‘The Talent Bermuda Triangle’: Oxford graduate, 27, rejected offers from McKinsey and Morgan Stanley to explore why the brightest Gen Z minds continue to compromise

Elite Graduates and the Allure of High-Status Careers

Inside Oxford’s Sheldonian Theatre, the vice-chancellor’s words resonated beneath ornate ceilings, urging graduates to make a difference in the world. As the ceremony concluded, graduates in their academic gowns beamed for photos, holding degrees that would soon launch them into prestigious firms like McKinsey, Goldman Sachs, and Clifford Chance—long considered the ultimate destinations for ambitious students.

Among the applauding crowd was Simon van Teutem, who found the situation deeply ironic. “We all knew exactly where everyone was headed,” he reflected in a conversation with Fortune. “It was obvious, but we all pretended otherwise.”

Over the past fifty years, the career trajectories of top graduates have become increasingly concentrated. In the 1970s, only about 5% of Harvard alumni entered finance or consulting. By the 1990s, that figure had risen to 25%. Most recently, half of Harvard’s graduating class accepted roles in finance, consulting, or technology. Compensation has kept pace: according to a recent survey, 40% of employed graduates from the Class of 2024 started with salaries above $110,000, and nearly three-quarters of those in consulting or investment banking surpassed that mark.

Not long after his own graduation, van Teutem received offers from both McKinsey and Morgan Stanley. Rather than accept, he chose a different path—spending three years at the Dutch publication De Correspondent and writing a book examining the invisible forces that make these career choices seem predestined.

Van Teutem was motivated by watching talented peers get swept up by the prestige of these roles, only to find themselves locked into work that felt unfulfilling. He observed that many enter banking or consulting as a temporary step, but few ever leave. “These companies have mastered how to attract high-achieving but insecure individuals,” he explained, “and created a system that perpetuates itself.”

What Draws So Many to Consulting?

Van Teutem’s book, The Bermuda Triangle of Talent, was born from his own disillusionment. A self-described academic with a passion for economics and politics, he arrived at Oxford in 2018 determined to use his skills for good. Yet within two years, he found himself interning at BNP Paribas and then Morgan Stanley, working late nights on mergers and acquisitions with the intensity of a life-or-death mission. The issue wasn’t the nature of the work—he didn’t see corporations as inherently bad—but rather that the tasks felt monotonous and unimportant.

His subsequent internship at McKinsey offered more polish but little more meaning. “I was surrounded by brilliant minds,” he recalled, “but we were mostly building basic spreadsheets or justifying conclusions we’d already decided on.”

Rejecting full-time offers, van Teutem began interviewing over 200 professionals—bankers, consultants, and lawyers—at all stages of their careers. He wanted to understand why so many high performers drift into jobs they secretly dislike. He concluded that the real loss isn’t due to malice or greed, but to wasted potential: “The true cost is the opportunities missed.”

He discovered that, initially, money isn’t the main draw. “Most top graduates aren’t motivated by salary at first,” he said. “It’s the illusion of endless options and the social prestige that pulls them in.”

At Oxford, this illusion was everywhere. Banks and consultancies dominated recruitment events, while public sector and nonprofit organizations were barely visible. Van Teutem’s first encounter with the system came when BNP Paribas hosted a dinner for top students—he attended for the free meal and ended up with an internship.

“It’s a game we’re conditioned to play,” he said. “You’re always striving for the next achievement—the next Harvard, the next Oxford.”

By the time graduates realize that the next step is simply a higher salary and more demanding work, it’s often too late. Many believe they’ll leave after a few years to pursue their true passions, but few actually do.

“At Least I Can Buy My Children a House”

To illustrate this cycle, van Teutem shares the story of “Hunter McCoy” (a pseudonym), who once dreamed of working in politics or at a think tank. After graduation, McCoy joined a prestigious law firm, intending to stay just long enough to pay off his student loans. He even set a financial goal—the amount he believed would give him the freedom to pursue policy work.

But that sense of freedom kept slipping further away. Living in an expensive city and surrounded by colleagues who worked around the clock, McCoy always felt behind. Each promotion and bonus only raised his expectations and expenses.

Gradually, he found himself trapped: first by a mortgage, then by home improvements, and then by the phenomenon known as lifestyle inflation. Every new comfort led to another upgrade, and each upgrade required more work to maintain.

“High earnings lead to high spending,” van Teutem observed. “And higher spending creates even more expenses.”

By his mid-forties, McCoy was still at the same firm, telling himself he’d leave soon, but guilt and routine had set in. “Because I missed so much time with my children, I convinced myself to keep working a few more years,” McCoy told van Teutem. “At least then I could buy them a house to make up for it.”

The most heartbreaking part, van Teutem noted, was McCoy’s uncertainty about what would remain if he ever left. “He wasn’t sure his wife would stay,” van Teutem said. “This was the life she had signed up for.”

For van Teutem, this was a sobering reminder of how ambition can become a form of captivity. “It made me grateful I chose a different path,” he said. “You think you’ll be able to make different choices later, but you might not be the same person in a few years.”

The Rise of Consulting and Finance: A Historical Perspective

Van Teutem’s experience is part of a broader trend that has unfolded over decades. The rapid expansion of what researchers call “career funneling”—where students focus on a handful of prestigious industries—coincided with the financialization and deregulation of Western economies in the late 20th century. The neoliberal policies championed by Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher opened up capital markets and gave rise to new financial sectors, transforming finance into a dominant industry. At the same time, governments and corporations began outsourcing expertise to private firms, fueling the growth of modern consulting. The last of today’s “Big Three” consulting firms was established as recently as 1973.

As these companies captured a larger share of economic rewards, they became symbols of meritocracy—exclusive, data-driven, and seemingly neutral. They offered not just employment, but a sense of identity and belonging.

There’s another, quieter challenge: the soaring cost of living in major cities. In financial hubs like New York and London, comfortable living has become a luxury. According to a 2025 SmartAsset study, a single adult in New York now needs about $136,000 per year to live comfortably. In London, basic monthly expenses for one person range from £3,000 to £3,500, and financial experts say a £60,000 salary is just enough to avoid living paycheck to paycheck—a figure only 4% of UK graduates expect to earn straight out of university.

How many entry-level roles pay over $136,000 or £60,000? For young graduates eager to experience city life but lacking family financial support, only a narrow range of jobs meet these thresholds. As a result, many are forced to prioritize salary over purpose-driven work from the outset.

Breaking Free from the Golden Handcuffs

Van Teutem believes that the answer isn’t simply a matter of personal ethics, but of institutional design. “You can structure organizations to encourage change and risk-taking,” he said. He points to Y Combinator, the Silicon Valley accelerator that has helped launch companies now worth a combined $800 billion—“more than the GDP of Belgium,” he noted.

Y Combinator succeeded by lowering the barriers to risk: offering small investments, quick feedback, and a culture where failure wasn’t fatal. “In Europe,” he added, “we’re not very good at this.”

He argues that governments can adopt similar strategies. In the 1980s, Singapore began competing with private companies for top graduates, offering early job offers and eventually tying senior civil service pay to private sector salaries. While controversial, this approach helped the country retain its brightest minds.

Nonprofits have also learned from these tactics. Programs like Teach First in the UK and Teach for America in the US have adopted consulting-style recruitment—selective cohorts, leadership branding, and rapid responsibility—to attract talented graduates to teaching instead of corporate roles.

“They use the same strategies as McKinsey and Morgan Stanley,” van Teutem said, “not as charity, but as a launchpad.”

Still, financial pressures continue to shape choices. In the US, unemployment is rising among recent graduates as the job market weakens.

Van Teutem hopes that universities and employers will follow the Y Combinator model: reduce the risks and elevate the prestige of taking chances. “We’ve made risk-taking a privilege,” he said. “That’s the core issue.”

This article was first published on Fortune.com on October 26, 2025.

Further Reading on Gen-Z and Careers

• Gen-Z faces a ‘readiness paradox’ that affects both their professional and personal lives—read more here.
• BoFA is asking, ‘Dude, where’s my job?’—find out more here.
• Jensen Huang predicts a surge in six-figure jobs for Gen-Z thanks to data centers—details here.

This article originally appeared on Fortune.com.