What's more important? Company or position?
I’ve been working at a Fortune 500 company now for almost six months. It’s a successful, highly profitable, high-growth company with a very strong domestic and international brand. I like working there, I like telling people that I work there, and I’m proud of being a part of the success story of the company. There’s just one problem: I’m in a back-office, operational department and the duties that I have are very specific (meaning I’m not sure if they could transfer anywhere else). I’m very interested in FP&A, so my plan is to work in my current role for two years and then try to transfer internally. I know of at least two people in this exact department (and one more in a similar department) who have successfully made the transfer, so I think that with some networking, I could do that too.
A few weeks ago, one of the companies that I interviewed for before landing my current gig emailed me about a new opening that they had in FP&A. I went in for an interview, and now I have an offer from them. Compensation and benefits are practically the same, but the two companies couldn’t be more different. This new company is a moderately sized (~60 billion in TA), regional bank that is performing slightly under the average in their peer group. I don’t feel I would take much pride in working there. Also, although I’d be working in FP&A, I’ve heard that FP&A for a bank is different enough from other companies that I wouldn’t be able to readily switch to non-bank companies. This could be problematic, because I don’t really feel any attraction to the banking industry, and I would actually prefer to end up in almost any other industry.
So I guess the basic question here is what is more important, the company or the position? If my eventual goal is to work in FP&A at a large, successful corporation, what is my best course of action right now?
Perfect job or perfect company? (Originally Posted: 09/20/2014)
I'm in the fortunate position of having two amazing offers (not in finance) for after I graduate in may 2015.
Offer 1: The company I interned for during the summer gave me a return offer in the exact role that I want to be in. It's a great company, I liked the people there and am very happy about the offer.
Offer 2: This company is probably the most elite firm in the area that I am interested in, but the offer in hand is for a role that is somewhat different than my ideal role. However, it has been explained to me by my recruiter as well as a friend who works at the company that I would be able to transition towards the role that I want over time. The compensation here is significantly higher and I would work in my ideal location.
So, if your goal in life was to be in IBD and you had an IB offer with Citi and an S&T offer with GS (and in this hypothetical world, people within GS told you that it is very possible to transition from S&T to IB), which would you choose? I'm so conflicted between the perfect job versus the perfect company. I'm leaning towards the perfect company at the moment because of the possibility of transitioning into the job that I want over time, but I'm still not 100% sure how guaranteed this would be.
What do you guys think?
I would personally take perfect company if you think that the chance to move is real. Otherwise, perfect job. Keep in mind that maybe a year or two at perfect company would also allow you to move to perfect job at another (non-perfect, but maybe better than other option) company?
Offer 1. No discussion.
Moving to a more elite company in the same role is much easier than transitioning to a more elite position even to a less-elite company.
Consulting firms - brand vs role (Originally Posted: 06/15/2015)
Hi everyone. I have two offers with consulting firms for different roles. BCG has offered me an Associate Researcher role, whilst a smaller, independent firm (which has quite a strong reputation in the law, finance and accountancy sectors) has offered me a Consultant role. Advice on which would be better long term? I don't want to be in a support role in research for the forseeable future, and client work is what I would like but long term I would like to move over to finance. In my mind the main issue that is causing a dilemma is the brand name of BCG, but the role with the independent is definitely better. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Role > Brand most of the time. Sure, BCG might tempt you with "do this role for 2 years, and we may have a spot in the role you really want but 2 years is some time that you could be gaining some valuable experience. I would possibly go with the smaller firm if your role is more important. Otherwise, if brand is more important I would go with BCG. This also depends on your long term goals? Do you want to go to business school? Become a partner at M/B/B? What's the long term plan?
Long term I would want to do an MBA in the next 3-5 years and after that get into one of the leading firms to work up to partner. I think I know that it's better to take the smaller firm due to how rare it is for the big firms to allow research to consultancy internal movements (having spoken to one of the researchers today, you would have to move to knowledge analyst first).
Would you take a shitty job at your dream firm? (Originally Posted: 10/11/2012)
Was scanning for some potential lateral/exit opportunities tonight. Came across what seems to be a middle office role at Ares, in portfolio risk and analytics.
It made me wonder...
If you knew you didnt have the pedigree to make it straight into an investment role at a shop like Ares (Apollo, KKR, whatever) even after your banking years, would you consider taking a middle office role hoping to climb out of the ditch and transfer into the investments role?
Girlfriend told me I was insane to even consider it; what do you guys think?
(And for the record, there is no fucking way a headhunter would ever put me in front of a real fund for an investments position. I was able to overcome my horrible GPA by networking to get into banking - but I have yet to find a way to circumvent the gatekeepers to the buyside)
I agree with your girlfriend.
I guess I'm just depressed that all I can find are lateral opportunities. Feeling a little desperate :(
Definitely not. From what I've been told by HHs most hiring occurs at the start of the new year (especially so this year considering the fiscal shit, election, etc)...stick it out man.
not unless you wanted to be looked down and be treated like a second class citizen
if you are not in a desperate position, I'd continue waiting for the right opp as they will pop up
i was once offered some MO job at Och-Ziff, needless to say i did not accept.
Are you at a boutique?
I wouldn't.
Unless a shop tended to draw its FO from MO ranks, I would never do it. I interviewed at Bain Cap's MO once but honestly had zero interest.
Opinion: Brand or Title (Originally Posted: 06/20/2013)
Just wanted to get a discussion going:
What do you value more? Having a position of a lesser title at a larger company/brand or having a better title at a smaller company/brand?
In my head, the difference between an Associate at a Facebook/Google or a VP at XYZ Health (for discussion purposes, ~$50 MM in revenue per annum).
And where do you go from each route @ 28 (or your age)?
Thoughts?
Just had a discussion about this with a former F500 x 2 CEO and current F50 President and he said neither. He said it is all about the money. I literally discussed this exact question with him yesterday as I have interviews for another BB despite being at my current BB.
What is the first question another company will ask you during the negotiation? ...what is your current salary
He also said titles don't mean shit. He said they could give him the title of waterboy but if he was making more then his last place he did not care.
This becomes more of a factor as you get older though. The CEO is close(r) to retirement so future positions are of less importance to him vs. money today. For those starting out their careers both brand and title can have a huge impact on your future earnings potential (maybe you were implying this).
OP, I think it would be very situational in a case like that. But if you were looking at something like BB Ops analyst vs. IB MM analyst everyone on this board would say go banking (assuming you want to do banking). One thing you really have to be careful at when dealing with smaller firms is the culture (personal experience here). Make sure you research the shit out of the place, check glassdoor, contact former employees, etc. because if you don't fit in or there are other issues it won't be fun.
Et neque laudantium pariatur in. Sint perferendis quisquam soluta ipsam nisi assumenda quis.
Molestiae minima quod in qui impedit praesentium iure corporis. Sint dolores tempora inventore excepturi ea sed illum. Rerum iusto possimus ut est. Sint odit atque excepturi rerum necessitatibus.
Eos omnis pariatur reprehenderit cum iste odio ipsam. Molestiae consequatur non voluptatem tempore laudantium. Ab non eos id aut nostrum. Perspiciatis rem omnis nisi molestiae asperiores nihil consequuntur voluptate.
Amet reiciendis quibusdam est nemo aut aperiam est. Consequatur cum dolorem est voluptas. Consectetur vel laudantium eius minima ea. Minus quia officiis laboriosam.
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...