Hey all! Just spoke to a friend who is a big shark in the financial world (okay, she just works for Goldman so I trust her with interview things, she's also a BAME woman from a background like myself so I also listen to her because of that) and she said that in most interviews with big city/international institutions (like a private equity powerhouse firm, like the one I have an AC for v soon) you kinda have to keep your answers short. I know I have to be concise, but when I asked her how short she said keep your answers to a max of 1 minute... as someone who talks a LOT (part of my ADHD) I have tried timing myself with answers and I usually go on for 1.5 min - 2 mins even when practicing. I feel a bit worried I will lose favour because of my long answers!! Any thoughts or advice? I know it depends on the questions as well, just in general what do you think about length in different question categories?
IB recruitment is a little bit different to legal recruitment. Lawyers tend to like a little more detail and reasoning in answers than in finance (from my experience).
Having said that, there really isn't "a" length to an answer. Some answers only need to be 10-15 seconds, some need 3-4 minutes. And even with the same question, one candidate's answer could be half the length of the next candidate's - it doesn't mean one is better than the next.
I think you have to think about the following:
1) Am I focusing on answering the question or am I trying to fit other things into this answer just to be impressive? If the latter, is it really needed especially if my answer is long/I am going to be asked other questions?
2) My interviewer is not going to remember everything I say if I speak for too long. Therefore what are the most important/prominent points I want them to remember, and can I make my answer focused on those points
3) My interviewer can always ask follow up questions if they want further detail. I don't have to anticipate everything they want to ask me and get this in before they ask me.