Alles was Sie brauchen, auf einen Blick

A disproportionate number of CEOs have worked in top-consulting firms.

OnDesk recently ran the numbers - they looked at the CEOs of the US’s largest operating companies and analysed where people had started their careers. Of the top 8 most common companies, 6 are consultancies:

‍

‍

In this article, we look into what makes consulting alumni so well-suited to lead organisations. And what this means for you hiring for leadership positions in your team and organisation.

‍

Diverse exposure: versatility for complex challenges

Consultants are exposed to a wide array of industries, challenges, and business models during their careers. This breadth of experience enables them to adapt quickly to new environments, making them invaluable as leaders in dynamic or fast-changing markets.

High-Profile Example:

• Indra Nooyi, former CEO of PepsiCo, leveraged her experience at BCG to navigate PepsiCo’s global expansion and drive innovation in sustainability.

Consultants’ ability to analyse diverse scenarios and develop tailored solutions makes them particularly adept at addressing complex, multi-faceted challenges. This versatility can mean the difference between an executive who only fits into a niche and one who can lead across functions and industries.

‍

Analytical proficiency: a data-driven and structured approach to leadership

Consultants are trained to analyse problems methodically, using data to guide decision-making. For CEOs, this analytical rigour is crucial in navigating uncertainty and driving strategic priorities.

High-Profile Example:

• James Gorman, Chairman and former CEO of Morgan Stanley, used his McKinsey-honed analytical skills to stabilise and grow Morgan Stanley following the 2008 financial crisis.

Hiring managers should value candidates with consulting backgrounds for their ability to synthesise complex information into actionable insights—a skill essential for steering organisations through uncertainty and change.

‍

Strategic insight: long-term thinking for organisational growth

A key focus of consulting is strategy development—defining clear goals, aligning resources, and ensuring execution. This mirrors the core responsibilities of a CEO, making consultants natural fits for leadership roles.

High-Profile Example:

• Sheryl Sandberg, former COO of Meta (Facebook), transitioned from McKinsey to redefine Facebook’s operational strategy, contributing significantly to its growth trajectory.

Candidates with consulting experience bring a proven ability to think beyond immediate challenges and design strategies that position organisations for long-term success.

‍

Extensive networks: access to key relationships

Consultants develop extensive professional networks through interactions with senior executives, cross-functional teams, and industry leaders. These connections often become a powerful asset in leadership roles.

High-Profile Example:

• Sundar Pichai, CEO of Alphabet (Google), utilised the network and insights gained from his time at McKinsey to transition into leadership in the competitive tech industry.

When considering candidates, hiring managers should recognise that consultants often bring with them a wealth of professional relationships that can facilitate partnerships, mentorships, and market opportunities.

‍

Leadership development: coached for executive excellence

Consulting firms invest heavily in leadership development, equipping their employees with early management responsibility and structured training programs. Consultants are often tasked with leading client projects and managing teams early in their careers, giving them a head start in developing the skills required for executive roles.

High-Profile Example:

• Julie Sweet, CEO of Accenture, exemplifies how consulting firms prepare individuals for leadership, transitioning seamlessly into executive roles by leveraging her extensive consulting experience.

This preparation translates into candidates who are not only strategic thinkers but also adept at managing teams, driving results, and navigating high-pressure environments.

‍

What this means for your team and your company

Consultants are a great succession plan for your Board. They will bring with them a broad skillset, proven leadership ability and clear strategic vision. Whilst this is critical in leadership roles, it’s also an invaluable skillset to have throughout your organisation. 

Despite the number of well documented redundancies across consulting, it hasn’t made the market any easier to hire in. We typically find clients are looking for an ex-consultant who has already made the adjustment into “industry”, be that a PE-backed company or an Enterprise business. They’ve therefore built up a track record of delivery and “operating” over the previous 5-10 years.

If you’d like to learn more about how you would bring this type of talent to your team or company, please do let us know.

‍

Earlier in the year, our data showed us that it was the best time to hire in a decade, with the highest level of interest per role we’d seen since COVID. We’ve conducted further analysis, looking at what the bearing this has had on compensation dynamics in the market.

To find out more about hiring with Movemeon get in touch with our team here.

Using our proprietary data, we’ve analysed over one and a half million data points, and seen a seismic shift in the market. Two years ago, there was a large gap between the compensation candidates’ expected for a new job and how much employers were offering. Within just two years this has dropped to historic lows - suggesting that many companies “over-corrected” their salaries and are now effectively over-paying for new joiners.

In this article we look at how the compensation gap has changed over the last five years, driven primarily by supply-demand dynamics. We look at how this varies  by company type, suggesting corporates have over-corrected their compensation, as well as Private Equity and Consultancies but for very different reasons.

Finally, we look at how this picture varies by alumni firm. McKinsey, BCG and Bain alumni have historically commanded a premium in the market, but we’re seeing early indications that this premium is decreasing. MBB expectations have only increased by a modest (and below inflation) level of 2% compared with 4% for the Big4 and 6% for boutiques.

Introducing the Movemeon compensation index and what it says about the market

Below you’ll see how the Movemeon compensation index has tracked over the last five years. We’ve analysed over one and a half million data points going back five years, looking at the gap between expectation and reality when it comes to comp. We see this as a measure of “friction” in the market, and an early indicator of inflationary pressures on wage growth.

For the numbers to make sense, it’s worth a quick recap of who’s in the Movemeon network;

• It’s global: our 75k members are based across the world, with our main hubs in UK, France, DACH, Middle East, APAC and US
• Everyone has worked in a leading consulting or accounting firm: 45% are ex-McKinsey, BCG and Bain; 30% are leading strategy firms; the remainder are the Big4
• They are future leaders and Board members: it’s well documented that McKinsey is the largest future leader factory in the world. The number of ex-consulting and accounting professionals leading companies (from Fortune 500 to PE and VC backed scale-ups) is astounding

How to interpret the numbers:

• 0-25: There’s only a small difference between candidate expectations and compensation offered In other words, it’s a highly efficient market
• 25-50: There’s a manageable difference between candidate expectations and compensation offered.
• 50-75: There’s a marked gap between candidate expectations and compensation offered - a high friction market.
• 75-100: There’s a large and unsustainable gap between candidate expectations and compensation offered - a very high friction market
  ‍

Supply-demand in the hiring market is the driver behind the compensation dynamics

When we plot our hiring and compensation indexes together, it’s clear there’s a very strong causal relationship (an 85% negative correlation). The more in demand ex-consultants are, the more their compensation expectations increase, resulting in a larger compensation gap between job offers and expectations.

‍

Are you now over-paying for new joiners? The compensation gap is at an all-time low

Over the past 5 years, we’ve seen the gap between expectations and job offers hit historic highs of 22% in 2021, before falling way down to  6%, -9% below the historic average.

‍

We had assumed the drivers of the decrease in this gap were candidates re-adjusting their expectations downwards. This is historically what we’ve seen in very competitive hiring markets.

But this has not been the case. Over the past year, compensation expectations within our community have still increased at a healthy rate.  The real driver of the expectation gap has been a very high increase in compensation being offered for jobs. This is clearly unsustainable in the longer-term, and feels like an over-correction in response to the higher consulting salaries and candidate expectations we saw in 2022-23.

For our latest salary information, you can view our benchmarking here.

Over-correction, hard to recruit talent, or paying for the best - how PEs, scale-ups, consultancies and advisories have reacted

When we look at our compensation index by company type, there are some very interesting trends.

Large corporates have a compensation gap of just 2%. This is much lower than historic averages, suggesting they have overcorrected compared with candidates’ expectations.

Scale-ups on the other hand have a gap of 13%. This is in line with historic averages  and suggests that a focus on profitability combined with lower levels of VC-funding have ensured there hasn’t been an over-correction.

In the advisory space the picture is quite surprising. It’s been widely reported that it’s a tough market for consultancies, however, what our data shows is that those who are recruiting are prepared to pay a large premium - 8% in large consultancies, 5% in boutiques. We think this is being driven for two reasons: firstly, firms that are recruiting are growing, and as such are in a position to be paying for high performing (more expensive) talent; secondly, it is a hard market in which to attract ex-consultants given slow growth in the industry as a whole. To make it more appealing, bigger packages are being offered.

Finally, Private Equity is also paying a premium to outstrip expectations. This comes as no surprise and is also in line with historic norms in the sector. Private Equity is focused on attracting the very best, and as such is prepared to pay top decile compensations.

Compensation trends offer further evidence that McKinsey, BCG and Bain have been harder hit by the downturn than other strategy firms

When you look at how compensation expectations have changed by alumni firm, an interesting trend emerges. McKinsey, BCG, Bain alumni have seen the lowest increase in their expectations - a modest (and below inflation) figure of 2.3%. This is broadly in line with other strategy firms, but under half what we’re seeing alumni of boutiques and the Big4 demand.

Despite the higher increase in expectation from boutique and Big4 alumni,  McKinsey, BCG and Bain alumni are still paid a premium of over 12% compared to the median compensation.

If you’d like to find out more about how Movemeon can support your hiring, please get in touch.

Now is the best time to hire in over a decade, and is an opportunity to bring in once-in-a-decade talent - a seismic shift from just two years ago.

We analysed over one and a half million data points to see what's happened to the job market over the past few years, a period characterised by rapid flux: Initially, quantitative easing and COVID drove The Great Resignation and the biggest war for talent we’ve seen since being in business. This market, highly favourable to candidates, was abruptly halted by high inflation and consequent sharp quantitative tightening. The higher cost of capital resulted in some pretty severe re-valuations and a tough trading environment. As a result, reductions in wage costs were required through job cuts and hiring freezes.

What does this mean for employers now? For those in a position to, it's a great time to hire rarely available and exceptional talent.

Jump to:
- Movemeon hiring index
- Have McKinsey, Bain and BCG been hit harder?
- What business types are most popular at the moment?
- Where to find future leaders?

Introducing the Movemeon hiring index and what it says about the market

We use our proprietary data to give an overview of how favourable the hiring market is for employers. Our analysis also explores how this varies for different consulting firm alumni, and people moving into different industries: PE, VC-backed scale-ups and Corporates.

Below is how the index has changed over the last five years. For context, it's worth understanding who the Movemeon community are:

• It’s global: our 75k members are based across the world, with our main hubs in the UK, France, DACH, the Middle East, APAC and the US
• Everyone has worked in a leading consulting or accounting firm: 45% are ex-McKinsey, BCG and Bain; 30% are leading strategy firms; the remainder are the Big4
• They are future leaders and Board members: consultancies make up six of the top eight "CEO factories" (companies whose alumni become CEOs of the largest businesses. And this isn't constrained to just large businesses, with a disproportionate number of unicorns founded by consulting alumni

In terms of interpreting the numbers:

• 0-25: a very hard market to hire in. Focus on retention, as replacing people is going to be hard.
• 25-50: a hard market to hire in. Be proactive and start talent pipelining for key positions.
• 50-75: a good market to hire in. Start looking to take advantage of the market, and strengthen key positions.
• 75-100: an exceptional market to hire in. Look to bring in exceptional talent, that you’ll only get a few chances to snap up.

The Great Resignation feels like a long time ago

After COVID, Movemeon’s hiring index spent a year below 25. This was an incredibly hard time for companies to hire. Increased focus was on retention (compensation rises) and other effective ways to onboard talent (freelance).

During COVID, uncertainty meant hiring pretty much drew to a standstill. In parallel, there were some initial layoffs from industries that were hit hard by COVID. We saw the index reach some of its highest levels from March 2020 to August 2020 - a great market to hire for those in a position to do so.

However, this soon changed. Quantitative easing and large social support packages trickled through, and at a time when everyone was spending less. The resultant economic boom saw companies' hiring intensify. The Great Resignation poured further gas on the fire - with retention dropping sharply at companies. Our index dropped to some of its lowest sustained numbers between March 2021 and March 2022.

Throughout this period, companies were falling over themselves to attract the best candidates as the war for talent intensified. Salaries spiralled as the focus on retention intensified. The freelance market boomed as a quick solution to urgent capacity and capability constraints.

“You see who’s got swimming costumes on when the tide goes out”

W Buffet

With hindsight, we now know this was (hopefully) a once-in-a-lifetime shock to the system.

Just three years on and the picture looks very different. High inflation and consequent quantitative tightening has meant we've gone from one extreme to another. Overhiring has resulted in more radical action in recent months around redundancies, wage reduction, job cuts and hiring freezes.

The tide well and truly went out and, as Warren Buffet would say, it has been a great indication of who had swimming costumes on! With very few companies hiring, and more people looking, the index went from a sustained period under 25 to 100 in just 10 months. It has sustained those levels ever since (although we're seeing some green shoots in Q1 2024).

Have McKinsey, BCG and Bain been hit harder? Or do they just have more options?

When we look at what this has looked like for the alumni of different consultancies, a very interesting picture emerges.

As you can see from the first chart, McKinsey, BCG and Bain went from some of the lowest numbers on the index to the highest number, in a matter of a single year.

When we compare the difference between Q2 2022 and Q2 2023, we see that MBB and the Big4 saw the largest turnarounds in the market. Interestingly the smaller strategy houses and the boutiques seem to have seen less of a shift.

The potential drivers behind this are complex.

It’s hard to determine whether the larger change in McKinsey, BCG, and Bain alumni is driven by just how in demand they were before, or just how many are looking now. Based on our initial analysis, it appears the demand factor plays the larger part.

For the current consultants, it has been reported that more people are being managed out of McKinsey, Bain and BCG than other firms.

For alumni, it’s more complicated. The hardest-hit sectors in 2020-21 (e.g., VC-backed scale-ups; PE post-deal) had a disproportionate flow of MBB consultants doing this type of work.

The other driver could simply be that they have more options. In a highly competitive market, their brands might mean there are still doors open to them. Leading them to be less willing to “sit through” their current work position and proactively look to move.

What we can say is that this is the best time we’ve ever seen to hire alumni from these firms.

Corporates more popular than scale-ups; PE losing its talent edge

We also analysed how this picture varies according to the type of business.

Even in the hiring frenzy of the Great Resignation - Private Equity was a competitive place to find a job. Numbers of people employed in PE has not kept track with growth in terms of assets under management and there has always been strong interest in moving into the sector.

Interestingly, over the last 6 months, we’ve seen the desire from candidates to move into the Corporate and Advisory sectors grow to the same level as into PE.

Now is the best time to hire in a decade

Returning to Warren Buffet’s old adage - those wearing swimming costumes can now take advantage. Companies in a position to take a through-cycle approach, and potentially sacrifice some margin in the short term have a once-in-a-decade opportunity to transform their organisation’s talent.

Consultancies are future leader factories. This has been well documented for years, and recently re-analysed by OnDeck. They looked at the CEOs of the largest operating companies in the US and saw where their alumni came from. We’ve copied the list of the top 8 below, 6 of which are consultancies.

Is now the best time for your business to hire its next CEO?

If you'd like to find out more about how Movemeon can support your hiring, please get in touch.

[hubspot portal="25392842" id="519fa7a4-9f5d-4fc1-9cce-40d189b9a881" type="form"]

Every fortnight or so I run a poll on my LinkedIn. Given my area of expertise, the polls explore consulting careers (in and after consulting) - why people start, why they leave and what they leave for. Typically 600-1,200 people join in (a pretty decent sample size) and overall, these polls have been viewed by over 500,000 people with more than 15,000 participants.

Why do I do these polls about post consulting careers?

Well, unlike many more linear careers, most consulting careers involve leaving consulting. So for a consultant, plotting a career is a bit of a minefield. And if you're trying to hire consulting-trained professionals, how best to attract them can be equally mind-boggling. So, I find the results of these polls particularly enlightening. Why?

• For employers (HR and hiring managers inside and outside of consulting firms), they unlock the secret sauce in retaining or attracting consulting-trained professionals (into roles like strategy, transformation, project management, commercial development, chief of staff etc) by shining a light on how most people think about their consulting careers.
• For consultants, they shed light on how others in the consulting industry feel and behave and accordingly, give you clear references for plotting your consulting career - either in or away from consulting itself.

In this article, I've collated 11 recent polls into 3 topics:

1. Firstly: "Starting a consulting career - why?"
2. Secondly: "Leaving consulting - why?"
3. And finally: "Leaving consulting - what for?"

So, let's get into the data...

Starting a consulting career - why?

Summary: simply put, the majority of people who start a consulting career...

• Don't regret the time spent in consulting (83%);
• Didn't join intending for a lifelong consulting career (88%) / did join as a means to an end (skills, network);
• Don't regret leaving consulting (93%) and;
• Would have been more likely to stay / would return if pay, progression and, especially, working hours improved (80%).

Consultants & former consultants - do you regret the time you spent / are spending in consulting?

Results: (link to data)

When you joined a consulting firm, was it as a "means to an end", or did you envisage a whole career in a consulting firm?

Results below (link to original data)

Do you regret leaving consulting?

Results below (link to original data)

What's the main reason you'd consider switching consulting firms / moving back to consulting?

Results below (link to original data)

Leaving consulting - why?

Summary: simply put, the majority of people leave a consulting career (i.e, leave a permanent role in a consulting firm) in order to...

• Improve their work-life balance / working hours which has..,.
• Deteriorated further during / thanks to covid

What's the main reason you left / would consider leaving consulting?

Results below (link to original data)

Leaving consulting - was work-life balance the main reason (or would it be, if you were to leave in the future)?

Results below (link to original data)

Consultants - how has your work-life balance changed through covid? I'm working..

Results below (link to original data)

Leaving consulting - what for?

Summary: simply put, consultants transition their careers out of consulting along the following lines...

• Scale-ups are the most sought-after company type, but the full range of organisations is appealing (the consulting skill set is extremely transferable so most options are open)
• Most consultants want their career to end up in a P&L or operational leadership role (CEO/COO track) - the most successful companies at hiring ex-consulting talent can show a path to these (typically using strategy / transformation teams as a stepping stone / leadership talent pipeline)
• Freelance consulting is becoming increasingly popular
• Current & former consultants want more data when it comes to choosing post-consulting careers, especially regarding compensation and work-life balance. We're on a mission to provide that - check it out here.

Consultants - what company type do you find most appealing (as a post consulting home)?

Results below (link to original data)

Current & former consultants - what job type would you most like your career to lead to (or for more senior folk, which has it lead to)?

Results below (link to original data)

Freelancing - Are you more of less likely than 12 months ago to consider doing some freelance work?

Results below (link to original data)

Would it be helpful to know which post-consulting careers have the best pay, working hours & job satisfaction?

Results below (link to original data)

Popular Resources

If you're trying to assess your options for a post-consulting career, here are some popular resources:

• Private equity - 29 questions to ask
• What is a Chief of Staff and why do they get hired?
• How to be successful as a freelance consultant
• 30 interviews with industry leaders (who used to be consultants)

Leaving consulting for other industries is more common than staying. There are numerous reasons for this, most notably according to our discussions with movemeon users and the data from the movemeon jobs board:

1. The pyramid structure at most consulting firms means there is an in-built bias towards leaving - often referred to as the "up or out" model.
2. Many people start consulting with every intention of leaving after a few years. It's a conscious means to an end (after building skills and network).
3. The lifestyle can be uncompromising. The long working hours and regular travel can be too much in the long term for many people.
4. The skill set developed in a consulting firm is extremely transferable and highly sought after by all organisations (from startups to multinationals to Private Equity to the 3rd sector). There are numerous classic "post consulting" roles/teams from in-house strategy & transformation, to Chief of Staff to revenue operations.
5. Many people want to "do" rather than "advise". The arms-length nature of consulting can become frustrating for many who prefer to own something and see their impact.

Which are the best career paths for alumni? Based on over 20,000 applications made on the movemeon platform, these are the top industries ex-consultants move to.

BIG CORPORATES

Big corporates are always looking for alumni. Experience in consulting will usually translate into you entering the company at a higher level compared with other people with your years of professional, but not consulting experience. The most typical function for consulting alumni is obviously strategy. However, our analysis of people hired through Movemeon indicates there are other interesting functions for ex-consultants, including operations and product management.

START-UPS

The world of start-ups is an interesting realm for consulting alumni. Compared to consulting firms, they have a very different environment and approach to work. However, the skills acquired in years of projects, data analysis and problem-solving make consultants perfect candidates for founding new start-ups or managing existing ones. This article offers some useful information for consultants who want to start a career in a start-up.

FREELANCE OR BOUTIQUE CONSULTING

After working for years in a consulting firm, even die-hard consultants, the ones who love every aspect of consultancy, might need a bit of a breather. They might also simply wish to be the commanders of their fortune. This is a prime reason why a lot of them decide to open boutique consulting firms or work as freelancers.

PRIVATE EQUITY OR VENTURE CAPITAL

Many consultants develop very strong financial skills during their years in consultancy. These skills prepare them very well and make them very sought after, by financially-minded institutions like private equity or venture capital firms. Consultants’ financial skills, matched with their strong strategic outlook and consulting ‘toolbox’, make these individuals the perfect candidates for PE & VC funds.

FAQs

1. What are the common challenges faced by consultants when transitioning to roles in industry?
   
   Consultants encounter challenges transitioning to roles like big corporates (hierarchy, risk aversion), startups (flexibility, autonomy), freelance (independence, client acquisition), and private equity (due diligence, relationship building). Navigating skill set shifts, adapting to cultures, and managing work-life balance are common hurdles, demanding adaptability and industry-specific expertise for success.
   
   
2. Are there specific industries or sectors within big corporates that tend to attract ex-consultants more than others, and what factors influence their choices in joining a particular function, such as operations or product management?
   
   Ex-consultants often pursue roles in internal strategy or corporate development in large corporations. Decisions are driven by personal interests, skills alignment, industry trends, and networking. Roles in operations, supply chain management, corporate finance, and technology-driven transformations are also popular.
   
   
3. Is there a gap or difference in work culture between consulting firms and start-ups? Are there any specific tips or insights for consultants looking to make a successful transition to the start-up environment?
   
   Consulting and start-ups vary in culture, with consultancies being structured and risk-averse, while start-ups are dynamic and flexible. Transitioning consultants should adapt by being hands-on, entrepreneurial, and developing technical skills. Networking, assessing cultural fit, and embracing ambiguity are vital. Successful transitions require comfort with risk and a genuine passion for the start-up's product or service.

• Explore current opportunities on Movemeon.com
• Solve a business challenge, hire a Movemeon professional
• Join 30,000+ following our Co-Founder, Rich for regular insights on life in and after consulting

Take a look at another popular article: Which pays best, staying in consulting or leaving?

Subscribe to our newsletter to receive our exclusive insights and career tips straight into your inbox every month:

Given the intense competition, receiving an offer to join a private equity firm is quite a significant achievement, and the temptation to accept the offer as soon as you receive it without having done any proper due diligence is thus huge. Overlooking this crucial step of the job-hunting process can lead to serious disappointment in the future and the fast-moving private equity industry is no exception in that respect.

Below are 29 questions that you should ask to ensure you make an enlightened decision.

Fund strategy & positioning

1. How many funds and/or product lines does the firm operate?
   More and more Private equity firms are diversifying their activity to include hedge funds (i.e. public market investing) or debt vehicles. Each business line requires a particular approach and investment strategy. As a consequence, this can give you a feel for the variety of the work (in terms of investment type) that you will face. Beware though; like any organisation, a firm that spreads across too many lines is likely to feel a bit disorganised.
   
   
2. What kind of assets does the company invest in? There are primarily two types of assets in private equity: companies and infrastructure. Again, referring to the first post of my series, the nature of the work differs between those two environments.
   
   
3. What is the fund's investment strategy? Each fund will more or less strictly position itself within a spectrum going from "distressed" (i.e. underperforming and close to bankruptcy) to "glamorous" or "high-growth" assets. The price paid but more importantly, the type of work and situations you will encounter will depend on the strategy. In a distressed fund, you should expect to be involved in heavy restructuring and cost-cutting programs. In a growth context, you will spend much of your time finding ways to develop the business' top-line.
   
   
4. What is the size of the fund? What is the fund's sweet spot in terms of enterprise value or equity cheque? As mentioned in the first post of this series, the type of work you will do will significantly differ if you join a small-cap (<$250m roughly), mid-cap ($250m to $1bn) or large-cap fund. The equity cheque (i.e. the amount the fund itself invests in a given company) is intimately linked to the fund size since a fund will typically make between 8 and 20 investments as well as to the enterprise value sweet spot since roughly 50% of the acquisition price will be paid by raising debt.
   
   
5. Which stage of the company's lifecycle does the fund invest in? As mentioned in an earlier post, private equity funds as a whole cover the entire company lifecycle, from birth (seed or VC) to maturity (LBO). You should expect VCs to be more "gut-feel" based whereas LBOs require deeper due diligence and involve a significant amount of financial structuring (absent in VCs which very often can only raise equity).
   
   
6. Where is the fund present? Where does the fund invest? On one hand, a global fund will limit country-specific risk exposure. On the other hand, the more global the fund, the more you will have to travel - especially if the office network is relatively loose, e.g. only one office to cover the whole of Europe.
   
   Practically speaking, the geographical remit is defined in two ways. First, investors sign a term sheet that formally defines the areas where the General Partners (or "GPs", i.e. the members of the private equity firm) can and cannot invest. Second, and more importantly, GPs have their own "comfort zone", which is often a subset of the theoretically authorised area. This question is important for you as it will determine the amount of travel you can expect from this job as well as the extent of the cultural gap you may face when meeting with management teams.
   
   
7. What kind of industries does the fund invest in? The majority of funds are "sector-agnostic" and will invest indifferently in all industries. Some (most often smaller ones) have specialised in one or a handful of industries, typically Retail or Tech.
   
   
8. Does the fund do minority and/or majority deals? By definition, if the fund only does minority deals it will rarely be able to exert full control over the company and therefore you should expect more time to be spent on the due diligence - to ensure that the business "as it is" is a good one. This situation is relatively rare in private equity as opposed to hedge funds
   
   
9. Is the fund committed or raised on a deal-by-deal basis? A committed fund will offer more stability and less dependence on market conditions. Furthermore, a firm seeking investor funding on a deal-by-deal basis may feel the pressure to invest regularly to keep momentum with investors, even if the climate or opportunities are not optimal.

Track record

1. When did the firm raise funds for the last time? This question will give you a feel for the type of work you will be doing. If the fund is recent (less than 2-3 years), you should expect to spend most of your time sourcing deals and executing investments for this new fund. If the fund is older, portfolio management ("harvesting") should take a growing share of your bandwidth.
   
   
2. Has the firm raised more than one fund? First-time funds can appear attractive because of their entrepreneurial nature and their subsequent potential. If the first fund is successful the second will be larger and the team will grow, potentially creating "upward gaps". However, growth in private equity is more often achieved through external hiring rather than internal promotion, so you should always consider career upside potential with a bit of caution.
   
   
3. How does the actual fundraising amount compare with the fundraising target? In the current environment, with liquidity being more than abundant, a fund not meeting its fundraising target has run out of favour with investors and such momentum is very difficult to reverse, so I advise you to stay away. Some funds exceed their target, but many will stop when they reach it in order not to overstretch their teams.
   
   
4. How does the latest actual fundraising amount compare with previous actuals? Fund growth is a clear indicator of momentum and expected team size evolution. In particular, if the firm has been raising a decreasing amount of money, it means investors are less and less convinced and, unless the firm manages to come up with a series of mind-blowing investments, you should expect the trend to continue and therefore the team to keep shrinking.
   
   
5. How have previous funds performed? Given the illiquid and long-term nature of private equity (funds have a 10-year lifespan), it takes time for struggling funds to be entirely wiped out of the market. An early indicator consists of benchmarking the latest funds' IRR. If those IRRs are disappointing, it will only be a matter of time before investors are free to switch their funds to another destination.
   
   
6. Has the fund made recent investments? A fund may decide to slow or fasten its investment pace depending on market conditions. However, a fund that has not put any money to work over the last 18 months is more likely struggling to source interesting deals and this should raise a flag.
   
   
7. How fragmented is the Limited Partner (or "LPs", i.e. investor) base? I am always concerned with "one-LP" funds where one investor has the practical right of life and death over the fund. I believe this not only creates uncertainty about the future of the fund in case of headwinds (both at fund and investor level) but also there is a risk of seeing the LP interfering with investment decisions (creating useless friction).

Operating model

1. How large is the firm globally? In London? A classic question. All funds started with very small teams and an entrepreneurial spirit, but some have grown so much that this early flavour may have disappeared quite significantly.
   
   
2. Are there other offices? If so, where? Where are the headquarters? What is the role of London? The worst case for you is to join a US-based fund which considers London (and Europe in general) as non-core to their strategy and as such does not give you a lot of consideration and does not involve you in the investment decisions. Fortunately, London is a strong financial place and such situations are rare (at least rarer than if you were applying in Paris or Madrid).
   
   
3. Are there investment committee members based in London? Building on the previous question, a negative answer will likely indicate that the office has been primarily set up to perform local sourcing and execute deals when told by the headquarters, which reduces the amount of autonomy you will enjoy and subsequently the interest of the job.
   
   
4. How is staffing decided? Are there teams dedicated to particular geographies/industries/product lines? This question will help you assess whether you are going to develop particular expertise or whether you are going to remain quite a generalist. Both approaches have their own pluses and minuses, but in any case, you would like to ensure that your prospective employer does not plan to specialise you in an industry you do not fancy.
   
   
5. Is there a dedicated operations team? If so, how large is it, what are its remit and background? If an operations team exists, you should expect to be consequently less involved in commercial and operational aspects of the due diligence and/or portfolio management.

People & culture

1. Where do people come from? PE professionals typically come from a mix of investment banking, consulting, accountancy/Transaction Services and Corporate. The way of approaching investments is influenced by this background.
   
   
2. How would you define the fund's culture? Some funds have an American culture, which as a Frenchman I would define as direct and energetic, others have a more British inclination, softer and possibly more political. This does not mean that one is generally better than the other but you need to make sure that the culture fits your way of working and interacting with others.
   
   
3. How many (net) additions to the team have there been in the last 24 months? In the investment team alone? The "fund size evolution" question, should help you assess the momentum the firm is benefiting from. A shrinking team is almost always a bad sign - the fund is losing momentum or struggling to attract talents to fill the gaps.
   
   
4. How many people have left the fund over the last 24 months? If you exclude "defined-length" contracts (such as the Associates program), churn should be low: jobs in private equity are rare, and people tend to stick to their seats if their role is interesting and if they believe the firm has decent future prospects. If churn is high (say more than 30% of the firm was renewed over the last 2 years), at least one of the two previously mentioned conditions was broken.
   
   
5. Who are the senior sponsors of the fund? Each private equity fund is chaired and/or advised by highly respected individuals within the investment industry. Such personalities act as a stamp of approval and tend to facilitate fundraising. Conversely, you should proceed carefully with not or weakly endorsed funds.
   
   
6. Can I meet the rest of the team? Private equity firms are small companies and the personal fit is even more important than in consulting - imagine that you will spend many years working with the same people on a series of projects. I thus encourage you to meet as many team members as possible to assess this fit.

Compensation and career path

1. Who has access to carried interest? How is carried interest computed? Carried interest (i.e. the performance fee that general partners receive when their investments generate an IRR in excess of a certain threshold) amounts to a very significant share of your compensation, especially at senior level. Always useful to know when you will be entitled to receive a share of the pie. Most often carried interest is computed and shared at fund level; however, a few funds (e.g. CVC Capital Partners) are famous for their "deal-by-deal carry structure".
   
   
2. What is the typical career path? You need to understand whether there is a "glass ceiling" that you will never be able to go through. Many US funds have formal fixed-term Associate programs which imply that you will need to leave after 2-3 years. Other funds may encourage investment professionals to leave once they reach a given tenure if there is no room for additional senior managers or partners. In any case, you should feel free to ask for specific examples.

FAQs

1. What are the potential drawbacks or challenges associated with joining a private equity fund that has recently raised funds (less than 2-3 years old), and how might the job responsibilities differ in comparison to joining a more established fund?
   
   Joining a private equity fund that has recently raised funds (less than 2-3 years old) may involve a greater emphasis on sourcing deals and executing investments for the new fund. This could mean a higher focus on building the fund's portfolio and establishing its presence in the market. The nature of the work may lean more towards the early stages of fund management, with portfolio management gaining prominence as the fund matures over time.
   
   
2. How can I assess the cultural fit within a private equity firm, especially considering the different cultural inclinations between American and British-founded funds mentioned in the post?
   
   Assessing cultural fit within a private equity firm involves understanding the underlying cultural dynamics, such as American or British inclinations. For instance, American cultures might be characterized as direct and energetic, while British cultures may be perceived as softer and possibly more political. You should consider your own working style and preferences to ensure alignment with the cultural nuances of the firm, as this can significantly impact job satisfaction and collaboration.
   
   
3. In the context of private equity fund size and fundraising, what are the implications for my career progression and job responsibilities based on whether the fund exceeds its fundraising target, stops at the target, or falls short of the target?
   
   The fundraising performance of a private equity fund can influence career progression and job responsibilities. If a fund exceeds its fundraising target, it might indicate strong investor confidence and potential team growth, creating upward career opportunities. Conversely, a fund that falls short of its target may face challenges, potentially leading to a shrinking team. Understanding the fund's fundraising success provides valuable insights into its momentum and the trajectory of the team, helping candidates make informed decisions about their long-term career prospects.
   
   

Continue reading the private equity series:

• 12 usual activities of a private equity associate
• The double-edged sword of working in private equity
• 9 principles to help you break in
• All private equity funds were not created equal
• When to look for the boarding gate?

Subscribe to our newsletter below to receive our exclusive insights and career tips straight into your inbox every month:

Explore jobs at Private Equity Firms on our free platform - it takes 2 minutes to sign up here