From the article:
The key word is pedigree: the array of background traits, including the cultural, social, and educational capital passed from one generation to the next, which EPS candidates bring to the competition for elite jobs. But it’s a closed competition. One must get through the gates first. A candidate’s pedigree determines whether his or her application to an EPS firm is legitimately considered in the competition, or tossed in a slush pile of candidates who have no realistic chance to even compete for such jobs.
Of course, pedigree has always been influential in hiring decisions for first jobs at elite professional service firms. While Rivera acknowledges this, she contends that the rules surrounding pedigree have changed over the generations. Although elite employers have always hired on the basis of pedigree, the mechanism is now far more indirect. Finding young talent to fill society’s most important and highly paid jobs once was based on descent, the handing over of familial economic power from one generation to the next.
Today, elites have modernized the rules of entry. Rather than explicit bloodlines being the determining factor, the outcome biased toward elites is interpreted as just the rational outcome of the “meritocracy” at work. Now, just as elite colleges contend that they admit students on the basis of cognitive talent, elite employers claim their highly competitive hiring practices lead to finding the best and brightest young employees.
But the way elites choose talent is hardly an open competition, Rivera argues. Rather, EPS hiring is a “sponsored contest.” While any college graduate is free to apply for a position, only those who are pre-qualified are actually permitted to compete. The most important pre-qualification is earning a degree from one of two types of schools. Generally, EPS firms maintain two lists of colleges from which they draw the applicant pool. First is small list of so-called “core” schools that have fed firms’ talent requirements for decades. The relationships are historic, steadfast, and habitual. Think Ivy League, especially colleges that are within a few hours drive from power centers of finance, banking and law.
Next is a list of “target” schools that firms have relied on for talent, but to a far lesser extent than core schools. The pivotal difference between a sponsored and an open competition is the behavior of gatekeepers in seeking talent. EPS firms go to great efforts to seek out the kinds of college graduates that fit the firm’s culture. The firms go to the students, spending valuable time and money traveling to the listed campuses and recruiting for their applicant pool.
I think this is far less true today than in the past. However, admission to a highly-elite school demonstrates something of value and speeds up the vetting process. My advice: Save your admissions letters but go somewhere you can afford.