Dear NPers,

I've heard that it is really easy to get a phone interview at GS so I won't get my hopes up, but I've got one tomorrow for a junior quant in credit and/or energy derivatives. This is my first phone interview in a while, so I am almost guaranteed to blow it due to the rust factor, but I would value any advice you may have. What kinds of questions should I expect from GS? What is the best way to make a good impression style-wise aside from answering the questions correctly. Is arrogant acceptable/expected at GS? Humble? I almost think being too humble would be viewed negatively at that place, but it is just an opinion and I have no first-hand experience to back it up. Would it be a positive or a negative to mention that I was brought in for a face-to-face for almost the exact position a few years ago (when I was really too green)? Should I expect to be thrown a lot of brain teaser questions?

Best regards,

Schizo

Dear DW,

Thank you for your advice. Regarding the confession that I was there before...

I was thinking about bringing it up in the context of how that first experience at GS left a very positive lasting impression on me and encouraged me to pursue my career in finance. It is true. I haven't been the same since I stepped foot on their trading floor. Is that too corny (even though it is true)?

Best regards,

Schizo

Schizo - thats a real shame you had such a bad experience. Lessons to be learned from this are:

1) Dont let your recruiter bully you into doing a phone interview at a time which is going to be tough for you. Insist on an early evening when things are quieter and you can sit yourself somewhere where you can have a pen an paper to hand (your recruiter should have advised you of this).

2) Demand more from your recruiter - it sounds as though you did not have a clue as to what to expect from the phone interivew, did not sound as though you knew much about the role/group you were interivewing with either? Whilst its unlikely that a respectable recruiter will simply prime you with answers to common questions they still should provide you with some idea of the level and purpose of the questioning. Goldman especially ask a lot of VERY basic questions in the early stages of their interview, too many people focus on the wrong things - Worth taking a look at this: 

Attached File: Interview Prep for Junior Quants.pdf

Very basic, in some ways almost patronising but you would be suprised how many experienced quants f*ck up on their basics because its been a few years since they brushed over them. Whilst basic this is pretty much the foundation stuff in the correct balance that you should feel e 100% confident on  (as in really understand rather than memorize solutions to common equations or programming problems that come up - you will get exposed at a "proper" interview). Once you have mastered this then spend more time on the likes of Oxendale etc.

3) Dont go to interviews unless you are fully prepared - getting interviews is not the challenge (it's pretty easy if you've got a good CV and its landing on the right desks), being offered the job is what your after and you only get 1 shot at this every few years or so with any one company. Of course you need to do a few interviews to build up a bit of familiarity and get acustomed to the type of questions and the manner in which they are asked - but dont use a Goldman, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan or any other top house where you think you might really want to work as a warmup - instead go somewhere you would not be that gutted if you messed it up as practice.

Finally - i'm suprised you say Goldman have now "Blacklisted" you - Don't know where you go that from but I think its nonsense - if points 1 and 2 above are an accurate reflection of what happened then if anything they should blacklist the recruiter as they are not exactly doing their client many favours by sending them unprepared candidates who stand little chance as a result and thus waste their clients time.

Silverside - lol.

DW,

Thanks again. You rock. Those notes are great. I wouldn't mind questions like those, but when Mr Goldie Stix asked, "What kind of questions did they ask you last time you were here?", I remembered exactly the questions they asked me. I didn't know how to tell the guy they were the lamest questions I have ever heard in my life. I just gave up. If answering that kind of crap is what it will take for me to work at GS, then it is not a place for me. Here is another dialogue from the last time I was there:

Russian Goldie Stix: Ok. You are here at point A. You want to reach point B here, but you have to touch this wall first. What is the path you should take to minimize the time from point A to point B?

Me: Ah. That is Fermat's principle. It is equivalent to the path a ray of light would take. Hence, the angle from the normal as you approach the wall will be equal to the angle as you return from the wall.

Russian Goldie Stix: I don't like that answer. Give me another way.

Me: *confused* Ok. You could write down the distance as a function of the point on the wall, minimize the distance by taking the derivative and setting equal to zero.

Russian Goldie Stix: I don't like that answer either. Give me another answer.

Me: *even more confused* What are you looking for? I gave you two perfectly valid solutions.

Russian Goldie Stix: You Americans learn nothing in High School.

Me: *holding lip, want to stab the dude in the neck with a pencil* I don't know what you are talking about. How would you solve the problem?

Russian Goldie Stix: I would reflect point B to B' on the other side of the wall and draw a straight line. It is simple.

Me: I don't see how that is any more simple than the first solution I gave you. It is basically the same thing. Geodesics.

Russian Goldie Stix: Let's move on...

Me: *grumble*

Oh yeah, I can't forget the first 5 minutes with the Goldie Stix hiring manager. After giving me an hour long written test, he looks at my answer to the first question (which was done in about 4 lines).

Hiring Manager: Nope. That is wrong.

Me: *confused* Ok.

Hiring Manager: Let's walk through it.

Me: Ok.

Hiring Manager: *10 seconds later* Shit! It is right. My solution was several pages.

I don't want to totally rag on Goldie Stix though. I got along great with the traders. In fact, it was the trading floor that made the positive impression on me. The front office quants actually asked more relevant questions and I nailed those. I would love to work on the trading floor there (as long as I didn't have to put up with juvenile questions).

kr,

That is great! It takes a number theorist I guess I wish you would interview at Goldie Stix just for entertainment purposes and bring a hidden video cam to capture the experience. I would pay money to see you swat them

Best regards,

Schizo

nah, come on - I hear ya but we have to stick with Stix, ever since the original post
that will be our own subtle branding influence

Dear monkeyA,

Thanks for your response. All I can say I guess is that Goldie Stix is not a place for me. If I had to do things over again, I'd probably handle it the same way. If I wanted to, I could go out and memorize "Heard it on the Street" and a million more brainteasers. I could rehearse with a recruiter how to fit the Goldie mold. But I would always come back to the same question, "What does this have to do with finance?" If that is what it takes, then it is not for me.

At my last employer, I was an integral part (as were all the other scientists) in the interviewing process for new candidates. As a result, I have gone through fairly extensive training by specialists on how to give quality technical interviews, i.e. to be an interviewer. I am willing to bet that none of the people I have spoken with at GS (or anywhere else on Wall Street for that matter) have ever had any formal training in giving interviews. If they have any training at all, it would seem to be an inbred (with all that lack of genetic diversity implies) type of training handed down from peers dating back for ages.

Here is a rough outline of how a decent interview might go...

Before the interview:

• Think about the position you are hiring for. What are the specific skills needed (both social and technical) for this job? Make a list.
• For each item in the list, think of questions that will elicit the past experiences that the candidate has regarding that particular skill.

During the interview:

For each skill you are looking for, follow the same general structure

• Describe a specific example of a situation where you needed to demonstrate said skill.
• What actions did you take?
• What was the outcome of your actions?

And some general rules of thumb

• Never ask open-ended questions, e.g. "Tell me about yourself." Every question should be focused in an attempt to elicit specific information about a specific skill you require.
• Do not settle for vague, generalized answers. Always insist on specific past experiences related to the question. The mantra is "Past behavior is an indicator of future performance."

I could go on, but the idea is called "Behavior-Based Interviewing."

For example, let's say I was interviewing at a place that demanded that I have knowledge of Fibonacci numbers.

Interviewer: Please describe for me a situation where you were required to use Fibonacci numbers to solve a problem.

Interviewee: Well, there was this one time at band camp, where I needed to make a Fibonacci sandwich.

Interviewer: Perfect. How did you implement the Fibonacci sandwich?

Interviewee: Well, because of the obvious object-oriented nature of the problem, I wrote a Fibonacci class in C++.

Interviewer: Very nice. How did that work out?

Interviewee: Very well, actually. The band camp leader liked it so much and it got so much use that I wrote up a Fibonacci GUI for it. They still use it heavily to this day to make Fibonacci sandwiches.

For the life of me, I can't see how this kind of dialogue could take place at an investment bank for Fibonacci numbers. Is there any way to justify such a question? If he was really more interested in my programming or algorithm developing skills, it wouldn't be that difficult to ask a question remotely related to finance. Why not ask me to write up a binomial method? It takes about as much brains and is a million times more relevant.

I'll stop ranting here I guess. You can already tell how bitter I am. The reality is that I criticize GS because they won't let me in! It is the same reason why I criticize IQ tests (because if I took one, it wouldn't indicate that I'm a genius so it can't be right!).

By the way, monkeyA. If you work at GS, you are definitely one of the good guys there (obvious after looking at past posts). I know they do exist, but my experience was bad for the most part (except for the traders and front office quants). I still daydream about meeting Mr Russian Goldie Stix in a dark alley with a freshly sharpened pencil in hand.

Best regards,

Schizo