WFH / Hybrid working policies at top and MM PE funds
Are most of the top PE shops (e.g. KKR, BX, Ares etc.) 5 days in the office again? My company became 5 days last year and I’m unsure I can readjust to that lifestyle, struggling with it so far.
Genuinely feel my performance would
Improve if I had 2-3 days WFH, extra sleep and no commute.
Wondering if it’s more flexible in MM shops. Keen to hear thoughts if that’s a solution or whether I should accept the reality
The only large-cap firm I know with good WFH is Vista. Insanely jealous lol I'm going in six days a week...
This ended today lol. Back to 4 days a week
Damn that sucks, so just Friday WFH for the foreseeable future?
Source? For Vista only Fridays WFH now?
“You will need to show up as required” 🤓🤓☝️☝️
This is the type of dude to miss the birth of his son “to be there for the shareholders”.
you sound like a tool
I'm going to have to disagree here. The industry had record transactions, deal flow, and profit during a time when no one could go into the office. A little WFH flexibility (Friday at bare minimum) goes a long way for productivity and happiness/health of employees.
I’ve wondered how much of all that overall profitability when everyone was WFH was just bc of 0% rates and stimulus combined with crazy valuations. Maybe it would have been better had everyone been in the office all else the same. Who knows tho. Maybe some of the shittier SPACs wouldn’t have gotten traction haha.
having at least 1 day home is nice tho. If a slow Friday your weekend can start early and easy to do chores so you don’t have to do them that night or over the weekend.
@mods please delete my posts in this discussion. Thanks.
The fact that people are permitted to return daily to give MS to non-existent posts, which I deleted almost instantly, is an absurdity.
Otherwise, if the mods won't fix it, then at least out those who give MS, with their information publicly, so that I may defend my honor, however I may deem appropriate (including in-person/in the real world, if desired).
I believe other employers/leadership would like to see the names/identity of those who continue throwing MS on these posts, so that we may respond accordingly. Actions have consequences, and this should not be immune to that.
By allowing MS targeting behavior, for posts that haven't existed since initially posted, it discredits the WSO SB/MS system.
Further, to permit such behavior only fosters low quality posts, and seeks to discourage quality discussion, insight, or seniors attempting to provide helpful feedback.
To allow such behavior to be promoted, and to exist without consequence, only serves to soil the credibility of WSO, as it gives an unprofessional and immature flavor, rather than promoting a professional forum for finance industry discussion. I believe WSO may want to clean up much of that unchecked behavior, which has been allowed to go without consequence.
As long as there is MS on WSO, there is a risk for reputational harm, and a responsibility to allow it to be addressed/defended however necessary.
As we all know, a reputation is critical, and someone should not be permitted to attack reputation without consequence or a proper response.
I don't expect everyone to agree with my (somewhat old school) perspective; but I do expect the basic courtesy of proper discussion, without a bunch of immature turnips thinking they can attack reputation without consequence.
Some of us value our honor and reputation, to a very high level, and will defend it to an extreme. I am more than willing to defend my honor/reputation, and I believe that should be permitted/addressed.
Hahaha
You need to touch grass. These are imaginary internet points given to largely anonymous accounts on a forum mostly populated by college and high school students. You said something dumb/tone deaf about WFH and are so grossly threatened by emoji poops that you went back and changed it and are now furiously backpedaling, despite the fact that your reputation on this site is about as meaningful as your rank in Clash of Clans in real life. You might as well be crying about not getting enough upvotes on reddit or ask.com. This isn't about honor you goof. Seriously, grow up jfc
Asking for employers to be notified of MS on certain topics, so that you can defend your honor, is one of the wildest things I've read in my 15+ years on this site.
Clarification: I believe that WSO should modify the MS policy, to minimize potential for permanent reputational harm. Specifically:
• Eliminate the MS number on a profile.
• Eliminate penalties for receiving MS.
Issue here is that MS number on a profile, without context, will give outsiders a negative perception of professional competence of user; and that perpetuates the potential for enduring reputational harm in a serious way.
Based on MS number (out of context), it would suggest a peer-review/professional evaluation of a user. That could be damaging to a professional reputation.
As long as the MS number remains permanently on the profile, it presents a perception of lacking credibility/competence.
It would not be an issue if someone wanted to MS a specific post, if it ended there -- the issue is that the MS number becomes part of your permanent account history (on your profile), without context, which others (media, industry, etc) may assume to be akin to a peer-review type evaluation of a user's professional competence.
If only permitting one (1) account per user (pursuant to WSO terms), then allowing a permanent negative peer-review (MS number on profile) system to exist on a professional website that is often viewed by media, industry, and others; then WSO has a duty to protect that it isn't misused.
Otherwise, WSO is effectively fostering a scenario where random users may cause potential harm to professional reputations, without consequence. That is a dangerous scenario for an industry in which a reputation absolutely matters.
Analogy: That would be like, e.g. if others could anonymously attack your professional reputation and performance on LinkedIn -- or if someone could anonymously tag your permanent resume, to cause reputational damage.
I believe that WSO would be better suited to remove the the MS number, displayed permanently on the user profile, and to eliminate any site penalty for receiving MS on a post. That would mitigate potential misuse, and protect all those involved.
Otherwise, it promotes and perpetuates conflict and potentially life-altering issues to those of each side, as better avoided.
I believe that eliminating the permanent (and out of context) MS number on profile, and eliminating penalties for MS, would best serve the community, and would promote more positive outcomes to all involved.
I could be wrong but I feel like most MFs (except BX) you could get away with Friday WFH, and potentially Thursday once in a while (e.g. travelling red-eye Wednesday, work remotely Thursday and taking Friday off).
Agree that you should show up AT LEAST thrice a week in this industry, like it or not, and better four times. The career impact of coming in on Friday vs. not seems minimal IMO.
MM/UMM in NY, 5 days/wk. Sorry zoomers.
Apollo investment team in NY is 4 days in office (Friday WFH)
are most funds (including HF/asset managers etc) also mandating their "back office" staff like FC, FD, Head of Finance type positions in office 100% too are more lenient on that side of things?
I closed 8 high-growth, quality, investments during WFH - and even though I grew up in this industry 5-7 days a week in office, I will never push for fulltime again, for myself or my juniors, seeing the efficiencies we had during that time.
The only reason any firm wants to be in office full time (as opposed to some hybrid) is because partners want to get away from their family; change my mind.
A beacon of the light, a true hero.
Few things annoy me more than being a hardo for the sake of being a hardo. Fuck that.
Big reason I never went down the MF route. Will take flexibility over prestige 9 times out of 10.
lol my partners forced us back in the office in NYC the entire pandemic because they couldn’t stand being home with their families for the 2 months we were remote. The number of “successful” senior partners who literally hate their wives and resent their children is so high in this industry. Would rather commute 30-45 min on the train each way to sit around the office than spend that time with their families.
Berkshire is 4 days a week, Friday is WFH
I think that is reasonable, actually, but perhaps more of an 'as needed' in the office scenario, in case something comes up.
Friday remains a minimal day, beyond addressing loose ends; and I think is often possible without being in-office present.
Perhaps surprising to some, I'm not really against a Friday WFH option.
EQT 4 days in office
Beatae delectus excepturi earum qui voluptatem. Nisi ut accusantium similique nesciunt sit. Quaerat non autem beatae ut occaecati ab sit.
Veritatis enim asperiores quo consequuntur quibusdam laborum ut dolores. Molestiae modi iusto a voluptatem ea est est. Id ea quia distinctio maiores accusamus perspiciatis aut. Ex ex quia animi fugiat. Nisi doloremque quis suscipit consectetur dolores vero sint. Rerum dolorum quia aspernatur. Molestias omnis officiis sit totam sequi.
Quisquam saepe qui consectetur consequatur expedita. Commodi voluptatem et provident minima labore ex alias voluptate. Maiores voluptas qui nulla doloribus impedit ab reprehenderit. Voluptas consectetur consectetur labore dolor cupiditate molestiae. Iusto alias asperiores et pariatur aliquid ut sed.
Nulla ut occaecati eaque inventore nisi. Aliquid eligendi perspiciatis necessitatibus ut et ut enim. Aperiam quis quas nam et earum sit. Voluptatem asperiores repellendus dolores molestias quis incidunt omnis totam. Consequatur minima et voluptatem vel. Impedit vel provident voluptatibus sed minus officiis aliquid. Tempora nulla aut et ab.
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...
Laborum eligendi soluta quos hic corrupti recusandae. Illum facilis unde sit recusandae enim corporis. Accusamus est ut qui. Quibusdam aperiam aut quia laborum laborum.
Aut dolor sapiente in commodi aperiam ad quo mollitia. Quasi et quo quod maiores laborum illo quasi ratione. Itaque fugiat sunt optio facilis.
Consequatur iure in mollitia nisi quibusdam rerum. Eum et omnis veritatis corporis. Aliquam qui quia eligendi atque provident laboriosam. Itaque ipsa tempora explicabo deleniti. Consequuntur voluptates amet voluptatum perspiciatis est et at. Ipsum quis ut est exercitationem quidem nisi. Sit non magnam sequi ut minima.
Omnis quo amet eum quae. Dolorem quis autem quaerat in. Maiores nam laboriosam laboriosam provident incidunt maiores sit ea. Ut quibusdam deleniti quo illo reiciendis consequuntur. Est qui qui nam quasi.