Hi everyone,
I wanted to start a discussion on a topic I've been thinking about lately: the potential for freelance or project-based work for junior investment professionals (Analysts/Associates) in private equity.
It's clear that the PE industry is fundamentally project-driven. The lifecycle of a deal, from initial screening and due diligence to portfolio company management and exit, operates in intense, focused sprints. This workflow seems tailor-made for a more flexible, modern staffing model.
We've seen other mature, project-heavy industries like consulting, tech, and media thrive by integrating freelancers. They bring in specialized expertise for specific projects, scale their teams up or down with demand, and access a wider talent pool. Why hasn't this model been more widely adopted in PE, especially for junior roles?
Arguments for a Freelance PE Model:
I can see several compelling advantages for both funds and professionals:
- For the Firms:
- Managing Deal Flow Volatility: It would allow firms to bring on extra analytical firepower during peak deal-making periods without the long-term overhead of a full-time hire. This seems particularly valuable for smaller or newer funds with less predictable deal flow.
- Access to Specialized Skills: A fund could bring in a freelancer with deep expertise in a specific niche for a particular deal, rather than relying solely on the generalist skills of the core team.
- Cost-Effectiveness: A project-based model could be more capital-efficient, converting a fixed cost (salary and benefits) into a variable one that directly corresponds to deal activity.
- "Try Before You Buy" Talent Strategy: A successful freelance engagement could serve as an extended, real-world interview for a potential full-time hire, reducing the risk of a bad fit.
- For the Professionals:
- Flexibility and Autonomy: This model offers a level of work-life balance and control that is virtually unheard of in the traditional PE track.
- Diverse Experience: Junior professionals could gain exposure to a wider variety of deals, industries, and fund strategies in a shorter amount of time, accelerating their learning curve.
- Focus on High-Impact Work: A freelance role would likely be centered on the most intensive parts of the deal process, offering a concentrated dose of valuable experience.
Questions for the Community:
I'm curious to hear your thoughts and experiences on this.
- Has anyone actually seen this work in practice for core junior investment team roles (not just for back-office or specialized consulting)?
- What do you see as the main obstacles to this model? Confidentiality, team integration, and the steep learning curve of a firm's specific processes come to mind.
- Do you think this is a viable direction for PE staffing in the future, or are the traditional structures too entrenched?
Looking forward to the discussion.
I know a person that has been doing this for years. I don't have many details, but he's been able to make a good living in a HCOL city. He did 2 + 2 then/now freelancing for investment teams.
Any guess on how much he's pulling?
Did he pick a niche? E.g., independent sponsors, LMM in a specific vertical, etc.?
I don't know, sorry
The 2 big issues I see here are:
1) a lot of deal making is about having access to proprietary information. Having someone who joins only for a project or 2 would also potentially give them access to a lot of info the PE firm doesn’t want to leave the institution (investment process, portfolio company performance, transaction comps, private company KPIs, etc.)
2) after doing a deal the deal team continues to oversee / manage the portfolio company since they have the most knowledge on the business. If the junior member leaves after the deal is done then another junior would have to take over essentially starting from scratch
I’m not saying the model couldn’t work but these are likely reasons why it hasn’t so far.
In London, some funds do seem to hire Associates on a fixed term contract - ECI and maybe H2 have done it I think.
You’re trying to fix a problem that doesn’t exist. No PE partner/GP executive is trying to figure out ways to variabalize their lowest cost personnel. In many ways they’re already variablized since there a hard 2 year push out.
Also, the junior team is frequently at 90-110% capacity utilization, so it’s not like there’s a problem managing throughput/capacity.
There’s a big reputational issue with “renting” day labor talent to do your grunt work. Try telling your LPs about how great your process is and how wonderful you are at attracting, retaining and developing talent when your heavy lifting is done by a Wall St equivalent of an uber eats driver. Try getting bankers to share info with you when your half your team is combing through a data room in an internet cafe while backpacking in kualalampur.
You know what a pain in the as it is to find 6 qualified associates out of a pool of 300 banking analysts with gold plated resumes? And we need to do that once a year. Imagine having to find super capable person/talent every time you need to staff a deal? And once you do find them, they’re completely clueless re: the critical idiosyncrasies of how you look at investments and your firm’s specific quirks.
Sorry to say, this makes no sense max Why would any PE firm want to do this? What do they get out of it? What irreducible pain point are you addressing?
Thanks for the reply! Appreciate the point of view.
I see how this applies to larger/more established GPs, where as you point out, having more juniors is just a fraction of their costs. I was thinking more about newish GPs, where dealflow is still inconsistent and fluctuations in workload are significant.
Nonetheless very interesting to hear the thoughts, especially I hadn't thought about the LP & banker perspective when sharing confidential information.
If you’re a “smaller” GP you’ve still raised some sort of of institutional capital and generate mgmt fee to pay people. If you’re resource constrained, it’s certainly not the $200k Associates that are hurting you.
If you’re even smaller than that, like a fund less sponsor, than you’re likely just 2 guys, probably Principal/MD-ish level guys that left your MM PE jobs. You’re more than happy to do the work yourself.
Distinctio eaque molestiae voluptatem officiis aliquid. Aut voluptatibus pariatur est velit ipsa dolorum blanditiis et.
In voluptatem inventore est ea nobis at. Autem ullam autem sed autem. Illo occaecati consequatur sit velit sequi. Illo exercitationem corporis vel consequatur explicabo doloribus qui aliquam.
Sapiente error quia quas labore consequatur. Id officiis eos quos ea nihil quas. Dolores iusto reprehenderit necessitatibus officiis nulla est. Repellat error et ut veniam unde aspernatur explicabo.
Doloremque dicta rerum hic labore dolore et ea. Aut nemo dolorem et libero. Suscipit explicabo non porro sapiente neque dolor. Magni optio sit quas blanditiis voluptatum corporis voluptatem.
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...