What I find most intriguing is that the whole banking intern hours thing is that it's not the result of a resource constraint - they have plenty of money and plenty of intern applicants.
It's also not about getting particularly difficult work done - intern-level spreadsheet and PowerPoint work isn't the sort of thing that only a select few can handle.
It's entirely about filtering for people who will submit to abuse.
The point of an internship is to give candidates an idea of what the job is really like. At the analyst level, bankers will be subject to abuse. Not because of resource constraints, but because the job itself is demanding. Deals are fragile creatures that need to be completed quickly, and F500 C-suite executives are demanding clients. They need everything to be perfect and they need it done yesterday. That's what leads to having less people work more hours and the extreme focus on availability.
It's entirely about filtering for people who will submit to abuse.
Sort-of, but not entirely. You have the typical corporate exponential bottleneck (~25+% per year attrition) and extremely competitive people, but the work isn't intellectually difficult, so people need to compete on something, and it comes down to conformity and availability. It turns out that some people can take that to an extent that would kill many of us. We're good at our stuff; they're good at theirs.
I don't think the intention is to subject analysts to "abuse" at any level beyond the abuse that comes from clients. Sure, there's a bit of hazing and testing that goes on, but it's there for a reason: when shit really does hit the fan, even the MDs (who usually have a 9-to-5 existence if they want it) are working 24/7. You can't be a front-office banker if you can't deal with those kinds of hours-- even into your 40s.
This is all really, really wrong. I wonder how we, as a society, have managed to lower our values this much. Working days and nights and for what? Even if you do become rich, then what? You can't have your health back and you wasted years of your life chasing a dream. When you're on the patio of your beach house with your high blood pressure, anxiety and depression, what have you accomplished? Is reality like the dream you once chased?
So the article is describing investment banking, which is particularly demanding because it's a service job. You're helping a client do a deal, and clients are demanding and deals are time-sensitive.
People generally do not go into investment banking expecting to make a career out of it. A few-year stint as an analyst is a great way to get into HBS/GSB/Wharton, and from there into a CFO-track position at an F500. It's also a good way to get into a PE/VC firm or a hedge fund. Because those firms do their own deals and have a lot of autonomy from their "clients" (LPs), the jobs aren't quite so demanding. Finally, some people just want to stick it out for 8-10 years, save up a couple of million dollars, and do something else after.
It might sound wrong to you, but that's fine. You can do something else. There are plenty of people who love working in banking with this sort of culture (and the financial rewards it brings). There's nothing wrong with different people having different goals.
When Google was a young company, she worked 130 hours per week and often slept at her desk.
"For my first five years at Google, I pulled an all-nighter every week," Mayer said in a recent talk at New York's 92Y cultural center. "It was a lot of hard work."
I'm sorry but that's bullshit and unsustainable imo. I say that as someone who has worked nearly 100 weeks of 80+ hours over my career and has worked 100 hour weeks for a month or two.
It's not believable that Mayer worked 130 hours per week for 5 years.
That is so false, and if it's true is unbelievably stupid. It means that your work is so useless you can do it completely sleep deprived and burnt out.
Wow, a great contribution to a company.
I'd think that a company that needs to perform at the highest level should do so with smart people giving their best hours and resting appropriately so they can be sharp.
The number of hours is irrelevant. Great people are great because their contributions are of great value, not because they contribute mediocre work three times as much as everybody else.
What makes this comparison not applicable is that the interviewed intern said that they were really just adding warm bodies. I am sure Mayer added far more than that.
I somehow feel that when your company is growing 1000% a week and you have lot of equity in that company, somehow you find strength to work that many hours without breaking sweat. I believe thats more enjoyable experience than just work.
These comparisons never work for me. There's literally no amount you could pay me that would make me willing to be a plumber or electrician, and I'm grateful every day that there are a subset of people out there who will do those jobs competently without completely bankrupting me.
Isn't this all just a matter of supply and demand? There are a lot more young people willing to work in this industry than there are positions, so those people who actually get the jobs have to put up with all kinds of stupid shit.
I've never understood why these employees (who are clearly quite intelligent) don't just pursue another career where they have more leverage. After all, I don't think they have any particular love for banking. Being on HN, the obvious suggestion would be software development (not a bad choice, considering the current state of the market), but there are a lot of other options out there as well.
> The obvious suggestion would be software development
Looking anecdotally at friends in software and in finance (I went to a school with a great reputation for both cs and business ) , a good software engineering (at a good company) is not trivial to get into. On the flipside, banking was what you did if you had no discernible skills.
I've never understood why these employees (who are clearly quite intelligent) don't just pursue another career where they have more leverage. After all, I don't think they have any particular love for banking. Being on HN, the obvious suggestion would be software development (not a bad choice, considering the current state of the market), but there are a lot of other options out there as well.
If you fail in software, then you're just an out-of-work programmer. If you fail in banking, you take a two-year timeout at Harvard Business School and raise a search fund before you're 30.
The upside of software is arguably better (fatter rightward tail, more interesting work, more impact, less tied to NYC and London) but the insurance is not there.
First, I'll quibble with the definition of all-nighter: "I ended up doing an all-nighter in my first week as an intern, which is when you start work at nine, you stay until five or six the next morning, you go home, have a quick shower and then head back into the office and continue working."
If you leave work at 5 and start at 9, and are sensible and live within 20 minutes of work (which you can on a banker's salary, at least in NYC), that's like 3 whole hours of sleep.
Second, how many times did you pull a few all-nighters in a row during college? I can't even count. I certainly didn't die.
Third, he's leaving out the part where a deal dies and you find yourself with nothing to do for days. You may not experience that as an intern, but once you're actually working the 100-hour weeks will be interspersed with very dead weeks.
I worked as an analyst in Investment Banking for a while. To me it seemed that the analysts who worked the really long hours worked on projects in teams, where each team member was responsible for a part of a project. No one can start or continue until that part is done, so they just sit and wait.
There were many times when people just wouldn't respect other people's time. At 5PM I would get an email: "Hey, I need this done for tomorrow morning"..."So why didn't you just tell me earlier? I know you knew about it in advance."
Its not about productivity. the people doing the work are junior and replaced every 3-5 years. they are disposable, in that sense. Since the repsonsibility gets quite steep quite quickly, its more efficient to haze the junior staff, to push them to the breaking point and see how they do, before promoting them. Many people enter banking who are not suitable to it, because of greed or social pressure. It would be a lot worse if those people were not weeded out. it might sometimes seem impossible that banks could be more poorly run, but there are many who would be far worse to put in these positions.
Interns don't need to be efficient (they're cheap and disposable), and they don't do very intellectually taxing work, in general. Think making powerpoints, not designing investment strategies or coding. There's little incentive for the more senior bankers to treat their interns properly.
It's sad when the brightest and most competent people end up treated like that, but when they are abused and used against the rest, it's when I start feeling like putting up a guillotine.
I think its sad when anyone is treated like this, and pretending that some people are different with "best and brightest" bullshit just makes things all the worse.
This kind of horrible lifestyle is well-known to everyone applying for a job on Wall Street. Nevertheless, people still apply, and not out of desperation -- all of the successful applicants could get great jobs elsewhere.
There's no deceit here -- the investment banks clearly articulate what the lifestyle will be like, and people sign up for the pay. I know, I did an internship at Lehman Brothers and saw it firsthand -- people staying till 3am just to impress. I managed to keep my weekly hours under 40 by automating my job in Visual Basic, and then decided I wanted to make productivity tools for the general market instead of in-house.
I'm curious which processes you automated in VBA? I'm currently an analyst in an FP&A role. I use VB for a lot of things but I'm not sure I could automate that much of my job. I do a lot of smaller tasks, taking the time to write a macro for each one just doesn't seem to add value. Especially when processes change frequently. Perhaps IB is more suited for VBA automation.
as an intern, you're almost functionally useless to your desk. You're not really adding anything, you're not really doing anything, you're just one more warm body.
The article makes it sound as if the interns could just play FarmVille all night, as long as they’re at their desk. A lot of people would be doing that anyways at home. Is that a correct assessment?
I've had other interns vary there description between doing loads and not doing anything - people aren't going to micro manage you (or manage you at all half the time...).
Never understood what the obsession is with long hours in finance - I highly doubt it actually leads to any more productivity, and certainly reduces the quality of decision making. Surely the better way to impress is to do 40 hours of great work, not 110 hours of being barely awake.
Naively when I see a job ad asking for a rockstar programmer I assume there will be a supply of coke :P. Asking for a ninja... well that doesn't seem as much fun.
Although his death was a sad fact, the truth is it was his choice. In a free world, every adult is responsible for his/her actions. If he did not feel nice working such long hours, he should have quit.
The real issue is if he was paid for overtime and what was his contract details about overtime. Nowadays, a lot of employees demand overtime from their workers without properly compensating them.
>I ended up doing an all-nighter in my first week as an intern, which is when you start work at nine, you stay until five or six the next morning, you go home, have a quick shower and then head back into the office and continue working.
That really doesn't sound any different from doing field operations the military. Except without the shower.
Computers have increased people's productivity through the roof and still we see people working more than 100 hour/week. Are they working on something that can't be automated or they don't want to automate ? Are they doing something that can't be done by two people instead of one ? Something is not right.
No one has to be a banker, if they take you in it means you're smart enough to go elsewhere. It's no secret how hard it is.
Why do people feel the need to put down the jobs of others? Is it because they are different? Is it jealousy because they are not smart enough or don't themselves have the will power? I don't get it.
This kind of work in investment banking sector seems quite sad - you are no longer doing work for living, but the other way around.
I have absolutely no experience on what particular type of tasks are done in these positions. Could someone provide more insight? Maybe there could be opportunity to automate this work, at least partially?
It makes sense if you get enough money out of it. You can do that for some time. If you don't get paid enough in correspondence to the shit they throw at you, then you must remember that nobody forces you to be there and you can just leave if you think it's stupid.
[+] [-] No1|12 years ago|reply
It's also not about getting particularly difficult work done - intern-level spreadsheet and PowerPoint work isn't the sort of thing that only a select few can handle.
It's entirely about filtering for people who will submit to abuse.
[+] [-] rayiner|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fibbery|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] randyrand|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] michaelochurch|12 years ago|reply
Sort-of, but not entirely. You have the typical corporate exponential bottleneck (~25+% per year attrition) and extremely competitive people, but the work isn't intellectually difficult, so people need to compete on something, and it comes down to conformity and availability. It turns out that some people can take that to an extent that would kill many of us. We're good at our stuff; they're good at theirs.
I don't think the intention is to subject analysts to "abuse" at any level beyond the abuse that comes from clients. Sure, there's a bit of hazing and testing that goes on, but it's there for a reason: when shit really does hit the fan, even the MDs (who usually have a 9-to-5 existence if they want it) are working 24/7. You can't be a front-office banker if you can't deal with those kinds of hours-- even into your 40s.
[+] [-] cliveowen|12 years ago|reply
I don't think so.
[+] [-] rayiner|12 years ago|reply
People generally do not go into investment banking expecting to make a career out of it. A few-year stint as an analyst is a great way to get into HBS/GSB/Wharton, and from there into a CFO-track position at an F500. It's also a good way to get into a PE/VC firm or a hedge fund. Because those firms do their own deals and have a lot of autonomy from their "clients" (LPs), the jobs aren't quite so demanding. Finally, some people just want to stick it out for 8-10 years, save up a couple of million dollars, and do something else after.
[+] [-] harryh|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jmduke|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jackgavigan|12 years ago|reply
"For my first five years at Google, I pulled an all-nighter every week," Mayer said in a recent talk at New York's 92Y cultural center. "It was a lot of hard work."
Source: http://www.entrepreneur.com/blog/223723
[+] [-] wavefunction|12 years ago|reply
It's not believable that Mayer worked 130 hours per week for 5 years.
[+] [-] kenster07|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sklivvz1971|12 years ago|reply
Wow, a great contribution to a company.
I'd think that a company that needs to perform at the highest level should do so with smart people giving their best hours and resting appropriately so they can be sharp.
The number of hours is irrelevant. Great people are great because their contributions are of great value, not because they contribute mediocre work three times as much as everybody else.
[+] [-] ajmurmann|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 31reasons|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] johngalt|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nknighthb|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dclowd9901|12 years ago|reply
A job isn't just a job.
[+] [-] tedunangst|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] w1ntermute|12 years ago|reply
I've never understood why these employees (who are clearly quite intelligent) don't just pursue another career where they have more leverage. After all, I don't think they have any particular love for banking. Being on HN, the obvious suggestion would be software development (not a bad choice, considering the current state of the market), but there are a lot of other options out there as well.
[+] [-] Mikeb85|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wutbrodo|12 years ago|reply
Looking anecdotally at friends in software and in finance (I went to a school with a great reputation for both cs and business ) , a good software engineering (at a good company) is not trivial to get into. On the flipside, banking was what you did if you had no discernible skills.
[+] [-] parasight|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] michaelochurch|12 years ago|reply
If you fail in software, then you're just an out-of-work programmer. If you fail in banking, you take a two-year timeout at Harvard Business School and raise a search fund before you're 30.
The upside of software is arguably better (fatter rightward tail, more interesting work, more impact, less tied to NYC and London) but the insurance is not there.
[+] [-] rayiner|12 years ago|reply
First, I'll quibble with the definition of all-nighter: "I ended up doing an all-nighter in my first week as an intern, which is when you start work at nine, you stay until five or six the next morning, you go home, have a quick shower and then head back into the office and continue working."
If you leave work at 5 and start at 9, and are sensible and live within 20 minutes of work (which you can on a banker's salary, at least in NYC), that's like 3 whole hours of sleep.
Second, how many times did you pull a few all-nighters in a row during college? I can't even count. I certainly didn't die.
Third, he's leaving out the part where a deal dies and you find yourself with nothing to do for days. You may not experience that as an intern, but once you're actually working the 100-hour weeks will be interspersed with very dead weeks.
[+] [-] nickthemagicman|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] robertha|12 years ago|reply
There were many times when people just wouldn't respect other people's time. At 5PM I would get an email: "Hey, I need this done for tomorrow morning"..."So why didn't you just tell me earlier? I know you knew about it in advance."
[+] [-] Mikeb85|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JonnieCache|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] cs02rm0|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] marco-fiset|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 001sky|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ramchip|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] a8da6b0c91d|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mordae|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 7952|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] qq66|12 years ago|reply
There's no deceit here -- the investment banks clearly articulate what the lifestyle will be like, and people sign up for the pay. I know, I did an internship at Lehman Brothers and saw it firsthand -- people staying till 3am just to impress. I managed to keep my weekly hours under 40 by automating my job in Visual Basic, and then decided I wanted to make productivity tools for the general market instead of in-house.
[+] [-] Nicholas_C|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] millstone|12 years ago|reply
The article makes it sound as if the interns could just play FarmVille all night, as long as they’re at their desk. A lot of people would be doing that anyways at home. Is that a correct assessment?
[+] [-] sam_bwut|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jordanthoms|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bambax|12 years ago|reply
I don't understand. Are we supposed to feel sorry for them?
[+] [-] yogo|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] axilmar|12 years ago|reply
The real issue is if he was paid for overtime and what was his contract details about overtime. Nowadays, a lot of employees demand overtime from their workers without properly compensating them.
[+] [-] mason240|12 years ago|reply
That really doesn't sound any different from doing field operations the military. Except without the shower.
[+] [-] 31reasons|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] aaron695|12 years ago|reply
Why do people feel the need to put down the jobs of others? Is it because they are different? Is it jealousy because they are not smart enough or don't themselves have the will power? I don't get it.
[+] [-] gerhardi|12 years ago|reply
I have absolutely no experience on what particular type of tasks are done in these positions. Could someone provide more insight? Maybe there could be opportunity to automate this work, at least partially?
[+] [-] yason|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lhh|12 years ago|reply