Mid-Level Titles in Development
I work for a smaller development firm where basically all the senior front-office folks are principals (they had a long hiring pause post-recession). I started as an analyst and am now being promoted, but since there isn't much precedent for my position I'm in the unique position of being able to decide what my title should be.
It seems like industry standard for a person of my position is to be called one of Project Manager (which I don't like because it feels too much like a field title), Development Manager, or Development Associate. I'm leaning towards Development Manager but would like to hear your guys' opinions.
The only reason this really matters is because I don't quite myself staying at this shop and would like to retain flexibility in my appeal to other firms moving forward. I'm could see myself moving away from development to a true PE/capital allocator or a hybrid-oriented shop (have had no problem landing these types of interviews as an analyst but haven't really fully committed to a transition yet). How do you think these types of firms would perceive a 'Development Manager' applying to an Associate position? Would my brand be too development-y? Or if I were to shoot for an institutional developer like a Brookfield, any chance a 'Development Manager' applying for a Development Associate role would be weird (idk it just feels a little more senior)? Maybe I'm overthinking things but would like to hear some thoughts. Thanks in advance.
Managing Director
Haha, should've added the caveat of within reason
Development Associate is the title given at most of the larger, blue chip shops (Greystar, Hines, CIM, etc)
Development Manager is usually given at smaller, more lean shops. A lot of Development Managers work more closely with the architects and GCs in my experience.
Associate is more in step with REPE (Investment Associate) and other areas of finance (IB, PE, etc). Sounds like you're looking to get into the LP world, so I would suggest you call yourself a Development Associate.
in my experience working for/interacting with all sized development shops and talking to recruiters, the perception of seniority in titles in development generally trends as: development analyst, to development associate, to development manager, to development director/VP, to MD/principal. I think most recruiters will tell you a DM suggests more experience than an associate.
Interesting, did not know Development Manager normally indicates more experience than Development Associate.
It's odd to me that so many people in this thread don't see this as the norm, but then again, titles in real estate and all
Consider throwing in the word 'senior' if you feel comfortable. 'Senior Development Associate' has a much better ring to it than 'Development Associate.'
I think it’s pretty moot. The years of experience and project experience trump any title. This is CRE, after all. Positions are not typically structured across the firms.
agreed, but HR has literally zero idea about experience and jobs
Take a look at the shops you'd ideally like to work at and see how they use titles. I agree with Malta Monkey's view on this. At blue chip shops Development Associates are typically more on the commercial side of developments (acquisitions, capital raising, leasing, dispositions), whereas DMs are more on the delivery side (overseeing the design team, dealing with procurement etc.).
Don't worry about. Project Manager is fine. Anywhere you transition to is going to care about your experience and expertise and aren't going to care about your title. If you can walk the walk in addition to have [Impressive Title XYZ] then it won't matter what it says in those brackets.
That being said, it can be helpful for your current position to have a "more senior" title. I find that talking to gov't officials, contractors, etc that having "Manager" or a title they recognize as one of decision-making ability in it, gets you a lot further in the door than might otherwise be the case when negotiating terms
deleted
Eos nulla quod odit veniam. Et in numquam cum quia. Temporibus in quam accusantium et error et. Nam et numquam hic dicta rem quia sed.
Fugit et accusantium aspernatur et quis. Quibusdam mollitia inventore tempora adipisci maxime officia. Libero et tempore velit architecto dicta. Sed tempora sed neque ea labore dolor eaque ut. Et quas aspernatur qui 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...