take pleasure out of firing on all cylinders as a team. There is this feeling called Swing in rowing that's completely ineffable, but basically it's where the boat is moving faster than the sum of everyone's inputs. It's also incredible elusive, and you tend to spend 1,000+ hours per year for a chance to experience it for twenty minutes a year. But when you do experience it, it completely rewrites your model of effective teamwork.

- Develops the Buddhist concepts of right view and right intention, and the hindu concept of non-attachment to outcome. ("The Olympian stands alone.")

- At the same time, you learn to take pleasure in getting to go out and fuck up someone else's day.

Plus there are all sorts of aesthetic benefits as well. And the fact that rowers tend to be much smarter than the rest of the student body as well as athletes in other sports.

Re: Brown, Cornell and MIT Grads not considered good enough by recruiters

#28

Post by iwwr » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 3:09 PM UTC

Symmetry wrote: post #24

weel wrote: post #10

The article starts, "Think your Brown, Cornell or MIT degree carries weight in the professional world?" But what on earth is the "professional" world? "Top law firms, consulting agencies and investment banks." In other words, what is being said here is that employers that emphasize pedigree and polish like to hire from schools that emphasize pedigree and polish. Next week, somebody can publish a study saying that emp…

And its not even true for all top consulting agencies and investment banks (I can't speak for law firms). I know that Goldman Sachs recruits pretty heavily at MIT.

Yes, but for math wizards or accountants, not lawyers.

Re: Brown, Cornell and MIT Grads not considered good enough by recruiters

#29

Post by ajscherer » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 4:05 PM UTC

tomjen3 wrote: post #17

Alex3917 wrote: post #5

For what it's worth, crew and student government have always been the two most-valued extracurriculars. If you're a good rower then you can get pretty much any job regardless of which college you attended.

As somebody who has never been in the US, allow me to scream from the top of my lungs: why? What possible benefit would being a rower bring to working in an investment bank? I can see student government, but rowing?

In addition to the other reasons mentioned, I imagine it is also a decent proxy for a number of other characteristics (white, from a wealthy family) that you might not want to make explicit in your recruiting strategy. I guess Harvard just isn't doing a good enough job screening on those things these days.

Re: Brown, Cornell and MIT Grads not considered good enough by recruiters

#30

Post by jtbigwoo » Wed, Jan 12, 2011, 4:10 PM UTC

tomjen3 wrote: post #17

Alex3917 wrote: post #5

For what it's worth, crew and student government have always been the two most-valued extracurriculars. If you're a good rower then you can get pretty much any job regardless of which college you attended.

As somebody who has never been in the US, allow me to scream from the top of my lungs: why? What possible benefit would being a rower bring to working in an investment bank? I can see student government, but rowing?

What possible benefit would being a rower bring to working in an investment bank?

Perhaps I'm being cynical here, but rowers are usually white, tall, and fit. The usually have broad shoulders, long limbs, and tanned faces. Much of the job of an investment banker is looking the part.