I’m looking ahead and thinking about the analyst-to-associate jump, and I’m getting mixed signals about how much networking actually plays into that.
Some people are telling me it’s all about your deal experience and smashing reviews—pure performance. Others are saying that your ability to build relationships with senior bankers and VPs is what actually determines if someone fights for your promotion. And then there’s the quiet acknowledgment that sometimes it’s just politics and who likes you.
I’m genuinely confused about the actual mechanics here. Like, does networking during your analyst years set you up better for A2A, or is that mostly a performance-based decision? And if relationship-building does matter, what does that actually look like when you’re buried in moods and DCM modeling? Are we talking coffee chats with senior bankers on other desks? Partners lunches? Something else entirely?
I want to understand this before I land an analyst role so I can be intentional about it. What actually moves the needle on promotion readiness, and how much of that is your network versus your output?
This is where candor matters. Promotion from analyst to associate involves roughly 60% demonstrated technical competence and execution, and 40% internal political capital—which networking directly influences. The mechanics work like this: your reviews and deal track record are table stakes, but when promotion committees deliberate, they rely heavily on sponsor advocacy. A sponsor is typically a VP or MD who has directly worked with you and will argue for your advancement. You build these relationships through three mechanisms: exceptional work on their deals (passive credibility), deliberate relationship-building conversations (coffee chats, lunches, asking thoughtful questions), and visibility outside your immediate team. Most analysts neglect this because they think heads-down execution speaks for itself—it doesn’t. Additionally, understanding the A2A timeline at your specific bank matters; some promote at year two, others at year three. That timeline affects how much networking you need to pack into analyst years.
here’s the real talk: execution matters, but it’s not enough. you need two or three senior people actively advocating for you in promotion discussions. and those people aren’t gonna advocate if they don’t know who you are. so yeah, you gotta be intentional about building those relationships without it looking forced. do solid work on their deals, ask smart questions in meetings, maybe grab a lunch or two. bankers respect competence and effort more than manufactured niceness. if you’re good at your job, the politicking is just making sure the right people notice.
so u basically need a few advocates who know ur work + seen u crush it. that actually makes sense and feels less random than i thought ttbh
You’re thinking about this the right way by planning ahead. Strong execution plus intentional relationship-building is absolutely achievable. You’ll get promoted when the time comes!
Data on analyst-to-associate progression across major investment banks indicates that approximately 45-55% of promotion decisions are influenced by documented sponsor advocacy and cross-desk visibility, while 50-60% correlates directly with deal execution metrics and review scores. Critically, analysts who establish relationships with at least two to three senior bankers outside their immediate team show 25-30% higher promotion rates than those without external advocates. The optimal networking timeline for analysts spans the full two to three-year analyst period, with documented outcomes improving when relationships are built during the first and second years rather than concentrated in the final promotion cycle.