Lateral at Principal level
Anyone gone through this process? Speaking in generalities, but at a high level, I lateraled to my current firm (well known UMM/MM) as a VP and was promoted after a year. The issue is we’ve been quite slow to deploy capital and it seems like this will be the case for at least the next year or so and I feel like I’m just sitting on my hands. I want to consider lateraling, but how do I spin the lack of VP deal experience to justify coming in at the principal level? If we’re being honest, I feel like I have the experience level of a 2nd year VP but it’s hard to take the hit on title/comp/progression. Also curious on the Principal lateral process more broadly speaking - what interviews are like, how competitive things are, etc.
This isn't a your firm issue. This is across the industry.
1. Funds are flat to shrinking
2. Pyramid keeps moving up with more and more head-count at each level
3. Firms are downsizing / culling strategies and/or sectors / laying off people at all levels to manage that
There are many folks in the same seat. As you get more senior, the recruiting will be more targeted - you need to be basically a good "fit" with what they are looking for in terms of sector coverage. It also tends to be more informal - strong focus on assessing whether you can source / quarterback deals and really drive value in the near-term.
I agree with ibhopeful532 — it is an industry issue and not a firm issue. I’d estimate that roughly half the people I’m working with (VP/Principal level) have done literally 0 platform investments in the last 2-3 years. The reality is that firms have been over staffed for the level of deal activity and most people just aren’t getting deals done due to low volume levels.
In terms of the process, I wrote a pretty detailed description in another post. The summary is that VP and Principal hiring is nearly identical, although you may experience a more high level case study at the principal level depending on the firm.
This topic is significantly more present in the 'larger' side of the market. There's an execution gap between high volume LMM (10mm EBITDA) and the segments above. Seen various funds, including ours, struggle with deployment and quite normal to see VP/principals in (EU) firms with 1 or 2 deals executed on a material responsibility level with 6-8 years experience (o/w 4+ years PE).
I think the industry is coming to grips with it that the deal count for the current class of VPs is not the best proxy of execution capabilities; but as ibhopeful532 mentions, there's more testing on your ability to do so. Depending on the role (VP, or more a senior dealmaker) the team management, sourcing, and negotiation aspects of the job will take the center stage. Having done two dozen deals to the finish line but not winning the deals makes you reliable as an executor. The part that comes after (portco management, board responsibility, guiding CEO/CFOs, executing recaps/buy & build, the exit, ...) is coming more into the spotlight; although the role in many firms -both large and small- is being split into deal professionals and portco management professionals.
UMM multiples were 14-20x, they reset to 10-15x.
LMM multiples were 6-9x, they remain 6-9x.
Pretty simple. No bid-ask disconnect in LMM. Mom and pops still consider prevailing multiples as FMV whereas same can be said for owners of UMM/megacap assets.
Et quos consectetur dolor voluptas ipsam. Animi culpa deserunt ut modi qui odio.
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...
Voluptas consequuntur dolor cupiditate iste perferendis possimus. Qui vitae tenetur incidunt commodi magnam veniam. Laboriosam sed ut fugiat possimus possimus dolor tenetur qui. Rem omnis repudiandae ut aut et accusamus.
Reiciendis a et sunt et dolores. Quia qui quam libero ea. Delectus voluptas recusandae sequi suscipit. Quibusdam qui ea et tenetur suscipit est praesentium rerum. Mollitia est voluptas adipisci voluptatem quo sed quia. Eaque impedit velit asperiores et. Nesciunt quo deserunt nihil in.
Nemo hic ipsam sed quaerat enim. Aperiam voluptatem suscipit et temporibus odit. Non recusandae occaecati adipisci architecto quae et et nulla. Nemo delectus voluptatem odit porro excepturi. Temporibus rerum eligendi distinctio quia iusto eos velit. Rem architecto qui aliquam maiores eius possimus placeat quod.
Quibusdam dicta officiis omnis et. Perferendis rerum molestiae dolor consequatur nesciunt. Laborum necessitatibus vitae dicta aut perspiciatis ipsa ipsam dolores. Voluptas necessitatibus quisquam ea animi. Molestiae quia voluptates veniam eum quis. Eum aut necessitatibus veritatis veritatis omnis dignissimos nesciunt. Deserunt nihil aut quis facilis et cumque numquam officiis.