Live data from Hacker News

Goldman Sachs Tells Interns to End the Late, Late Show

wsj.com

31–40 of 64 posts

Re: Goldman Sachs Tells Interns to End the Late, Late Show

#31
post #9

What do investment banking interns (and bankers) do which benefits from such long hours? Lots of manual data processing? Reading? I absolutely benefit from uninterrupted stretches of 12-24h working on problems sometimes, but only infrequently -- usually hit diminishing returns between 4-12h. The only times where I've been useful >24h was when the task was more "set up this thing which has lots of waiting on other peo…

Former GS IBD associate here.

You basically have two workdays: the client-facing workday, and the preparation-for-the-next-day workday. Client-facing workday goes roughly 9am-6pm. Preparation workday goes from 6pm to anything from midnight (on a good day) to 5am (on a bad day).

During the client-facing workday you're spending about 1-2 total hours having meetings with clients, usually on conference calls, occasionally in person; the more senior you are, the more personal interaction you have with clients. The remainder of the time is spent reviewing the materials you generated the previous night, talking about what needs to be done, etc -- basically a constant planning / execution workflow around multiple concurrent streams of deliverables.

In the evening, managing directors go home around 6pm and vice presidents go home around 8pm. That's when you become really "free" to hunker down and start jamming out work. It's a lot harder to be productive when your time is hacked into 30-minute chunks the way it is during the client-facing day.

It is quite common to have nothing to do for hours at a time, both during the day and evening, while you wait for people to get back to you with further instructions on what to prepare and/or instructions for changing what you've already made. So, a 16-hour workday isn't usually a full 16 hours straight. You usually have time to go to the very nice on-site gym, for example.

The deliverables you're making are usually PowerPoint presentations with a lot of model-driven Excel outputs in them. Occasionally the underlying models are intellectually interesting, but they usually are pretty monotonous to put together....you're building something to a clear spec, and the challenge is being 100.000% certain you did it without errors, not figuring out how to do it.

To answer the question about whether you're productive working such long hours: the time commitment and the stress certainly don't foster creativity, happiness, or high productivity, but they really don't need you to be doing inspired work. At a junior level they're looking for people who can follow defined processes at a high level of throughput with a low error rate, while contributing occasional flashes of original thought -- for example, when you have to build a new model based on a unique client situation. Those situations are actually really exciting (especially when you're working on a big problem for a big client) but the flipside of the excitement is the stress around the consequences of fucking it up -- e.g., if the client just got a "bear hug" letter from a competitor expressing interest in a merger and you have to model out whether it makes financial sense.

The downside is that it's a miserable and unhealthy way to spend a couple of years. The upside is that you ride an incredibly steep learning curve and gain a ton of knowledge on valuation models, the inner workings of various industries, corporate governance, and how to run merger / fundraising / hostile-defense processes.

Hope this was helpful.

Re: Goldman Sachs Tells Interns to End the Late, Late Show

#32
A thought experiment: you have a job that pays exorbitantly well, and you want to offer it to someone. It isn't particularly difficult, and any reasonably well-informed, self-motivated college graduate can handle it. How do you hire for that job? The demand is likely insanely high.

Spoiler alert: you create an insanely complicated funnel to weed through huge quantities of candidates. And if talent isn't the primary determiner of success (remember that the job isn't that hard), how do you distinguish people? Simple, you work them nearly to death and see who comes out alive.

I'm not saying that is exactly the situation here, but I think as a mental model it's not that far off.

Re: Goldman Sachs Tells Interns to End the Late, Late Show

#33

So interns are expected to stay out of the office from 12am to 7am on weekdays. That's great... Now they're only expected to be there 17 hours a day! But, during those off hours, does that mean that they can remote in and still work?

on weekdays . Very sneaky, Goldman. I guess weekends are wide open to work as much as needed, right? Gotta prep that big PowerPoint for Monday morning's meeting. This all reeks of polishing the optics and nothing to do with treating their interns with any respect.

As of about a year ago GS IBD analysts and associates are required to be out of the office from 9pm Friday to 9am Sunday unless they are granted specific permission to work extra hours by the head of the group.

It is stupid that the new rule makes people go home from midnight-7am. It would be a lot more aligned with the working hours of investment bankers if that were changed to a 2am-9am embargo. However, the optics would probably look bad; "midnight" sounds a lot more wholesome than "2am". So instead, summer analysts are going to have to be waking up at 5:30 or 6 to make it in by 7am sharp, which is going to absolutely suck for them.

Re: Goldman Sachs Tells Interns to End the Late, Late Show

#34
post #32

A thought experiment: you have a job that pays exorbitantly well, and you want to offer it to someone. It isn't particularly difficult, and any reasonably well-informed, self-motivated college graduate can handle it. How do you hire for that job? The demand is likely insanely high. Spoiler alert: you create an insanely complicated funnel to weed through huge quantities of candidates. And if talent isn't the primary d…

If the demand is so high, why not simply lower the pay to winnow the candidate pool? Why bother with the insanely complicated funnel instead?

Re: Goldman Sachs Tells Interns to End the Late, Late Show

#35
post #15

So what exactly do they do there for so many hours a day? I'm having a hard time imagining anyone doing anything productive for that long.

Even if they adhere to this new rule that's still 17-hour days. Does not sound balanced at all to me. I assume these guys work the weekends so it's a 119-hour workweek.

If Britain hadn't opted out from the EU's Working Time Directive, it would be illegal.

https://www.gov.uk/maximum-weekly-working-hours/weekly-maxim...

Re: Goldman Sachs Tells Interns to End the Late, Late Show

#37
post #2

It's behind a pay wall. Not fair to make submissions many people can't read. All content I get on HackerNews should be free to read without an implication of paying to join the discussion. The Irish Times allows current articles to be read publicly but anything that gets archived (a few days old) must be payed for to be read. I prefer and pay for this model - would be nice if WSJ adopted it.

>All content I get on HackerNews should be free to read without an implication of paying to join the discussion. And why exactly?

[You need to pay $1 to read my answer to this question]

Re: Goldman Sachs Tells Interns to End the Late, Late Show

#38
post #34
post #32

A thought experiment: you have a job that pays exorbitantly well, and you want to offer it to someone. It isn't particularly difficult, and any reasonably well-informed, self-motivated college graduate can handle it. How do you hire for that job? The demand is likely insanely high. Spoiler alert: you create an insanely complicated funnel to weed through huge quantities of candidates. And if talent isn't the primary d…

If the demand is so high, why not simply lower the pay to winnow the candidate pool? Why bother with the insanely complicated funnel instead?

Because your pay is high too! If you can find people to work beneath you for cheaper, why can't they replace you for less money?

Edit: also, they do that with intern/entry-level banking jobs. Internships pay well, but it's nothing like what higher-level bankers make. Same with entry-level analysts.

Re: Goldman Sachs Tells Interns to End the Late, Late Show

#39
post #34
post #32

A thought experiment: you have a job that pays exorbitantly well, and you want to offer it to someone. It isn't particularly difficult, and any reasonably well-informed, self-motivated college graduate can handle it. How do you hire for that job? The demand is likely insanely high. Spoiler alert: you create an insanely complicated funnel to weed through huge quantities of candidates. And if talent isn't the primary d…

If the demand is so high, why not simply lower the pay to winnow the candidate pool? Why bother with the insanely complicated funnel instead?

Because it winnows the wrong ones. They want the extremely tenacious money-driven type, because those are the ones that will help them make billions once they work their way up—and gladly clap on the golden handcuffs as they do.

Re: Goldman Sachs Tells Interns to End the Late, Late Show

#40
post #32

A thought experiment: you have a job that pays exorbitantly well, and you want to offer it to someone. It isn't particularly difficult, and any reasonably well-informed, self-motivated college graduate can handle it. How do you hire for that job? The demand is likely insanely high. Spoiler alert: you create an insanely complicated funnel to weed through huge quantities of candidates. And if talent isn't the primary d…

Instead of having one job pay $200,000 per year (let's say total compensation is $350,000) and require 18-24 hours a day of work, you create 2 jobs that each pay $100,000 (total compensation $175,000 each) and only require 9-12 hours per shift.

OR

You could create 3 shifts at $66,667 (total compensation $117,000 each) and have true around-the-clock coverage!

Post reply on HN