Personally I am just speaking from recruitment experience. People are free to disagree as there is no universal standards of what constitutes prestigious.

For me what distinguishes good & prestigious is really the wow factor. Wow factor means if you are in a social setting, interacting with headhunters or negotiating your salary, friends will look at you in admiration, headhunters will be eager to connect with you even if they have no opportunities at hand, employers will look at you in deference.

Sure generally FO jobs in BB attract the best, but those who choose to join some sort of BO/MO rotation program still have a much better wow factor compared to a similar MAP in DBS for e.g. Maybe some will argue that they know anecdotal someone who is in some place not as good as people think, but that's not really the point. It is all about perception and employer brand equity.

A lot of it is really common perception. I mean try and imagine during CNY you visit relatives 2 youngsters introduce themselves as management associates, 1 is from Shell the other from DBS. Who do you think is likely to be the talk of the town?

The only difference in having recruitment experience is that I know better what are some of the companies that others always want to poach, what programs are harder to get in and what companies candidates are desperate to get in but can't.

Yeah, no one is denying that prestige is hard to quantify. But then again, what about other considerations like pay? For instance, I know DBS MAP pays about 4.5 - 5k?

I believe Shell pays lesser, say 4k max? Does this affect your judgement of the two candidates/companies?

How would you rank all the MAP/graduate programs (including banks) but not FO roles since those aren't MAP? Thanks.

That's an interesting point of view. However, from my personal experience, most people who are fresh out of uni and go to middle office would want to segue to front office in the future. Its just that they cannot break in with their current profile so they apply for middle office instead

How do you know all of their career aspirations/ambitions let alone grades and abilities at school?

I have a good network of people who made it to FO and MO as well as BO obviously. Its not always true the best go to FO lah. Some of those who head to MO, like I said, do it for family reasons, personal choice, liking the work better (credit/market risk?) etc: why is it so hard to believe that a fresh grad dislikes IB hours or the mundane work?

Judging by what you said, it seems like impressing a random stranger on the streets who is absolutely unaware of the difference between a BO role in BB and a FO role in a regional bank like DBS is your top-most priority. In that case, then yes, perhaps a role like DBS MAP wouldn't fall under your category of prestigious positions.

Nevertheless, here is another possible angle to look at things. If your intention is to "impress" your fellow educated peers who are cognizant of the differences between BO/MO/FO in the different tiers of banks, then I would say that DBS MAP is probably more prestigious than your BO role in BNP Paribas or Credit Agricole.

(Note that I quoted BNP Paribas/Credit Agricole because some people might still debate that a BO role in JPM/Deutsche Bank is still more prestigious than a local bank's MAP)

Not really. DBS pays 4.3 - 4.8k on a 15-16 mth package while Shell pays about 3.8-4k on a 18-19 mth package. Also DBS MAP usually get ~10-20% increase every year during the program while Shell offers ~20-30% increase. The difference becomes bigger after a few years, if you compare a DBS & Shell MA grad in the mid 30s, the salary gap becomes very wide.

I think it's hard to rank individual programs per se, I mean what's really the difference between GSK or Unilever or HSBC program? It really depends on what functions you are in, the kind of industry you like, as well as the type of rotational opportunities at hand. They are the kind of programs most people in the market will accept as getting the best at hand, but individual experience is going to vary.

Hi, do you mind sharing what are some of these programs that candidates are desperate to get in but can't and so forth?

You got your facts wrong. Shell starts off at 3.4k basic and rises to 5k at the end of three years. On the other hand, DBS MAP are getting about 4.8k in their first year. Bonuses are subjective and hard to gauge. Against the backdrop of an oil crisis, I don't think shell is rushing to pay out 6 months bonuses just like that.

It's tough to make the assertion that a shell grad will definitely outearn a DBS MAP in his mid 30s. Proof please.

Don't know much about DBS MAP and other banking MAP but Shell's starts off at $3.4k basic (+$200 for NS). Pay rises to at least $5k (better performers can even see close to $6k) after about 2.5 years (considering a fresh graduate typically joins in July/August after graduation in year X and he/she will exit the MAP in February of year X+3). The fixed bonus is always 3 months and variable bonus depends on the individual's and company's performance (the range is huge, can be 2 months, can be 7 months; it all depends). There are also employee and performance shares schemes. It is not unusual to see a MAP graduate earning above $200k/year in the mid 30's. There is also ample opportunities to rotate between various class of businesses (a typical MAP would have seen at least 4-5 different roles in different areas by the time he/she is in the mid 30's). Not to mention there is also the chance of expatriation in the different Shell offices around the world.

The above info was true a few years ago, I'm not sure if anything has changed since then.

Dun talk nonsense lah, double salary in 2.5 years! Haha my toes are laughing oil crisis now all the oil companies firing and cannot even pay bonus still talk rubbish about paying 6 mths. LOL

Mid 30's above $200k is pathetic, most local bank MAPs can pay >$200k by late 20s lor. Some of you here really frog in the well don't know market trends still try to BS.