[Closed] Brown shoes and loud ties hamper bankers

I'll remove my tie when it gets warm, thank you very much. And I'll thank you to not tell me how to dress, it's my choice. If you don't like it, get over it, it's your problem.
Judgemental asshattery at its finest. 🙄

I imagine neither of you are investment bankers?

I imagine neither of you are investment bankers?

To be honest, I read the article and thought who'd want to be one if that was what it was like?

Allways thought the rules were suit and tie = black shoes while a suit with no tie means brown shoes can be worn.

I imagine neither of you are investment bankers?

What, if any, is your point?

I assume he means that if you were you'd understand how crucial it was that you wore black shoes and could tie a half windsor on a dull coloured tie....

If the job has standards and you wish to do that job, why wouldn't you make an effort at least?

I'm hiring a minion in the US at the moment. If they arrive at the interview without a suit and tie* they're not getting hired. The markets they'd be servicing have expectations.

*I do take in to consideration the utterly dreadful nature of American tailoring, of course. **

** If a female candidate, I'll overlook the tie requirement, obviously.

No brown in town. Always been the unwritten rule.

I read this and was surprised it was newsworthy, if you interview for a job anywhere corporate you wear a plain shirt, a navy or grey suit, a subtly patterned tie and clean, black shoes. Certainly that was always the advice I was given and indeed would pass on.

I assume he means that if you were you'd understand how crucial it was that you wore black shoes and could tie a half windsor on a dull coloured tie....

No brown in town. Always been the unwritten rule.

I read this and was surprised it was newsworthy, if you interview for a job anywhere corporate you wear a plain shirt, a navy or grey suit, a subtly patterned tie and clean, black shoes. Certainly that was always the advice I was given and indeed would pass on

Back in the fifties probably its 2016 now.

Back in the fifties probably its 2016 now.

Try turning up at your local fast food emporium for a job interview in white tie. You'll find that you'll be judged there, too.

I work in corporate banking and occasionally wear brown shoes. There is however a time and a place for formal city attire. I wouldn't be adverse to hiring someone with brown shoes myself but at the same time I'd never turn up to an interview with brown shoes. It is not hard to look half decent anymore. Well chosen supermarket clobber could just about do the job!

Back in the fifties probably its 2016 now.

Come on, if you go for an interview you should do your research. And anyone who researched banking would know it's conservative and so you dress appropriately. Why is that difficult or in any way negative?

If the job has standards and you wish to do that job, why wouldn't you make an effort at least?

Old rules for oldies.

Thankfully the days of stripy shirts and red braces have died with the stiffs that wore them.

It's true you need to look smart, look like you mean business and have standards and follow them. But it's not true to pick one, maybe two items out and force ridicule.
But turning up to an interview with a gross tie and brown shoes does mean you'll be overlooked, if you get the job you'll be surprised at what you can wear day to day.
However, there are a few companies in the City that can pick and choose their candidates, but those candidates have been chosen, and watched, from Prep School and through the established School path. As they say, if you are not on the list, you are not getting in. If that's elitist, you have no choice but then you'll never meet anyone from those circles.

Their club, their rules...

turning up to an interview with a gross tie and brown shoes does mean you'll be overlooked, if you get the job you'll be surprised at what you can wear day to day

Yep. Also, a quick bit of interwebular research before the interview would be all that was needed to know roughly what was expected.

If you can't even do a little research before an interview......

But they have made an effort. How is someone at their first real job interview supposed to know that you (apparently) don't wear brown shoes.

If only there was some kind of online article setting it all out. Oh....

Brown shoes and loud ties hamper bankers

I thought it was laws and regulations that hampered bankers.

I'll remove my tie when it gets warm, thank you very much. And I'll thank you to not tell me how to dress, it's my choice. If you don't like it, get over it, it's your problem.

While working in practice accountancy many years ago I turned up in a short-sleeved shirt sans tie in the Summer. My reasoning was that as I didn't work in IT (at the time) and didn't sport a fading glory I was well within my rights.

Was informed by the office manager that it didn't matter what kind of shirt I wore; I [i]had[/i] to wear a tie. So... the following day I borrowed a hideous Bermuda shirt and paired it with an awesome Scooby-doo tie.

It didn't go down well

I'm not surprised frankly, I worked in corporate finance for a long time - they're fairly free and easy for entry level jobs, but White & Middle-Class (based on how they talk rather than anything else) recruits for the most part. 75% male at least too.

When I started the rules were black shoes, black belt, blue, grey (not too light) or charcoal suit (not black, we're not undertakers). White shirt, somber, smart tie. No jewery other than wedding ring and watch, not flash, not 'plastic' (no g-shocks). Sensible haircut. Clean shaven or a beard, if you want to grow a beard you do it on your hols. The rules less stringent in the handbook, but you'd be told straight away if you wandered off the path. That wasn't 1956 either, those were still the rules in 2009, probably still are. I can imagine someone turning up with a white tie or brown 'casual' shoes would be memorable at interview, but never get the job.

I didn't work in every dept of every bank, but the ones are I saw were very much only interested in PLUs, not racist or sexist in the tradition sense (although some were, very vocally and it was never challenged) just only wanted to work with people like them. Which meant more white, middle class males.

If you wanted to progress it would be much easier if you were male, very few Women got past the first few runs on the ladder, all managers in every dept I ever saw, white, male, middle class - golf nuts or passionate football fans and like that all the way up to prople you might have seen on TV arroganty refusing to accept any failure on their part or that of the bank after the crash happened.

Brown shoes and loud ties are for estate agents and working class weddings

@ P-Jay - sounds ****ing horrendous.

I would not work somewhere like that.

It's a uniform in every sense of the word. Imagination and style to be left at the door.

@ P-Jay - sounds **** horrendous.

I would not work somewhere like that.

and from the article

"What kind of industry is this where I can be told that I'm a good candidate, I'm sharp, but I'm not polished enough?"

[quote=CaptainFlashheart ]** If a female candidate, I'll overlook the tie requirement, obviously.

Sexist

utterly dreadful nature of American tailoring

I couldn't do a job if I had to wear a lot of clothes. If it's hot I get hot.
Luckily I can wear t shirt ,shorts and flip flops at work .
I have to wear a suit again on Monday and I will be uncomfortable . I put it on in the car park of the crem and remove it as soon as the tea and cake have finished.
Loads of people don't mind wearing lots of clothes ,I feel suffocated.

Agree with lunge, what's news about stating the bleeding obvious and trying to make it into a class issue (Millburn) is frankly absurd/desperate.

The use of the word "polish" was mildly amusing though.

I did have the opposite problem with a v talented Korean lady who would overdress for client meetings. That's a more challenging conversation, trying not to hurt her feelings.

The younger contributors on here may believe it doesn't matter but the fact is that when you enter a meeting or an interview your appearance counts for a lot. Brown shoes with a suit, loud or over-wide ties, loud or coloured shirts or suits, they will all mark you out as a non-conformist or somebody with bad taste or judgement. I have a colleague who is well salaried and has a good job but he wears brown shoes and dresses like a footballer in a club and it looks wrong. In the couple of customer meetings I've attended with him he has called the customers "you guys" which makes me wince in pain. He would not get a job in the City.

and these are the folk telling women that wearing a burka is proof of muslamic oppression?

Their club, their rules...

Its important we maintain the glass ceiling, it's what stops those above from falling through the glass floor.

they will all mark you out as a non-conformist or somebody with bad taste or judgement.

or someone who exercises judgement instead of conformity. It might be bad judgement but simply demonstrating that you follow without question is hardly a ringing endorsement.

I'm hiring a minion in the US at the moment. If they arrive at the interview without a suit and tie* they're not getting hired

I'd have thought that denim dungarees were de rigeur for minions.
No?

[img] [/img]

Good Effort young man. You're hired....
[img] [/img]

there's some pompous goofballs on here hey 😆

I'm guessing that none of you have ever risen above middle management

If the job has standards and you wish to do that job, why wouldn't you make an effort at least?

As noted they have made an effort its just that they dont understand your rules which are hardly difficult to teach a prospective candidate
For this role its is important we adhere to an outdated and highly conservative dress code that means you would be expected to wear ...... would this be acceptable to you and do you think you could meet this requirement ?

TBH we all know the colour of your shoes or the quality of your windsor knot is no indication of your ability to do the job. Given this I have no idea why some of us are still so hung up on attire for roles.

if a female candidate, I'll overlook the tie requirement, obviously

trying to make it into a class issue

Glad i dont work in such a conservative environment and I work in one where people judge my ability to do a job based on something real and observable rather than the colour of my shoes

I wear brown shoes with my suit. But I wear navy or tweed suits

Looking at the financial sector rules I see that it would appear to be a bit of a conservative environment, experience would tell me that the banking sector doesn't employ the most flambouyant characters.
So, why would someone who want to demonstrate their individuality want to work in an environment of rather boring clones? Leave it to those who want to conform.

I'm guessing that none of you have ever risen above middle management

In our industry no one wears a tie even at board level, not our CEO, not our investors. Can't recall the last time I saw a customer wear a tie either, I've done plenty of presentations at VP level ($billion US Corps) and neither I nor any of our customers had ties on.

Sorry Junky, but the ability to look up on the internet to find out what the dress code is before you attend an interview is nothing to do with class and all about research. Google "what to wear to an interview" and there are countless articles that state that wearing black shoes, a subtle suit, plain shirt and subtle patterned tie is good practise. Ignoring that is nothing to do with class and all about being a fool.

The industry I work in attracts people of all classes, or all sexes and of all religions yet still holds a similar dress code. Appearance counts, maybe it shouldn't but it does.

But, if you don't want to wear a suit to work that's fine, don't work in banking. Personally I quite like it, a well fitted suit can make a fella look and feel pretty damn good. But if that's not for you, fine, just pick another job.

I'd always assumed that investment bankers spent the majority of their time clad in PVC S&M clothing, while coked off their nuts in the dungeon of some dominatrix. In which case I can see their issue with brown shoes and loud ties. They'd clash horribly

no one wears a tie even at board level, not our CEO, not our investors

my point was more that above middle management, people interviewing are going to be a little more interested in what's going on in the prospective employees head than what's going on in their wardrobe

Why was that even newsworthy though?

But they have made an effort. How is someone at their first real job interview supposed to know that you (apparently) don't wear brown shoes.

In fairness, if you've graduated from uni with a first in maths/engineering/physics and want to go into banking, then the differentiation between two candidates could well be "can they dress themselves appropriately?" And if the unwritten rule is black suit, black shoes, plain tie that's not hard to follow.

I work in engineering, we're still expected to turn up in a suit and tie everyday, I stopped bothering with the tie after a while on the same project with the same client, but still had a neutral one in my desk drawer for meeting new clients or wore one if the clients management team was due in the office.

It's not like a suit is expensive, you can pick up a reasonable one for less than I (and most) probably spent on a cycling kit.

my point was more that above middle management, people interviewing are going to be a little more interested in what's going on in the prospective employees head than what's going on in their wardrobe

Probably true, but would you employ someone who's first impression was maverick/nonconformist/can't dress appropriately? It's like spelling mistakes or a badly formatted CV, you could be brilliant, but at best you've made the task harder than it needed to be, and at worst you've just landed in the automatically rejected pile.

the ability to look up on the internet to find out what the dress code is before you attend an interview is nothing to do with class and all about research.

We can discuss why it has this. We cannot discuss, nor deny, that it does have this - well its stw so we can but it requires one to ignore the facts

if you don't want to wear a suit to work that's fine, don't work in banking

Times are changing and have moved on though some sectors lag behind the general drift from bowler hat and pin stripe to the looser work dress code of today

It's all fashion isn't it?
And clearly most here are woefully out of date 🙂

I'm thinking that up to a certain level, being docile and compliant is one of the fundamental requirements, but at some level a more creative approach will undoubtedly produce far better results

Junky, you are correct in that the industry is very white, male and upper/middle class, no argument there. But my point is that true as that may be, your ability to ascertain what to wear to an interview has nothing to do with your class and everything to do with you ability to research.

my point was more that above middle management, people interviewing are going to be a little more interested in what's going on in the prospective employees head than what's going on in their wardrobe

Banking interview dark suit, tie and black shoes would be the norm. Smartly turned out too, no visible tatoos or piercings. Someone turning up in a suit/clothes to which brown shoes where a match is going to stand out in a way which is likely negative.

Away from banking, traditional asset management would have a similar expectation at interview. Once you get into specialist advisory and alternative asset management for interview suit but no tie can be acceptable and once you start work its a lot more informal. Colleagues would be in Gore commuter wear till lunch if it was a busy morning. Chino's and trainers round the office common too. Any client facing content was generally suit with optional tie and 99% of the time black shoes.

you sound just like the docile, compliant type of guy I'm thinking of lunge

I simply pointed out that the industry disproportionately pick candidates from a certain class of people - white, male and upper middle class.
It,demonstrably, has a class bias
We can discuss why it has this. We cannot discuss, nor deny, that it does have this - well its stw so we can but it requires one to ignore the facts

Women are under represented in Engineering in this country (conversely without the facts to hand I'd anecdotally say we're massively over representative with people of Asian subcontinent and South American ethnicity, so it's not a white middle class boys club). So every day we were bombarded with some one on the boards ideas about "diversity" and celebrating women in engineering. Which had three effects:
1) It just became background noise, because we can't do anything about what schoolkids want to do at uni anyway.
2) It kills morale as what you're actually saying is the other 80% are a problem.
3) Everyone hated the high flying women in the company because despite being nothing extraordinary (one was actively loathed by pretty much everyone who worked for/with her) they were the ones give all the praise and attention, not for over achieving, just for doing the same job as the men?

What I'm trying to say is, the bias might not b in the banks, it might be in the aspirations of the people joining the industry. And secondly, shouting about it can actually be counter productive.

It's all fashion isn't it?
And clearly most here are woefully out of date

you sound just like the docile, compliant type of guy I'm thinking of lunge

I'd argue I'm just someone who knows how to dress for the occasion. The job I do has an expectation that people will wear a suit and generally dress conservatively, so in the week that's what I do. Does that make me docile and compliant? Maybe so. But I also know that if I were to change industry and move into something more creative or less formal I wouldn't dress as I do now.

I simply pointed out that the industry disproportionately pick candidates from a certain class of people - white, male and upper middle class.

Rubbsih, absolute total rubbish. I've done Grad recruitment for 35 years at a whole range of Banks/Investment Banks and thats simply not true. Intake was always 50/50 men/women. The women tend not to stay beyond 30/35 but that's for a variety of reasons and not selection. As for middle/upper middle class the industry selects on ability, I can safely say the number of upper middle class people I have come accross in banking and asset management is tiny and far outnumbered by ordinary hardworking ambitious people. The only person I knew who worked for Coutts the private bank came from Blackpool and went to a state school and Leeds Uni.

As for white you are very much out of touch, the last 10 years have seen a disproportionate amount of hiring from non-anglo-saxon / non-white groups especially high educated Indians and Asians. My last bank was probably exceptional but it hired virtually no one from the UK, it's a condition of joinging the grad programe that you are fluent in at least 2 langugaes and French/italian/Spanish doesn't really count. Hindi or Mandarin are the two most common.

I've done Grad recruitment for 35 years at a whole range of Banks/Investment Banks and thats simply not true. Intake was always 50/50 men/women

I want to believe....

I want to believe....

Why, do you have a prejudice that people who wear suits are all racist misogynists?

Its important we maintain the glass ceiling, it's what stops those above from falling through the glass floor.

I like that, do you mind if I use it.

FWIW I was hiring a few weeks ago. I don't stand by the requirement to be suited and booted for interview. As long as the candidate looks reasonably smart and clean and is dressed appropriately then that is fine. I'm more interested in the person than the packaging. Having said that, I went for an interview earlier this week and despite uncommonly warm temperatures in Liverpool I was suited, booted and uncomfortably warm.

I'm in the "meh, not an issue" camp. Yunki your scathing comments are a bit irrelevant I'd say - senior managers will be judged just as much at interview as anyone else, unless it's at really senior manager level at which point there won't be a conventional interview process and it's fairly irrelevant. Odds are they'll be well turned out anyway though.

I worked for a FTSE 100 insurer, the group CEO never wore a suit, tended to go for chinos and a shirt. He was one of the most respected people in the industry. More or less everyone around him still wore a suit and tie from Group board level to the directors in each region/business area. I don't know if you're calling them 'middle managers'? Most people in the City office wore suits, about 50/50 on ties. It was never specifically mandated, it was just what you tend to wear working for a City based insurer. I'm not entirely sure this means you're being oppressed by the man or whatever. I'm sure if you wanted to express your individuality you could dress like this:

[img] [/img]

Which is exactly what I thought of with this:

So... the following day I borrowed a hideous Bermuda shirt and paired it with an awesome Scooby-doo tie.

I now work for a finance company, the CEO I used to work for is the Chairman here, he still doesn't wear suits. No one does, even the directors. I'm in the tech part, people were shorts and flip flops. I actually miss wearing a suit.

I guess the people saying "OMG who'd want to work for a company that tells you to look smart" are the sort of people who'd never want to work for that company. The dress code is just one reason. Actually most retail jobs are more stringent than most city firms once you're in the door, and dressing appropriately for an interview hardly seems like a big ask to me.

ads678 - Member

@ P-Jay - sounds **** horrendous.

I would not work somewhere like that.

It had its ups and downs - I'd be completely honest, whilst I never shared the opinions of come of my colleagues, I am white, I am from a "nice town" and I effected a 'posher accent' at my interview and learned to keep it up during work. Those 3 things and little or no experience meant that I could walk into a job at 22 (no degree either) at the bottom, but still earning 20k a year 16 years ago. Double that within a few years and as long as your face fitted you'd have a job for life, even when the banks crashed I chose to leave, I wasn't really pushed - I was offered other roles, I just took the money instead (£18k tax free to see me right).

Honestly I saw some quite horrific ****-ups made by colleagues, stuff that would get to thrown from the building anywhere else - the very people who should be the ones giving you your marching orders, or frankly calling the police, were the ones who made it all go away.

I'd never go back, it made me very institutionalised to it all, it was a complete culture shock to go anywhere else, but it wasn't a horrible place to work once you got used to it.

Rubbsih, absolute total rubbish.

The report noted that in the UK, 7% of children attend fee-paying schools, yet the Sutton Trust found in 2014 that 34% of new investment bankers had attended a fee-paying school.

I am sure you will argue its because they are the best candidates and not due to any sort of network or old school tie scenario

I am sure its less prevalent than it once was but to deny its still there / it still opens door is somewhat difficult given the stats.

The only person I knew who worked for Coutts the private bank came from Blackpool and went to a state school and Leeds Uni.

How wonderfully insulting to suggest that people of a certain class are incapable or too lazy to understand a simple concept like dress code. Everyone industry, sport etc has one. It's not rocket science.

Or is just more of the same old lame excuse mentality?

On the other side if the coin, I once had an architect come round to give me a quote in a Range Rover vogue and wearing Gucci loafers. Not hard to guess where his quote was going to lie in the range of quotes nor what happened to it afterwards!

How wonderfully insulting to suggest that people of a certain class are incapable or too lazy to understand a simple concept like dress code.

Why have you ignored the actual stats of the recruitment within the industry- its almost like you dont want to try and defend the truth so you will go for broad sweeping attacks to no one in particular

Or is just more of the same old lame excuse mentality?

again we can debate why this happens not if - well those of us who operate in the land of facts can do this so clearly you are out.
I am sure you will argue its because they are the best candidates and not due to any sort of network or old school tie scenario

I am sure its less prevalent than it once was but to deny its still there / it still opens door is somewhat difficult given the stats.

Whilst the stats are valid, do you have anything to disprove your middle paragraph?

I bet if I went into The Fat Duck / Hand and Flowers / L'Ortolan (other expensive restaurants in the home counties are available) there would be a similar proportion of people who went to private schools. Does the head waiter apply a bias or is it just a continuation of good school -> good grades -> good uni -> good job -> good restaurant?

On the other side if the coin, I once had an architect come round to give me a quote in a Range Rover vogue and wearing Gucci loafers. Not hard to guess where his quote was going to lie in the range of quotes nor what happened to it afterwards!

We turned down a pension advisor at work (partly) based on his car which was a 7-series BM IIRC...

I work in engineering, we're still expected to turn up in a suit and tie everyday, I stopped bothering with the tie after a while on the same project with the same client, but still had a neutral one in my desk drawer for meeting new clients or wore one if the clients management team was due in the office.

I work in engineering too and we have a flexible dress code. You don't see too many suits in our offices. Our customers frequently don't wear suits, our suppliers is a mix. I generally wear a tie, but never a suit.

With some exceptions, I'd almost say there was an inverse correlation between suit-wearing and job performance at most levels up to and including middle management.

Fortunately, we and our customers are generally more interested in performance and output than what you wear (within reason and allowing for Health and Safety rules).

Bankers. Totally sh*t at doing their job, who every couple of decades or so crash the economy they are currently leaching from, leaving everyone else to pick up the pieces, but by god they must look good while they are doing it.

Its really not our fault that bankers hire in a skewed manner from the upper middle classes and those who went to private school. We did not make it class issue, they did, and we only observed that this industry has made it a class issue.

Yep, class war started from the top.

I work in engineering too and we have a flexible dress code

yep, sat in here in the office in an un-ironed North Face SS shirt and North Face shorts....

Only people who wear suits are our Sales team and CEO, but no ties. CEO is French though, so he's dressing to their standards..

Telecoms...

I work in engineering too and we have a flexible dress code. You don't see too many suits in our offices. Our customers frequently don't wear suits, our suppliers is a mix. I generally wear a tie, but never a suit.

It depends on the personal relationship with the client through.

I'd never (and I bet I'd never see) anyone go into a proposal meeting for a project in anything less than black suit/black shoes and a tie. It's a given that you scrub up and wear a tie for those meetings!

Conversely once the project as been won, and the client is now just another engineer there to answer questions on behalf of their company, not the CEO of EXXON/ADNOC/PETROBRAS (and is probably wearing an open collar) then the tie isn't needed anymore.

Same way you'd address them as Mr ........, and go through the whole swapping business cards, bow, take time to read it, then put it away if they're from asia. It's a cultural expectation.

I work with investment bankers a bit - they are always really well dressed (certainly in public facing meetings anyway).

Most of them are bright you things from around the EU, only around 1/3rd brits; the public schoolboy thing doesn't apply I think. There is also a good proportion of women 40 - 50% I'd say. (That goes for senior psots too - Credit Committee members etc)

I also deal with underwriters and brokers in the city. In 15 years have only once met your archetypal public schoolboy knob.

I don't recognise the (sometimes) public perception of people who work in the City as coming from highly privileged public school back-grounds. In my experience they are not, they are well above average intelligence and extremely motivated and hard working. The ones I have dealt with do all seem to have been to good Universities - maybe that represent 'privilege'.

by the by

I'm reminded of the apocryphal tale of a Guards adjutant giving advice to a newly joined subaltern:

Always remember, it's The Underground, not 'the tube', never carry a parcel, and never brown-in-town old boy.

From personal experience, those who work in that sector of banking don't seem to mind the mindless conformity.

Seems to break down into three camps;

Those who've been used to it all their lives and never actually noticed.
Those who don't like it but put up with it for the money.
Those who actively enjoy it.

I don't recognise the (sometimes) public perception of people who work in the City as coming from highly privileged public school back-grounds. In my experience they are not, they are well above average intelligence and extremely motivated and hard working

Indeed but that doesn't fit into the banker-bashing/class war narrative.

Instead of the whining and crass class crap, how about some sensible advice. If you are going to an interview part of your preparation is to understand the culture of an organisation and this includes dress codes etc. So do your homework beforehand. Not only is that important for your chances of success but it also allows you to consider whether such a culture - be it dressing conservatively or not - "suits" you as an individual. That's practical advice rather that wallowing in self pity and complexes. Banking hires people from all walks of life and is extremely meritocratic. If you are good, don't blow our chances by ignoring such simple advice. You are better than that. Dont wear brown shoes, silly ties, comedy socks and silly cufflinks. You simply reduce your chances in a v competitive process.

banker-bashing/class war narrative

narratives and virtue signalling 😆

you guys are hilarious

Dont do yourself down Yunki. You are keeping the amusement levels v high yourself. 😉

Jambas, not sure about Coutts but close friend worked for Cazenove in the 90s just when dress down was coming in. He was wearing a shirt with a v light check in it on one Friday (in addition to conservative suit and black oxfords etc). He was in a lift with a senior partner (in their old offices) and was reminded that "we don't do dress down at Cazenoves!" 😀

If you are going to an interview part of your preparation is to understand the culture of an organisation and this includes dress codes etc. So do your homework beforehand. Not only is that important for your chances of success but it also allows you to consider whether such a culture - be it dressing conservatively or not - "suits" you as an individual. That's practical advice rather that wallowing in self pity and complexes. Banking hires people from all walks of life and is extremely meritocratic. If you are good, don't blow our chances by ignoring such simple advice. You are better than that. Dont wear brown shoes, silly ties, comedy socks and silly cufflinks. You simply reduce your chances in a v competitive process.

Well it's not exactly rocket science is it? 😉

The rocket science is the stuff you use when you have the job!! Don't blow it beforehand.

Well, it's not exactly rocket science is it?

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and_audio/headlines/37250128 ]Some rocket science....yesterday.[/url]

Represented the corporate face of Pharma yesterday in a blue linen suit, flowery shirt and brown shoes. I was the nonconformist in our group, but never wear a tie on the grounds of equality. Not one member of the group we met wore a tie.

I might consider a tie for a job interview but not once in the door. It's what you produce that really matters.

As always, the actual article is considerably better informed (and meaning) than the crass BBC article would suggest although still short on practical advice (caveat, I didn't get to the end).

As an example it mentions - v sensibly - the importance of work experience and getting this early (too early IMO). But instead of practical advice and a recognition of initiatives such as blind interviews, it regresses into how unfair it all is.

As a recruiter, I am more tolerant of more maverick talents and different backgrounds but there are limits. More importantly, this does not preclude simple norms like being smart and sensible in dress and doing basic homework.

I've always taken the approach of mirror what your client wears, but if in doubt go slightly smarter. (This only works in the western world, don't if you are British go and purchase Arab dress for a meeting in Dubai 🙂 )

I'm in engineering (O&G) and outside of the CEO types it is open collar shirts, smart trousers / chinos and shoes (brown is fine). In fact wearing a tie tends to make you stand out and not for the right reasons.

I've always taken the approach of mirror what your client wears, but if in doubt go slightly smarter.

Good advice.