Bottom heavy vs top heavy group?

Having been in both a very top heavy group and also a more traditional pyramid, bottom heavy group, I think the main observations which I found were:

1) Less ability to step up in a top heavy group, and often to justify their worth, Directors / VPs in the top heavy group end up doing work which typically would be below their level, which means it is harder to get recognised for good work and taking initiative. The opposite is true in a bottom heavy team, where often within a deal team the VP / Director is not particularly engaged and so you have the ability to develop strong relationships with the client and ultimately run the deal

2) More challenging to carve out a niche / get promoted quickly within a top heavy team, especially as you reach the more crowded senior ranks. In the top heavy team there were many directors who had been at the level for 10+ years, as each time they brought in a new deal, the credit was poached by the MDs

3) Lots more ambulance chasing in a bottom heavy team, as the MD has plenty of analyst resource and there is no concern about wasting time

4) Stronger deal flow across more verticals in the sector within the top heavy team, this being a function of there being an MD covering every vertical as opposed to one covering the entire sector. More time in front of clients as a brand in the sector means that you are more front of mind when the deal does eventually come

I think this may vary quite widely depending on the firms which are being compared however and the calibre of the teams in question.