Getting promoted to VP but don’t want to move up further…
I’m an associate who will be receiving promote to VP this year. I work at a middle market shop and have carved out a nice relationship with a few senior bankers I’ve been with since I started in the industry. I’m a strong performer and am solely relied upon for execution with the 2-3 senior folks mentioned above. The group has high long term aspirations for me, but frankly I don’t want to move past VP. I get paid well and have a good work life balance, but have no interest in moving towards a sales function. I’d be content staying in this role for the next 3-5 years…how do I have that discussion with the group head, and when? At my review they talked about starting to think about how to start developing relationships and thinking about building my own book over the coming years. I have ZERO interest in doing that…
Bump
Honestly some of the most prolific MDs of all time (Ken Moelis, Frank Quatrone, etc.) were stone-cold analytical guys and not relationship bankers. You can 100% get by as a grunt-worker, cranking out models & pitch-decks as an MD. In fact, you may be one of the more valuable MDs this way. They can always bring in a new salesman to chase clients, not so easy to find a true Analyst at the MD level.
Swag King, all up in yo ass.
I've seen coverage bankers remain execution-focused through their SVP / Director years, but have not seen them make the jump / promotion to MD without a book of business (outside of lateraling).
If you want to strictly stay on the execution side, it probably makes sense to join a bank that has an M&A group. While you'll need to maintain relationships as you grow, you can partner with coverage bankers that focus on relationships / sales and find your niche as their execution guy.
Unless there is some rush that I missed, I'd wait it out until they firmly suggest you need to start bringing in business. At that point, you can tell them your goals / aspirations and it opens up the conversation. I have seen people at the Director level who are basically execution guys. I suspect you may get dinged on comp (not significantly, at least in the beginning) vs. your peers who are generating revenue.
How much client interaction have you had previously? And what makes you think that you won't like starting to build your own relationships? You could always try for a year or two and see how you go before raising anything with them.
In addition to the join-an-M&A group response (and caveat that coverage bankers usually outearn M&A-dedicated counterparts at the MD level) - another option if you prefer the execution-oriented side of the job is considering the transition to PE. While a lot of these jobs end up to some extent becoming sales-oriented, definitely provides few years of runway to remain as execution-oriented / in the weeds as you'd like at the VP- and even principal-level if that's more your work style / preference.
You could consider moving to an M&A group if you feel the execution-only role isn't going to work out for you at your current firm. But be wary as the M&A group may not be the solution either as you'd be seen as an expensive D/MD resource for someone who isn't bringing in revenue for the firm and would need to demonstrate some pretty significant chops as a seasoned practitioner who bring a boatload of advice to the table that isn't readily offered by others at the firm. The execution-only guys also benefit from being plugged in to specific coverage areas so that they become the defacto experts within a certain industry group which makes them sticky and invaluable as a resource to the coverage MDs across the pitch to execution stages of a variety of transactions. Comp will definitely not be on par with coverage bankers as you're not driving fees for the firm and you'll get paid out of the M&A comp pool which is usually created by way of "taxing" the fees brought in that are M&A-related.
Little confused, forgetting this guys situation, do folks at Vp/D in M&A just get comped for execution and are not expected to bring in new business? That is impression I'm getting from the above about getting a piece of the comp fees brought in, but other posters have said there should be book building.
Good question. To be clear, while they aren't expected to directly bring in revenue as producers, they are expected to be driving associated revenue with coverage teams which help make clear lanes as to how much M&A assisted on a process to get the revenue % allocation. If you're an execution-only guy, you better hope that you are tied to high producing coverage folk who drive business your way to execute. Frankly if you're an only M&A product guy, you're not really focused on building your book (though you could in tandem with the coverage guys if you really tried and were commercial) but rather you're nestling yourself into the revenue-producing groups so you become the go-to guy to execute the high-producing folks' work.
What's your career goal? Stay as VP for 3-5 years and then what?
Not everyone gets Director. Some places you can stay VP for longer. Or go elsewhere and do VP years again. Clip the coupon. Shit happens, not everyone gets promoted.
I mean the best MDs I’ve worked with aren’t really salesman. They built strong relationships with people (similar to what you did with your MDs) and are known for execution so they get called when the client (PE funds and strategics) need someone to execute a deal. Best relationships are driven by work not really wine and dine / 100 page pitch books
There are MDs that aren't relationship bankers, but those guys are mostly "product" guys, meaning they are super smart (usually quant) guys that develop new structures or brought in to help execute very complex deals. They aren't the ones generating business, but they are the ones who help direct traffic when it's deal execution time. But there aren't many of those guys at most firms (my guess is probably one or two per sector). That said, I used to have similar thoughts as OP, thinking that the work/life balance is pretty sweet at the VP level, you are basically the MD I described above (less the pay), but executing typical/traditional deals. But when you move up your work/life balance doesn't change that much, just your day-to-day job does (i.e. instead of working with jr bankers to crank out RFPs and models, you spend more time traveling and on the phone with clients). So my question is, are you are worried about work/life balance or you are just being honest with yourself that you are not ambitious and simply content with the status quo (it's not a dig at you, because I know bankers who are like that)?
Quo fugit non numquam omnis dolores consequuntur. Beatae aspernatur quia et. Et facere hic cum saepe rerum autem natus ut. Est natus cum similique magni nihil.
Est qui aspernatur modi quam. Minima minima cumque nisi non nisi cumque. Molestiae nobis et autem qui magni qui.
Ipsam fuga fugiat dolorem reiciendis ipsam. Sed itaque quo fuga molestiae et recusandae error est. Sit culpa at nesciunt eligendi eius. Eos est eaque debitis placeat maiores occaecati fugit.
Velit dolor reiciendis repudiandae dolorem voluptatibus esse. Sequi sunt dicta modi officia est accusamus. Et ea facilis itaque non officiis voluptas voluptas soluta.
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...