Bain & Company Is it truly easier to get in a smaller MBB office?
Have heard a lot for different opinions on these. The logic is that it’s easier because there is a lot of supply in cities like NY, Chicago and SF, but the counter argument is that the offices with less supply are also way smaller and have a lot less demand.
(Continue on comments)
McKinsey & Company Bain & Company Boston Consulting Group
You’re overthinking it. The bar is the bar. Pick where you want to live and crush the interviews
Thanks I am already in AHAHAH, starting at McK in the summer.
Been helping some friends so was thinking about it.
Here’s my take. In a word, yes, but with caveats. As other have said, the bar is the bar and you won’t get into any office without clearing it.
That said, the demand per available slot in more popular “T1” offices is higher, and just due to regional factors I’d say the demand base is populated by people from “better” schools on average.
What that ends up with is there are probably people who get a “no” from a T1 who could’ve gotten a “yes” based on the same case performance in a smaller office. The issue is that in a T1 office, like 50% of people in final rounds clear the bar, so they can scrutinize more on fringe stuff to get to the 20-30% they make offers to.
All that being said, I feel very strongly that “the bar” that all offices hold themselves to is set at an appropriate height, and the fringe stuff that T1 offices have the privilege (?) of scrutinizing are moreso just interview day noise, and aren’t good predictors of success at the job. All told, I don’t think the talent in T1 offices is any higher than that of any other office. This opinion is driven by multiple years of working with people across offices... and seeing people from HSW who are clowns, and people from no name schools that are absolute machines.
Another argument is that looking at for example a Dallas office you’ll see more people from SMU and UTD, rather than the top schools, so they are easier. But that kinda assumes that the people from these schools are inherently less competitive.
What are y’all’s thoughts?
I’ve worked with some absolute rockstars from schools like (and including) SMU and UTD at clients with teams from our TX office. We get some of our best people from those places.
Where someone is at 18 doesn’t predict everything about where they’ll end up a few years later. Plus, lots of those schools in that tier have massive scholarship programs that attract top talent.
I went to HYP and work in an east coast office. Our UTD et al folks are just as talented as my undergrad friends. Would sleep on the smaller offices at your peril. Apply where you want to live and don’t think twice.
Pre covid yes but people wanna have space so Texas is more competitive
Current, temporary Perception rn is Texas > ny
It depends on year/location/firm/office dynamic but typically yes.
Other factors:
-Many internationals want to live in those cities...so less demand for others just the fact that you’ve eliminated much of competition (esp. for mba level)
-People have partners who are either obtaining jobs in those cities/job market is more expansive there if they are looking
-The most ambitious people and more from top programs want to be in those cities
This may change post-COVID but who knows.
There are a set of offices that are small and becoming popular (Austin, Miami), in-line with migration from the larger cities.
There are also offices where people typically have no desire to live unless they are from there (Houston, Cleveland, Minneapolis, etc.) or have some other specific reason to be there. So demand is limited here by those factors...
FYI Dallas is a pretty big office for most firms, certainly not 1/5 the size of Chicago. Chicago benefits from having 2 large target mba programs nearby.
It’s not just about the sheer number of people, it’s also about who is applying.
The less popular locations will typically get enough applicants for a good pipeline with 1st choice, it’s uncommon to be pushed to offices you didn’t pick.
Coach
Recruiting is pretty standardized, especially with the cases. There is extremely clearly defined answers that fit into good/better/best for every part of a case.
The bar is the same in all offices, but for the very large offices, you may have a way higher percentage of people that slot into “best” on all aspects of the case. In smaller offices, you might get lucky.
Now, this doesn’t mean passing the minimum bar is easy, it is still very challenging. But in the larger offices, you could pass the bar and miss the opportunity because everyone else was so much better.
Coach
Flexible means +/- some variation. It does not mean everyone who passes the minimum bar gets hired.
In terms of letting good candidates go, there is no shortage of excellent candidates. They can pass on good candidates.
Smaller offices have less demand, but also fewer seats. It varies year to year.