The Recruiting Process at SG Cowen - Case Study Example

Discuss the recruiting process at S.G. Cowen (Core Schools Strategy, Cowen On-Campus, and Super Saturday). As with any recruiting process, S. G. Cowen wished to integrate the very best talent available within the market to the firm. Naturally, due to the fact that S. G. Cowen was not the same size and could not exhibit the same footprint that other more developed firms could within the college recruiting process, it was necessarily faced with a fundamental strategy shift. Whereas S. G. Cowen had previously been attempting to compete with the larger financial giants at certain universities, such an approach was realized to be counterproductive due to the fact that the firm was expending large amounts of time and money attempting to compete with larger, more high profile, and more moneyed competition. As a means of redirecting the strategy, S. G. Cowen came up with what was known as a “core school strategy”. This core school strategy decided to take the focus off the top 10 universities within the United States for this particular field of expertise and placed their level of focus upon schools within the top 25. In such a way, a broader range of applicants from around the nation were able to be attracted as well as the fact that a more intimate level of interaction could be achieved on the part of S. G. Cowen with the potential applicants. Whereas they had previously been competing on large college campuses of the most prestigious universities the United States, it was determined that such an approach was needless and ultimately wasteful due to the fact that S. G. Cowen’s appeal to the students was ultimately lost upon the potential applicant body as a result of the much more high profile and glamorous investment banking firms vying for their attention (Baron & Kreps, 1999). In such a way, as with any reasonable business strategy, the stakeholders at S. G. Cowen realized that a far more efficient approach would be to focus money and time in attempting to integrate with potential employees on a more personal and intimate level. By expanding and broadening the scope from the top 10 universities to the top 25, S. G. Cowen was able to more effectively utilize the resources at their disposal while all the time not adulterated the applicant pool with a higher degree of unqualified applicants than had previously been realized at the top 10 schools. One of the most effective means by which S. G. Cowen was able to integrate with regards to what the firm labeled as “Cowan on campus”. Such an approach was to draw around 20 alumni, currently employed by S. G. Cowen, and send them on recruiting efforts to the universities in question. However prior to this taking place, introductory speeches were given and shareholders within the University were made aware that the firm was going to be writing within the near future with the stated goal of seeking to recruit you to tell. In such a way, not only were shareholders made aware of the fact that the firm was open and interested in offering potential employment opportunities, they also were able to interact with employees of S. G. Cowen on a rather intimate level. Due to the fact that approximately 100 students would show up for any potential recruiting speech, it was typical that the ratio of students to former alumni was approximately 5 to 1. This of course allowed for the firm to engage in small groups and interact even more closely with the potential applicants. Similarly, during the time that companies stakeholders were interacting with potential employees on campus, specific time was set apart to interview some of the more promising candidates. As a result of these interviews, the stakeholders that S. G. Cowen had sent into the field were able to return with a promising list of future potential applicants that could be drawn upon for what came to be known as “Super Saturday”. As such, “Super Saturday” served as the crucible by which the most promising of the candidates which had been screened during the campus visits were interviewed by senior management of the firm. This crucible was much more than merely an interview as potential applicants were screened on a personal basis, scholastic basis, and the overall group dynamic that individuals within the firm felt with regards to having such potential applicants serving upon their respective teams. Sub-question 1: One of the primary factors that affected S. G. Cowen’s ability to recruit qualified talent was with regards to the decision of what schools the firm would focus their recruiting efforts. Naturally, many firms decide to focus their recruiting efforts based upon where they believe they can hire the most talented, highest educated, and lowest-cost employees (Pfeffer, 1998). However, in the case of S. G. Cowen, the most prevalent and overriding concern was with relation to the quality of the applicants. However, as has been detailed in question one, S. G. Cowen was at a supreme disadvantage with regards to the top 10 schools. Due to the fact that S. G. Cowen was a much smaller firm than the likes of Merrill Lynch and others, it ultimately stood no chance of drawing from an already overfished pool of applicants. One of the reasons that this particular approach that S. G. Cowen chose to engage upon was of such vital importance is with regards to the fact that rather than choosing to expand their recruiting to regional universities or broadly select a range of universities within which to draw upon, the stakeholders within the firm decided to take the middle path and mine the wealth of talent and expertise that existed within the lower 50% of the top 25 universities in the nation. This approach, although seemingly simplistic, represents a great deal of foresight and understanding. The ultimate truth of the matter is that the difference between the top 10 universities in the nation and the 25 universities in the nation is much smaller than one might otherwise wish to believe. This is not say that there is no differential that exists between universities; rather, the differential is small enough that firms such as S. G. Cowen can seek to leverage such a differential in their favor; all the while not sacrificing the talent pool that they seek to draw from. In essence, Rae’s core school strategy was a means by which the firm was able to continue having a presence within potential applicant pools without lowering the overall quality of the applicants that they were seeking to engage with. In short, such an approach was both enlightened and highly overdue. •Subquestion 2: Similarly, with regards to S. G. Cowen’s presence on-campus, it can and should be understood that this approach is not only effective, but has been utilized by Fortune 500 companies, as well as government agencies, for the better part of 50 years. Such a realization certainly helps the reader to understand the level to which a presence on-campus event from a firm such as S. G. Cowen can have with regards to seeking to draw interest from potential employees that the firm would like to integrate with. However, even though the approach is necessarily strong, it should not be understood that it is not without its weaknesses. One of the most obvious of these is with regards to the weakness that the somewhat cursory level of initial interviews that are given to the applicants. Whereas the case study goes into a great deal of depth with regards to how “Super Saturday” takes place in the means by which this crucible of performance effects heavily on whether or not the individual will have future within the firm, the introductory interviews performed by relatively low level individuals within S. G. Cowen do relatively nothing in order to determine the overall suitability of the applicant (Hirschman, 1998). Naturally, this could take her situation is not completely different than a situation in which very low level individuals within a given firm/organization would give a cursory, almost whimsical, interview to a potential applicant and then base the future hiring strategies of the entire firm upon the outcome of such an interview. Although what is been described is somewhat of an exaggeration, it cannot be understood that the hiring process in which S. G. Cowen engages is entirely different from what is been described. Although Super Saturday in and of itself is something of an ironclad process, the initial lead up to this leaves much to be desired and is likely to disenfranchise a certain number of highly qualified applicants that would’ve otherwise deeply impressed upper-level management during an opportunity such as Super Saturday might provide. • Subquestion 3: One universal factor of the hiring process which almost every firm has been forced integrate the understanding that the hiring process is one of the single most important interactions that the firm will ever have with the employee/potential applicant. As such, the industry has noted a marked increase in the level of multi part interviews that have been evidenced over the past several years. The situation which is been described within the given case study concerning S. G. Cowen is merely a further level of evidence with regards to this trend. In this way, the two-part process which is been defined serves to give the firm an adequate, albeit somewhat incomplete, view of the candidate from two different unique aspects. Similarly, with regards the information which was collected throughout this process, the reader/researcher can and should understand that this information was concentric not only upon academic records, key interests, and issues related to personality; key levels of information were gleaned from potential applicants within Super Saturday with regards the degree to which these individuals were believed to be capable of fitting into the team that S. G. Cowen represents. Likewise, with reference to the degree in which Super Saturday, and the events surrounding it, were able to give S. G. Cowen a level of inference with regards to the way in which these potential employees either meet or do not meet the needs that their firm exhibits, it is the belief of this author that Super Saturday was effectively worthless in this respect. Although this is a strong statement to make, it is made with the understanding that these individuals were all brought together at one time, in one place, and subjected to an extraordinarily high level of stress which the senior management of S. G. Cowen all sought to size them up in but a few brief hours. Although such an approach is realistic within the business world in which first impressions, speed, and the ability of a candidate to engage with and impress a potential client are instrumental, the overall level to which these senior shareholders were likely to be able to draw inference upon the abilities of these applicants to do just that was most probably extraordinarily limited. Also, with respect to whether or not the firm was able to achieve sufficient level of information for each of these applicants, it is the belief of this author that this was indeed the case. Yet potentially more importantly is how this information was used. Although the case that he was able to illustrate something of a democratic process within which the senior shareholders discussed, analyzed, and ultimately made decisions based upon the applicants they interviewed, it can also be said that such a level of personal tastes and not rigidly adhered to metrics created a process in which personality and emotion defined far too much of the decision-making process (Harshman & Chachere, 2000). 2. What are the key decision points used by S.G. Cowen in making hiring decisions? What is your evaluation of the process used by the firm (discuss interviews, alternative data sources, finding an associate with “the right fit”)? With regard to the main decision points the firm uses, these can easily be summed up in the following: originating from a prestigious university the displaced within the top 25 within the United States, showing a level of interest in sufficient performance among the S. G. Cowen stakeholders and the campus interview, and convincing the senior stakeholders at Super Saturday that they indeed worth it for the company’s culture. Of all of the determinants that have thus far been listed, it is the last, the need for the individual to fit with the company’s culture, that makes up perhaps the most important aspect of S. G. Cowen’s final decision. As with many firms, if the individual is not able to coalesce with the company’s culture, the level to which the individual can hope to have a level of a fulfilling or expected career is instantly called question. Alternatively, although this author ultimately agrees with many aspects of the hiring process which have been illustrated within this brief analysis, the fact of the matter is that there is always room for improvement (Spence, 1973). One of the means by which the hiring process and decision-making structure that S. G. Cowen could improve upon is with regards to the data sources and means by which the individual interviews are carried out. As has previously been discussed, the first changes that should be made is with regards to the rigor and effectiveness of the preliminary interview. In such a way, the firm is able to save a great deal of time, money, and effort. If the preliminary interview or more successful in determining the very best applicants, a great deal of time would be saved by senior level stakeholders further on as they attempted to weed out many of the mistakes that preliminary interviews had allowed the slip through (Mornell, 1998). •Subquestion 1 With regards to the age-old question of what the best way to conduct an employment interview might be, it must be understood by the reader that there is no set answer to such a question (Gladwell, 2000). Rather, there are a litany of varying means by which the interviewer can interact with the interviewee. As long as legality is maintained, and the main purpose of the interview is always clear to both the applicant and the employer, then the process itself is likely to be something of success. However, oftentimes in seeking to break away from the norm and provide something of an unstructured interview, employers often trespass upon the law and can ask questions that are outside of the bounds of what is stipulated. This is not usually done on purpose; rather, it is merely an unintentional lapse of judgment that oftentimes occurs when an unstructured interview me enters through a variety of different topics - both personal and professional (Campion et al, 1997). Likewise, with regards to whether this particular student or a senior banker at S. G. Cowen, it would be vitally necessary to gain a level of inference with regards to what primary motivator prompts or has prompted the individual to pursue a career in investment banking. The answer to such a question is not meant as a trick; rather, it is meant to determine whether or not the individual will be open, honest, and candid with regards to such a question. Secondly, it should also be the responsibility of the interviewers to seek to understand the level of importance the individual places upon ethics and reference checks (Avoiding Truth or Dare in Reference Checks, 2000). Although the employment process is nuanced and has obviously been well researched within S. G. Cowen, there is little if any mention whatsoever with regards to the importance of being honest and maintaining high ethical standards within the industry that has been plagued by ethical violations and illegalities. Naturally, the utilization of transcripts, SAT scores, an inquiry with regards to what professional work experience and/or level of student involvement that the potential applicants my of exhibited are also useful sources of information upon which the firm will should seek to leverage (Roth et al, 1996). Finally, with regards to whether or not the evaluators should be interested in the family life of the applicants, the answer to such a question is a flat and resolving no. Although the law is nuanced with regards to what questions can and cannot be asked during an interview process, the topic of family and familial relations are of a personal nature and accordingly have no place within the interview process or the workplace. If for no other reason the concerns of the gallery, such topics should be completely ignored unless the applicant is a willing and able to volunteer such information. References n.a. “Avoiding 'truth or dare' in reference checks”. HR Focus, vol.77, no.5, May 2000, p.5. Baron, J., Kreps, D. “Consistent Human Resource Practices.” California Management Review, Spring 1999, vol. 41, reprinted from Strategic Human Resources: Frameworks for General Managers (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1999), p. 346-51. Campion, M.A., Palmer, D. K., Campion, J. E. A Review of Structure in the Selection Interview. Personnel Psychology, 1997, p. 690. Gladwell, M. The New-Boy Network: What Do Job Interviews Really Tell Us? The New Yorker, May 29, 2000, p.68-86. Harshman, E., Chachere, D.R. Employee References: Between the Legal Devil and the Ethical Deep Blue Sea. Journal of Business Ethics, 2000, vol.23, p.29-39. Hirschman, C. Playing the High Stakes Hiring Game. HR Magazine, March 1998, vol. 43. no. 4, p.80. Mornell, P. How to Shift the Burden of Hiring onto the Candidate. Harvard Management Update, Aug 1998, Vol. 3, Issue 8, p.5-8. Pfeffer, J. The Human Equation: Building Profits by Putting People First, Boston MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1998, p.72-73. Roth, P. L., BeVier, C. A., Switzer, F. S., Schippmann, J. S. Meta-analyzing the relationship between grades and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1996, vol. 81, no.5, p.548-557. Spence, M. “Job Market Signaling. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1973, vol. 87, no. 3, p.354-374. Read More