Has anyone been in a position before where by the time you were mid-career (VP / senior VP-ish) you haven't closed all that many deals (1-2?). Assuming the issue has to do with fund strategy (e.g., value orientation, some special niche that sees low flow...) at what point does that start impacting the long-term trajectory of one's career? There's the impact on one's deal reps / exposure (can't learn from reading memos on this job) and there's also the corresponding issue of lower DAW.
It's a frustrating seat to be in because it certainly doesn't feel 'fair' versus if I had picked a seat in a more 'on-trend' strategy.
For people you've seen that's been on a long dry-spell - what's the solve?
1. Leave fund / search for another strategy?
2. Hang on tight and hope something works out?
3. Others?
Do you have a sense of the deal velocity at your fund vs. funds of similar strategy?
Similar - i.e., it's a strategy that has lower velocity of deployment. Not by design - but constrained by the realities of the market and where valuations have been for the past 10-15 years.
If you're generally satisfied with working long-term in this strategy, then it sounds like there's nothing wrong with your current fund and so probably no reason to jump ship. But if you have any degree of intention around moving on to another strategy, particularly a more mainstream one, at any point in your career, then yes I'd say the longer you stay at your current firm, the more you'll get pigeonholed and therefore harder to ever leave in the future.
Qui reprehenderit placeat velit nobis qui. Cum enim corrupti labore natus ad dolor. In sed numquam deleniti enim nisi. Ullam incidunt corporis reprehenderit qui.
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...