Which stage of investing feels most like a 'team sport'?
I'm a second year Associate at a UMM fund starting to get serious about what comes next after my Associate stint. For context I came from MBB.
I really like the core diligence aspect of investing - doing research, running calls, talking to management, forming a view on a business, building a model to see if we can make the math work, etc. - but one part of my PE job I really don't enjoy is how isolating it is. I feel like a hired gun almost, going from VP to VP in a very transactional way. This is a pretty sharp contrast to my time at MBB, where I had a strong nuclear team that I felt connected to in a way that I really enjoyed. As I look ahead I'm trying to think through which stage of investing would give me more of that "team" feel while still allowing me to do the core diligence work I love.
My current hypothesis is HF is probably out because it's even more isolating than PE, and VC may not offer enough diligence work to satisfy me (at least early stage). That makes me think Growth Equity may be the right fit, but curious to hear from anyone with a POV. I'm also open to the consideration PE is actually the most likely to feel like a team, I just need to find a different fund.
Any thoughts?
I work at a UMM ($8bn+ fund) and cover a specifically industry vertical and our sector team is 6 people (2 associates, 1 senior associate, 1 VP ,1 Principal, 1 Partner) and my experience so far (8 months into the job) has felt like a team sport.
Granted being the associate I'm not quarterbacking the deal but I work with the same folks 24/7 and we all work on the same deal so well my tasks in itself (building models/ writing investment memos) isn't necessarily the most stimulating tasks I do feel like I'm part of a team.
With that being said, maybe you just need to find a smaller shop and join a smaller group?
Do you get the sense that those more senior than you feel the same? Just wondering if it’s structural for now.
I think it is hard to categorize entire strategies as individual or team. Probably comes down more to individual funds and their cultures.
Smaller teams/shops create a team-like atmosphere.
From my experience I don’t believe growth equity will be a different dynamic from what you’re describing. There is also likely to be a smaller scope of DD + more of an individual component if there’s a strong sourcing culture
I’m not sure that what you’re describing truly exists in the investing world. A big party of getting more senior is getting better at independently handling / anticipating tasks and delegating where you can
IMO you really only get that "team" feel at the smaller MM/LMM firms. UMM/MFs are more banking 2.0 both in terms of culture and staffing model. You are typically viewed as a "resource" versus a team member, and part of that is driven by the assembly line nature of large firm deal making. Contrast this with smaller firms where as an associate you can be involved in every aspect from LP meetings, marketing events, sourcing, etc. to the point you hopefully are viewed as more than just a processor.
Recusandae aut quaerat beatae qui. Quos a fugit eum nihil nulla. Repellendus enim earum explicabo autem. Molestiae consequatur earum consequatur ea unde voluptas temporibus.
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...