Associate back to Analyst
Does anyone have experience, or can offer advice on going from an associate at a respected real estate company to a top tier firm as an analyst? Would any of you consider doing this if you had 5-7 years or so in the industry and good experience, but felt it was the only way to break into a top tier firm? Both positions would be in the same focus, ex. Asset Mgmt. or Acquisitions. Would you potentially stay as an associate and try to make you way to VP or wait out until you were more senior? Thanks for the insight.
I personally don't think taking a demotion to get a better brand on your resume is worth it. Keep plugging away until you can find a top tier name willing to take you on as a lateral hire.
Tough question. If it is truly a top tier firm, and a place you have a strong desire to be, maybe its worth exploring further. I'd assume there is a compensation question that would require some serious consideration. However, 5-7 years is a fair bit of experience for an essentially entry level position. Potentially negotiate up to a senior analyst or do as the previous poster suggested and wait it out.
I would consider this if the position in question is acquisitions. I wouldn't do it for Asset Management.
Love that pic of Tyrod. Pro Bowler!
What would the comp difference look like? Title of your position is important, but if you're making 60% of what you were as an associate, that's going to hit you harder. Of course, your career progression would be accelerated, but it's down to what you can stomach and if you think that you'll regret not jumping for the opportunity.
Also, you could possibly counter for an early review for promotion to associate or something similar if there's any room for negotiation.
I know you may not want to reveal more info, but it depends so much on other factors.
First of all, a lot of real estate titles are complete bullshit. I worked in a 22 person shop with 4 principals, 16 vice presidents, and 2 analysts. It's hard to judge this without knowing if your current company, or the future company, follows this model as opposed to the more "standardized" banking model.
Second, how big are these companies? An analyst at a 10 person HQ might end up doing more work and having a better resume than an associate at a 100 person HQ.
Third, and perhaps most importantly, is this "top tier" company important and impressive enough to you personally to warrant the title hit? Are you leaving for Blackstone? Related? Hines? Something like that? Do you care about the "prestige" increase? Will it help you long-term in your career? Will you make more money?
For me, it would be about comp. I know they say don't make it about money but after being "stuck" for about 4 - 5 years out of college I decided I gotta eat too and did what I could do get my comp up where it needed to be. You could call me head jack off of all trades if it made better comp now and more importantly IN THE FUTURE i.e. upside potential. At the end of the day its all about getting invested. Either through the GP or doing stuff on my own outside of my day job
I had the title of "Head Research Analyst" once. Thought I was cool. The amount of comments, emails, requests for reports, etc. I got from coworkers about researching head immediately corrected that ego inflation, however.
Unfortunately, I thing I'm about to be in that boat. Glad to hear someone has been through it!
Thanks for all the responses. To answer a couple questions posed, it would be in acquisitions, which is where I am currently. It would also believe it or not be an increase in compensation - about 25%. I would say I do care about the prestige increase, or I wouldn't be considering it. I'd be doing similar to what I am now, but with more variety which would be a positive. Long-term it may help my career by having the name on my resume, making new contacts at the company, learning new product types, but short-term it obviously would look odd and I could be passing on an opportunity coming up I do not know that exists at the moment.
It doesn't sound like a big step down. You might be placed into an A2/A3 situation and be back at associate level shortly making more money that you did at your old gig (as an associate)
So you're making substantially more money, at a better company, with more day to day variety, and it will help your career long term?
IMO, fuck the title. You can always explain it away in your next interview, and by then, it may have changed anyhow.
This sounds like a pretty obvious decision; take the job! I wouldn't worry too much about the analyst title. Think long-term instead: once you make it back up to associate your resume will read well and it will look like you made a great lateral.
Ignore what I originally said. I did not think a 25% raise would come with a "demotion."
For me the comp part would be an important piece, which it seems you have covered so that's good. Another consideration is what the path of upward mobility looks like. This can be very hard to get a sense of unless you already know someone well who works in the group. All I'm saying is you don't want to make the move and then find out that the seats ahead of you are basically taken and there isn't an opportunity to move up. There is a certain level of uncertainty no matter where you are, people can leave and a spot can open up at any time, but to the extent you can get a decent sense of your prospects for advancement going into it, you will be better off. I think eligibility for an earlier promotion/a senior analyst title would also make it easier to make the move if I were in your shoes.
Because there is no title standardization in RE titles, I don't think it is that big of a deal, especially since your salary history will show that you were always moving upwards.
I sort of have something similar on my resume. One company I worked for split the Analyst band into an Analyst and Sr. Analyst role. The next company I worked at only had a single Analyst band. So I was a Sr. at one company, then was just a regular Analyst at the next. It was something I was concerned about when I decided to do it, but nobody has ever asked me about what happened In any interview.
Also, I actually took a pay cut when I made that move, because I was moving to a more prestigious company. However, accepting that job has been a defining moment in my career - the money that I gave up has been paid back to me both in opportunity and monetarily 20x.
You sound like you are in an even better position. If the company really is a top shop, and you are serious about wanting to work there, then I would do it.
After reading the posts above it sounds like a good opportunity to me!
You're evaluating an opportunity to make more money at a better firm, but are concerned you'll be an "analyst" rather than "associate" (in an industry with no standardized title progression)? Is that seriously how people evaluate roles these days? I haven't commented in ~2 years, but this one was frustrating enough that I felt the need to log in and express my frustration. Holy shit dude. Best of luck.
CaR - There is title progression, just not as straightforward as perhaps what you do. The difference being running excel and argus models and writing investment memos versus sourcing the deals. It's not as black and white as you make it out to be, and people in the industry voiced their opinion both ways. But thank you for the input.
Culpa nostrum quasi eligendi. Aperiam cumque non ipsa dolorum vero. Ut voluptas ducimus itaque ut. Sed error voluptatem qui id. Occaecati qui est maiores possimus. Harum enim enim ut magni.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...