Risk of getting pushed out in PE - Why gun for PE in the first place
Hi all, was wondering what the risk of being pushed out in UMM/MF PE was despite being a top performer with great “political” standing with senior management – I’ve read stories about Senior Assocs., VPs, and Directors being pushed out simply because of headcount or space. If getting pushed out is such a significant risk, why do people leave IB and compete so intensely for those positions in the first place, and what do these individuals who get pushed out end up doing - down market to MM/LMM or back to sell-side? MFs seem to be getting more and more saturated at the top. If the goal is to maximize long-term career predictability and seat stability, does it not make the most sense to stay in something like MBB/IB where making partner is significantly more certain, all things being equal? Other than the reason that everyone else is doing it, and the sole (unlikely) prospect of ever making partner, is there anything else I’m missing here?
I can't imagine being pushed out in PE at maybe VP level and then looking back and thinking how you could still have had a job (with the associated $) if you had just stayed in IB, and would have been on track to making SVP/Director by now with a more realistic chance of making MD/Partner.
Is it very common for strong performers in UMM/MF PE to get pushed out? Where do they end up afterwards?
Because IB sucks that much and life isn’t just about making the most amount of money in the shortest period of time at the expense of everything else
Because you prefer the work in PE to IB? If you're truly a top performer with good "political" standing but get pushed out for space reasons it's relatively easy to get a job at a different firm through references. If you stayed in IB though it's very difficult to get a job in PE if you're a VP+. Most bankers don't stay at the same firm either their whole career...
People also get pushed out of IB all the time for similar reasons. So do consultants. So do big law attorneys. So do high level execs.
Nature of the game for any competitive, high paying, high responsibility roles.
I think it’s more common to get pushed out in IB than people realize. Sure there is self selection in that a lot of analysts / associates leave voluntarily, but there is a funnel at any firm. Thousands and thousands of people join banks every year but there are only a few hundred MDs / Partners. You don’t get to $1M+ comp just by coasting and doing the bare minimum in any field let alone IB / PE / HF.
Yeah I am confused by the premise of this topic. It is way more common to get pushed out in IB for headcount reasons than PE…
Yup, a lot of times in ib, people may also just not get promoted as well. No a2a, no asso to vp etc.
Happens in SWE, finance, consulting, investing roles, even in corporate development / strategy roles.
Yeah would say the career stability in corporate or strategy roles is possibly lower than in buyside and ib considering the hours can still be long, but promotions / progression can be slower, people still get laid off or internally moved into less optimal seats in downmarkets or even during strong markets. Have seen demotions where people go from essentially svp to back office analyst
Jeeez what?! Fk tht man, why would anyone decent even take that move? Hiring market is stronger these days than a few months ago too
I think it has become rare for people to be pushed out despite their performance due to internal office politics than it was in the 80s or 90s. Regardless, if you dive deep in some of the senior professional biographies, almost all of them have been both on the buyside and the sellside. In some case, people have made the jump multiple times for a variety of reasons. If people are good at their jobs and they maintain a strong network, there will always be opportunities, even if it doesn't fit in the clear mold of what a "successful" career looks like.
at my firm and from talking to peers, have found it to be common, especially in the past year given the environment. in PE it's never widely announced layoffs, it's typically quietly being told that there's no future and people are given time to find jobs, etc. do agree that this is common for any job, but (e.g., getting pushed out, it being driven by politics vs. performance alone), but also do agree that at my MF / I'm sure at other big funds, the level of pure dedication to the job that's required is very high
If you're both a great performer and have great political capital I can't see how you get pushed out unless the fund is blowing up or severely downsizing
Tenetur nulla architecto incidunt. Quidem est natus voluptatum aut. Placeat et minus autem ea maiores sit. Tempore et est tempore quia non tenetur recusandae. Corrupti sunt accusamus quidem et.
Consectetur eos dolore molestiae. Omnis illum nesciunt in eos vel repellendus facere ut. Veritatis tempora deserunt non quia voluptatem enim aut aut. Quasi facere aut quo architecto. Accusantium accusamus eos voluptas quasi aliquid deleniti architecto.
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...