Pedigree: How Elite Students Get Elite Jobs

by Lauren A. Rivera

How social class determines who lands the best jobs

Americans are taught to believe that upward mobility is possible for anyone who is willing to work hard, regardless of their social status, yet it is often those from affluent backgrounds who land the best jobs. Pedigree takes readers behind the closed doors of top-tier investment banks, consulting firms, and law firms to reveal the truth about who really gets hired for the nation's highest-paying entry-level jobs, who doesn’t, and why.

Drawing on scores of in-depth interviews as well as firsthand observation of hiring practices at some of America’s most prestigious firms, Lauren Rivera shows how, at every step of the hiring process, the ways that employers define and evaluate merit are strongly skewed to favor job applicants from economically privileged backgrounds. She reveals how decision makers draw from ideas about talent―what it is, what best signals it, and who does (and does not) have it―that are deeply rooted in social class. Displaying the "right stuff" that elite employers are looking for entails considerable amounts of economic, social, and cultural resources on the part of the applicants and their parents.

Challenging our most cherished beliefs about college as a great equalizer and the job market as a level playing field, Pedigree exposes the class biases built into American notions about the best and the brightest, and shows how social status plays a significant role in determining who reaches the top of the economic ladder.

Genres: Education, Sociology, Business, Nonfiction, Economics, Class, Society

392 pages, Hardcover

First published April 26, 2015

Reviews

[Mehrsa · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is fascinating and really confirms what I have seen in these spaces. The book shows how elites end up picking other elites for elite jobs. There is this feeling by a lot of people that white men have the hardest time getting hired because of affirmative action or a push for "diverse candidates." Though the rhetoric does make that seem to be the case, this book (and my own personal experience on both sides of this situation) shows how these "elite jobs" end up staying basically white, rich, and male.

[Dorotea · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the book I could have written at the end of my second year at a b-school (so not much novel information for me, but if you are interested in the topic of recruitment in banking/consulting/law you’ll definitely value this book) – as a ‘privileged poor’ I set out to intentionally absorb through cultural osmosis and mimicry how the ‘elite’ behaves and how EPS firms recruit because initially that was my goal. Thankfully, somewhere along the line, I discovered that inside the firm I wouldn’t find people so different from my current classmates, and those weren’t people I wanted to surround myself with.

[Christopher Febles · Rating 4 out of 5]

So, I decided to hibernate. In August / September. But, in my slumber, I got a lot done. Namely, all my student recommendations. Comes to about 40,000 words, if you care to know. But I can do them in my sleep. Get it? Sleep, hibernate? Hello?



Anyhoo, here we go. A book I read in July. Before I had a beard. (No, really. Gotta make a new profile, BTW).

Rivera’s book is highly related to my day job. It’s a preaching-to-the-choir thing: to me it seems easy to believe that colleges tend to recruit very high-income students. Rivera gives us that and a little more: she shares that the big employers pretty much do the same thing.

McKinsey and other consulting firms take almost exclusively Ivy League and Ivy-plus candidates not necessarily because they’re the best and brightest. They also do it because the candidates mirror a lot about the recruiters themselves. For example, they might be more inclined to hire someone because she plays golf or traveled to the same places, both indicators of someone with wealth. Not to mention, their activities, tutors, and private schools in childhood have also prepped them for elite colleges, which leads to elite jobs. Again, not hard to imagine.

Though the writing is rather academic, the research is evident and robust. It must’ve taken some effort to get just one firm to discuss their hiring practices, but Rivera got more than a few. She does admit that this doesn’t provide a wide view of things, an honesty I appreciated. And the work is done through lots and lots of interviews, which she breaks down into digestible pieces. There’s a central point, but she provides a lot of ways to look at it.

There are a few solutions, but neither Rivera nor you should hold your breath. Sure, you can ask McKinsey really nicely to sorta kinda, you know, like, hire a middle-class SUNY grad, you know? And you can give ‘em this book, since it does point out a lot of problems among those elite employers. But remember: don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

But a guy can dream, right? Books like this are necessary, if only to exist as the soft, distant voice of equality.

[Darien Carter · Rating 4 out of 5]

I picked this book up not as someone interested in critiquing the expansion of racial prejudice into the business world, rather a POC interested in learning what firms and the people who work for them look for in promising candidates.

While I certainly didn't leave this book feeling sympathetic for the firms (especially Holt), I'm inclined to think that I will never agree with Rivera's premise that it is the responsibility of firms to correct serious prejudices that likely exist within the minds of their clients as well. Nevertheless, Rivera utilizes an interesting ethnographic methodology to really examine the interplay of racial and gender stereotypes and hiring practices at elite professional service firms. I finished this book feeling more informed, would read again.

[Marks54 · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book reports on a study of recruiting practices for Elite Professional Service (EPS) firms over the course of a recruiting season at a super elite eastern university. Neither the firms nor the university were named. The study is an ethnography involving participant observation, interviews, some survey activity, and review of some documentary records. This research has been widely featured in the popular media and Rivera is currently a faculty member at a major business school.

The punchline of the book is that firm recruiting processes at EPS firms tends to reproduce elite societal groupings by favoring candidates coming from elite SES backgrounds, even in areas that on the surface appear to reflect individual merit and characteristics. There are exceptions, of course, but the overall perspective that comes through is that of a stacked deck and it is clear that the odds of people from unfavored situations cracking the various ceilings in these businesses are quite low. This fits in well with research documenting how American society is becoming increasingly unequal and social mobility increasingly attenuated.

What is intriguing about the book is the detailed description of the hiring process that Rivera provides. How are resumes evaluated? Who gets picked for interviews? What happens within first and second round interviews? How are individual interview results translated into decisions by the firms about who gets and offer and who does not get one? The process is one in which wide differences among firm participants on some matters come together and are homogenized into results that do not reflect the varied inputs of participants. Without much central control or training, a homogenous result is obtained and Rivera’s story of how the process reproduces a stratified and elitist social order is plausible. The book will certainly be interesting to anyone involved in the process of annual recruiting of elite professionals.

OK - but what is to be made of all this? Are these study results valuable? I have my doubts.

First, it is a limited number of interviews and firms (and universities). There is also sufficient individual variations in the processes described that I have to wonder what these results would look like if the study was replicated five or ten times.

Second, while I most always want to give the benefit of the doubt to an author, I wish I knew a bit more about Rivera as a data collector, interviewer, and observer. Would another observer have come to different conclusions about what was going on? There is actually a possible comparison in the book “The Class Ceiling” by Friedman and Laurison, which addresses similar research questions for British professional service firms, with much more statistical data but much less attention to recruitment processes than is the case for Rivera’s book. Both studies end up at the same place but the comparison would be worthwhile - perhaps a project for later.

There were some aspects to Rivera’s book that were annoying but understandable.

She is focused on the data and its summaries and could have spent far more time talking about her theoretical priors - although I do not really know what her priors were. The results of this study are not surprising and would likely have been anticipated by many informed observers of these firms. I seriously was not surprised by anything in the results. My problem is that I do not believe that the facts speak for themselves. It is important for the author to confess to some expectations and it would have helped in understanding the study choices she made.

A second problem is with the firms and their businesses. How does one even attempt to identify what constitutes a good or effective hiring process? How does one seriously consider whether the process was successful? It is clear from the book that participants are not in agreement on this. Moreover, many if not most of those who are hired are weeded out within five or six years if not sooner. Some leave early of their own accord as well.

This suggests that even if we take the process outlined by Rivera as a given and intended, we do not know what to make of the account. Is it a good process or a bad process? Are interviewers trained too little or too much? Who gets any feedback on these processes besides the candidates? Who is held accountable for good decisions or mistakes? Hiring mistakes will receive training after they join the firm (lots of it) so how do we know what is a mistake and what is not? Those passed over erroneously will go elsewhere and prosper or not. How do the firms follow-up on their mistakes and rejections? I suspect they do not follow up.

It is a rich description and will certainly be of value to second year MBAs and such. I am not sure what else there is to get from it. That is a shame since a lot went into the book.

[Alisi ☆ wants to read too many books ☆ · Rating 3 out of 5]

I did want to like this more but unfortunately, the writing is very dull and lifeless. It took some will to get through without skipping ahead, which was a shame because I was actually looking forward to this one (more than Unfair: The New Science of Criminal Injustice, which I picked up at the same time, tbh.)

[Joe · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bleak scholarly study on how elite east-coast companies hire from elite east-coast universities. The author shows how these recruiting practices make a mockery of America's supposed income mobility and affirmative action: for example, recruiters at investment banks care more about whether you grew up playing expensive sports like polo than they do about your grades in college. In my experience at these kinds of schools and firms, I think the author gets more right than she gets wrong, and it is well articulated.

[Rick · Rating 3 out of 5]

Reinforces my decision to never become a Chief Diversity Officer. The book is academic in nature (sociology) but very readable. Some solid tips on interviewing for any job, just just an "elite" one.

[veryfurious · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very insightful book about how classes perpetuate in a "meritocracy" - really, the more books I read about socioeconomic classes and (the lack of) class mobility in America (also relevant for Canada, though perhaps less so), the more it seems like the American Dream is just that: a dream.

I really liked the well-researched and thorough approach to this book, as well as the glimpses into an unfamiliar world and how clearly that world was drawn. The way hidden biases and advantages/disadvantages were brought to light led something that is otherwise hard to qualify in worlds to be easier to trace and understand.

The only part I didn't enjoy about this book was that I found the writing to be a bit stiff and formulaic. The author does come across as more of a researcher/scientist than a writer, so I suppose that makes sense, and it didn't take too much away from the content of the book, which is what actually matters in a book like this.

[Katie · Rating 5 out of 5]

I absolutely loved this book! Incredibly eye-opening to hiring processes in elite organizations and the underlying biases and social barriers that existed. I really enjoyed the layout of the book, and found the testimonials incredibly insightful. I would recommend this book to anyone who works in HR or is interesting in social-inequality, or if you're interested in wanting to know how accurate Suits was :)

[Lydia Camp]

A stellar ethnographic study of elite reproduction in professional service firms—highly recommended for anyone who wants to know how hiring functions as a matching process based on socioeconomic biases

[Jonas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Confirms my deep seated suspicion that no one really knows anything about hiring, especially at law firms, investment banks, and consulting firms.

Given the level of intellectual capacity at these firms, one would think that someone would have already developed a more systematic, less biased way to hire professionals, but I suspect there are various structures that would prevent this from happening: 1) opportunity cost of effective interview training vs. billable hours; 2) Ivy League and top law/business school career services offices restricting access to these firms if they were to open up the candidate pool more widely to 2nd/3rd tier schools; 3) existing employees wanting to hire people like themselves to justify the time/money spent for their own educational/professional development

Although the writing can be a bit dull and repetitive and unnecessarily jargon related, this should be required reading for anyone trying to get a job at these “elite” professional firms or better yet escaping the professional rat race that chasing these jobs entail.

[Chris Boutté · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was really interesting and further drove home the idea that meritocracy is a myth. The author starts by discussing how it's difficult for the disadvantaged to get into elite schools, but the focus of the book discusses how after college, it's even more difficult to get elite jobs. Rivera went undercover to understand the hiring practices at jobs that you'd expect elite students to get after graduation, and she uncovered that it's not that simple. Even with a degree from Harvard or Yale, if you're interviewed by someone who doesn't see themself in you, you're kind of screwed. These Wall Street jobs are looking for "cool" and "fun" people to work with who grew up privileged like they did, which makes it difficult for a disadvantaged person to land a job after college. 

As interesting as this book was, it could have been much shorter. The first half of the book is great, but once she gets to the interview process, the book was absolutely brutal to finish. I can see how some people may find her detailed stories interesting, but personally, when she got to the interview process, it was extremely slow. She covers all of the subjective aspects of the interview process, but personally, I didn't see the difference between the subjectivity at these elite jobs compared to other jobs, so the two or three chapters Rivera used to cover this topic seemed pretty useless in my opinion. But, I do still recommend checking this book out to learn more about the systemic issues we face.

[Cynthia Mafalda · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you are a person who thinks socio-economic background does not play a part in recruitment for the best jobs in investment banking, consulting firms and law firms, this is not the book for you.
If you are a firm believer in the idea of meritocracy, of the old adagio that 'no matter where you come from, you can make it in America', better not buy this book, you won't like it.
Now, if you want to learn something new, well-researched, with fresh evidence that explains why you see the same people, overwhelmingly white, male and upper class represented in positions of power in America (side note: in Australia as well), this is the book for you.
Dr Rivera shows us why recruitment is not even remotely a level plain field. She documented with extraordinary detail the recruitment practices of top firms: the on-campus recruiting events, the resume screening, the three acts of the 'interview dance', the calibration meetings and the final committee decision. After interviewing all relevant stakeholders she provides us with a brutal (but honest) picture of how current hiring practices reproduce economic privilege and reinforce discrimination in the labour market.

[Kelley Jansson · Rating 4 out of 5]

An inside account that follows elitism beyond the Ivies and into the workplace. We already know about the strong relationship between a higher socioeconomic status and the elite schools, so this book really validated what seemed obvious but had yet to be studied. Disproportionately, privileged kids attend elite schools and that that pedigree provides access to the highest paying entry-level jobs. The recruiting behavior and methods described of the elite consulting firms, investment banks, and big law firms, were definitely a world apart from what everyone else experiences. It was particularly enlightening to learn that the big name firms use diversity job fairs for public relations rather than recruitment. Mere mortals need not waste their time to apply. I guess it takes an elite to know one. I appreciated the author's diligent approach to her subject, but the findings made me sick.

[Jared · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a pretty interesting book that was very well researched, organized, and put together. There are some pretty crazy details about this whole rigamarole that people go through to get into these super high paying entry level jobs at firms in consulting, law and finance, and some of the absolutely random details that can be the difference between a candidate ultimately getting and offer and not. It just seems like the whole thing is a big waste of time based on prestige and appearances, and it leads to the firms themselves getting way too many applications, more than they should want, and a bunch of them are people who fall for their whole shtick about how working for them is the only way to be successful. I really liked the testimonies and the fact that the author was able to get into all this from the inside. I found some points a little wordy and longwinded, which is why I ended up giving 5 instead of 4 stars.

[johhh · Rating 4 out of 5]

I believe this is one of the most important books I'll read this year. Having spent a year at a prominent Ivy league institution and interviewed (and rejected) at a prestigious management consulting firm, and now aiming to enter a prestigious b-school, this book explained and clarified a lot of the behaviors, attitudes and incidents that I did not quite understand while socializing in those elite circles. Moving forward, I'm armed with the knowledge and wisdom of this book--with very crucial information--that will help me succeed at the b-school when I get there.

Overall, this was a very well-written book and interesting read. Some parts made me very uncomfortable, but hey, the truth hurts...

[Raziel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Culture contributes to the persistence of privilege (and underprivilege) through shaping peoples aspirations and worldviews, how people judge and are judged by others in everyday social interactions, and their success in navigating society's gatekeeping institutions. p. 7

In fact, [Pierre] Bourdieu (1986) identifies three forms of cultural capital: the objectified state (e.g., material goods and possessions), the embodied state (e.g., individual skills and knowledge; styles of self-presentation and appearance), and the institucionalized state (e.g., educational credentials). For Bourdieu, the logic that underlies the selection of signals that count as cultural capital is not necessarily the distinction between highbrow and lowbrow but rather the distance from necessity. p. 321

From a young age, economically privileged children are socialized into interactional styles emphasizing independence, self-expression, agency, and entitlement. p. 11

This is because how we interpret events plays a critical role in orienting action. p. 22

In a contest system, competition is open to all; success depends on demonstrated ability. Ralph Turner, who introduced the concept of contest mobility, likened such a systems to "a sporting event in which many compete for a few recognized prizes. Victory must be won solely by one's own efforts." By contrast, in a sponsored system, existing elites select the winners, either directly or through third parties. p. 29

"the uses of money are social as well as practical, and they are laden with meaning." Viviana Zelizer. p. 58

"we'll commit ourselves so fully that we'll mistake our desire to win the race with a desire for what it is we're chasing." Laura Newland. p. 75

"It's not easy to judge a person based on what's written on one sheet of paper. And it's never a fair thing and it's never an accurate thing either." Amit, consultant. p. 83

...having the right social capital shapes who is allowed on the playing field in the first place, and institutionalized cultural capital determines who is permitted to stay on the field for tryouts. p. 110

Polish: Social and communication skills required in client-facing... conduct professionally, speak in a way that earns your trust, presents their opinion respectfully but convincingly.

Also, prior research shows that members of low-status groups, particularly those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and racial minorities, are less likely to disclose personal information at work. Members of these groups typically perceive professional and private life as separate spheres and expect professionals to engage in a style of communication and self-presentation that is formal and work related as opposed to personal. p. 160

But in systems of class inequality and elite reproduction, the deck is stacked, not automated. Even in very rigid class societies, there typically are small amounts of movement between ranks; a complete lack of mobility threatens the legitimacy and stability of existing power structure. p. 253

Bourdieu's theory of cultural reproduction is predicated on the idea that culture matters for inequality because it can be cashed in for meaningful monetary rewards. p. 268

[Carol Wu · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pedigree was recommended to me as “soft interview prep” for jobs in the ESP (investment banking, consulting and law) industries, and I can see why. A @kelloggschool professor, Rivera went “undercover” to interviews and recruitment sessions, watching the mystified process from an insider’s perspective. ⁣
⁣
My biggest takeaways are 1) interviewers’ favorite life stories are those that mirrored their own 2) negative stereotypes are amplified in the decision process. ⁣
⁣
The former is intuitive, given the innate egoism of human nature, but it also has more insidious consequences in that, since the majority of interviewers (revenue-generating employees rather than trained HR’s in these industries) are white and at least middle-upper class, certain types of rhetorics are favored, putting culturally or socioeconomically different candidates at an unacknowledged disadvantage. ⁣
⁣
The way negative stereotypes are amplified is less anticipated. According to Rivera, although interviewers are not consciously biased, they do tend to focus on stereotypical “weaknesses” for certain groups (eg. math for women, “polish” for African Americans), so that people who make small mistakes in their “weak field” are often rejected while their counterparts from other groups get the benefit of the doubt. ⁣
⁣
However, the biggest lesson for me personally is the incredible amount of privilege I have simply been taking for granted. Despite being an immigrant and a first-gen college student, I have never hesitated to reach out to my schools’ career services and writing centers, while students at larger ones might have needed to wait for weeks to get access to the same resources.⁣ I'm also used to having the recruiters coming to campus and actually getting to meet and talk with them, despite the mountainous isolation in which my alma mater is shrouded.
⁣
In a list of strategies that could most help historically underrepresented students overcome barriers into the industry, Rivera cited “coaching” and “osmosis,” both of which are more readily available to students at elite schools. Therefore, just as she notes, “Although social reconstruction can occur, those individuals who are likely to experience it already have a foot (or two) in elite worlds.��

[Harald G. · Rating 4 out of 5]

How do elite management consultancies, law firms and investment banks hire Ivy league graduates?
Most readers will approach this book as a how-to career training manual on how to get into these competitive industries, but it is actually a carefully researched sociological fieldwork from within the hiring process.

This study is a major contribution to the debate on to what degree recruitment to the 1% highest paying jobs are meritocratic.

What kind of firms did Lauren A. Rivera study?
— "Although they are not identical, jobs in these firms share many characteristics. The nature of the work performed—a combination of research, teamwork, and client interaction—is similar, requiring both analytical and interpersonal skills. Across firm types, professionals work with similar clients, usually large corporations. The work is time intensive, “all or nothing.” Employees face numerous deadlines and typically work in excess of sixty-five hours per week. Finally, these firms have similar hiring procedures. They all garner the vast majority of their entry-level hires through a process known as on-campus recruiting."

[Summer · Rating 4 out of 5]

What an interesting book! It took me a really long time to read it. It's written mostly for an academic audience. It's not HARD HARD science but it's certainly a bit of a slog. Rivera is a careful researcher.

Thank goodness I never had the aim of becoming an elite banker because this book taught me I NEVER had a chance! It was so illuminating! Never in a million years would I have thought participation in a SPORT would be important in the hiring process!

I felt a glimmer of hope to know that these firms at least have an INKLING of concept of diversity. Obviously they have a LONG way to go, but at least we don't have to sell them the very idea.

One thing that I really took to heart from this book was the idea of the "personal story" being important. I had certainly never considered it important before, but it will be easy enough to tweak my own personal elevator talk into something that makes me sounds like a person who actually plans her life.

It's too late for me to get better grades, though. ;-)

[Tori-Ann Holness · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thoroughly researched. Lauren really dug into the perspective and exhaustively covered the subject matter. Finished the book in 4 days. I do not believe the author considered the audience of her book quite well. Though the analytical arguments were strong, I couldn't tell who she was writing to until the end of the book, where she starts making suggestions to companies on how to improve.

As a student reading this, who was originally seeking a career in the EPS field, after this read I felt desperately hopeless. This book left me with nothing to hold on to as a student with a boundless future ahead of me. I felt loss.

Nevertheless I applaud the author on presenting an light biased view on the industry and i sincerely appreciate her efforts to report her source of research. every claim and analytical conclusion was well backed and supported with research. I would definitely recommend this book. It will leave you full with awesome information yet retire useless.

[Edith · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an really interesting topic. A really sad truth is that many people who failed could never really know which part they did lack. Each time I observed a judgement with personal taste, I recalled my favorite sociologist Pierre Bourdieu's Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste They believe they are more superior than others and their judgement itself serving as an act of social positioning.

However, it is important to understand the logic behind it. As described in this book, some with different backgrounds managed to get those jobs, employing a strategy of social imitation. I always believe the way you are able to cope with others depending on how much you could understand them. I don't want to be tamed this way but it is always good to have the freedom to choose.

[Jill · Rating 3 out of 5]

Even having worked at a business school, and having a front row seat to both admissions practices, as well as recruiting preparations and practices, I still found learning more about the specifics distasteful. (especially when learning about the Yankees fan who didn’t give someone an offer because they were a Red Sox fan. Gross. ) Most of the people involved in the process seemed very self-important, and for all of their credentials, and “pedigree,” seemed very shallow and almost clueless about how they are coming across. If anything, this just showcased for me how class systems are alive and well in the United States and made me really think deeply about if and how I can help those who might not have advantages find opportunities. But at the same time , I want to make sure those who do have advantages can also do good with the gifts they have been given. This book gave me a lot to think about, there is no doubt.

[sodium · Rating 5 out of 5]

Having been through several on-campus recruiting cycles myself, many parts of this study were familiar and it was interesting to read about the hiring process from the firms' perspective. Some learnings:
- Elite firms focus their resources on a small number of schools (interview prep workshops, networking events) that they assume have the best students, for reasons like the school's reputation/selectivity.
- After school name, extracurriculars – particularly those that show long-term commitment, passion (not just career-related), and achievement – are the most important factor on one's resume.
- Interviewers base candidates' success on their own experiences, which can vary widely depending on the interviewer's background.
- Behavioral interviews look for a narrow range of "client-ready" attributes that are implicitly associated with a higher economic class.

[Becky L Long · Rating 4 out of 5]

Audio book. Important information in this book. I do recommend it to anyone planning to go to college or to become a recruiter for any size organization. Having said that the path to "wealth and riches" that these elite jobs offer is probably one of the least likely paths to be viable. There are so many paths to a fulfilling career and gaining wealth. Go check out "the millionaire next door" and "lost connections" and anything put out by Dave Ramsey and Mike Rowe.

Numerous things in this book made me think "joke's on them" toward both the recruiters and so called elite students. Sure the hiring process may be biased but who would want one of the jobs highlighted here. Ugh. You can keep your elite job.

[Fraser Sherman · Rating 5 out of 5]

Rivera's topic — that our supposed meritocracy is skewed to the privileged — is one I've heard discussed often enough I wondered if it would be worth reading. It was: Rivera does a deep dive and the results are highly informative.
The book shows how privilege reinforces itself: Wall Street and big banks recruit from the top-tier schools under the assumption admission is automatic proof of superior ability (if you went to state school, there must be something wrong with you). Students who make to the schools from other backgrounds are still handicapped because they don't have the kind of upper-class manners and style that makes job applicants a "good fit." And so on.
Dry but if the topic interests you Rivera's work is worth reading.

[Amy · Rating 4 out of 5]

sociologist studies recruiting processes for big law / consulting / investment banking and it’s wild but unfortunately not that surprising (besides maybe that big law work is also not that interesting? Yikes)

she documents her experiences posing as HR undercover w an unnamed MBB consulting firm through a recruiting cycle for an unnamed Ivy League school like 10+ years ago … interesting to compare w my own experience from a state school in 2019 but everything’s super diff post Covid now

4.6 for me bc it’s a book I’ll be recommending for a long time, but if not for the personal connection probably more around 4.1 - very accessible for non fiction / academic work!

[Rick Wilson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Fascinating for two reasons. First this book is one of the best books on interviewing I have ever read. Second this book is an impressive look at systematic and inherent bias.

On the interviewing point, this book does an impressive job describing each stage of the interview process for a higher level jobs. It provides a robust breakdown on each stage and what the interviewers are looking for. As a practical guide this book is better than any Vault guide. My experience is the tech world also mirrors the process the author discusses.

On the bias point, this book does a fantastic job of really bringing to light what the systematic biases are in the hiring process and presenting a fair criticism of them. Less actionable feedback, but that would be outside the scope of what is presented.

[Deborah Quazzo · Rating 4 out of 5]

What i like most about this book is that it extends the debate around equity and access in higher ed to its logical conclusion of career placement. The focus was on a very small elite slice of the hiring pool but the message is clear — the recruitment system out of college bears tremendous bias especially into sectors like finance and law. We need to extend higher ed reforms into workforce placement. Career centers need to be more proactive as do corporate employers.