What do these "Vice President" titles mean at Financial firms? (finance, investment)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In Corporate America (big business) a VP is a significant title that usually has a reporting structure reporting into CEO/CFO.
Banking basically anyone with a few years experience is a VP Comparable to a Senior role in a corporate America). Banks offer big titles with little pay and responsibilities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWoodle
At a bank maybe it means they get an office with a door that closes. In the office they can set up certain types of accounts. Loans, CD's etc. A teller just does deposit/withdraw transactions. These days with Covid you may have to make an appointment to see the VP. You just get in line if there is any for the teller.
The OP isn’t asking about the titles at banks. The ask is at wealth management/investment firms which are largely tied to revenue hurdles
Banking basically anyone with a few years experience is a VP Comparable to a Senior role in a corporate America). Banks offer big titles with little pay and responsibilities.
It's not equivalent/comparable; in fact, you state as such (and contradict) yourself. In other words, big titles and low pay/responsibilities (which I agree) is not comparable to a VP/Senior role in Corporate America, particularly depending upon what you are quantifying and qualifying as a 'senior role'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowexpectations
The OP isn’t asking about the titles at banks. The ask is at wealth management/investment firms which are largely tied to revenue hurdles
They actually are quite similar (whether banks/wealth management and so on) meaning a promotion of sorts, or salary rank - but not necessarily relative to increased (or even managerial) responsibilities.
It contrasts dramatically with the role of VP/senior VP and particularly C-level executives within the (standard corporate) hierarchy elsewhere.
They actually are quite similar (whether banks/wealth management and so on) meaning a promotion of sorts, or salary rank - but not necessarily relative to increased (or even managerial) responsibilities.
The difference between a bank and wealth mgmt are often time pretty clear. In wealth mgmt the titles are most often driven by the revenue you generate personally where banks thats not the driver. By that metric alone they aren’t even close to similar
Quote:
It contrasts dramatically with the role of VP/senior VP and particularly C-level executives within the (standard corporate) hierarchy elsewhere.
While I’d agree that neither are close to true C level it doesn’t mean the bank vs wealth mgmt are similar in nature
The difference between a bank and wealth mgmt are often time pretty clear. In wealth mgmt the titles are most often driven by the revenue you generate personally where banks thats not the driver. By that metric alone they aren’t even close to similar
The (obviously) relevant point is not the differences between investment banks/wealth management; but rather, their similarities, per the thread, in terms of structure and titles relative to salary rank/promotion in the (often) absence of managerial function, particularly notable comparatively to corporate heirarchy elsewhere.
The (obviously) relevant point is not the differences between investment banks/wealth management; but rather, their similarities, per the thread, in terms of structure and titles relative to salary rank/promotion in the (often) absence of managerial function, particularly notable comparatively to corporate heirarchy elsewhere.
The differences are important because the op inquiry wasn’t about bank employees and how you obtain the titles are not similar.
The difference between a bank and wealth mgmt are often time pretty clear. In wealth mgmt the titles are most often driven by the revenue you generate personally where banks thats not the driver. By that metric alone they aren’t even close to similar
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorporateCowboy
The (obviously) relevant point is not the differences between investment banks/wealth management; but rather, their similarities, per the thread, in terms of structure and titles relative to salary rank/promotion in the (often) absence of managerial function, particularly notable comparatively to corporate heirarchy elsewhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowexpectations
The differences are important because the op inquiry wasn’t about bank employees and how you obtain the titles are not similar.
How one obtains the title of VP relative to a financial firm/investment bank and so on (vs. elsewhere in the corporate world) is the basis of the entire point, lol. It has everything to do with the differences in corporate structure elsewhere in that it doesn't always (or even typically) involve any managerial function in the former. This is exactly why it's relative to the thread (and VP titles in Finance, as a whole) - per OP's thread title.
What do these "Vice President" titles mean at Financial firms? (commission, corporations)
Quote:
Originally Posted by britaintowsend
I was surfing online at these Financial Firms (ie. Morgan Stanley, Charles Schwabb, etc),
and I came across their financial advisor's contact pages.
A few just have "Financial Advisor" as their title.
But then for multiple others, under Financial Advisor, I see Vice President.
And some VP titles has additional rankings such as:
Vice President
First Vice President
Executive Vice President
Senior Vice President
What do these "Vice President" mean in their titles??
When I was in banking, titles like Vice President were often given out not just to Financial Advisors (FCs) but to others in sales like Loan Officers, Business Bankers and Branch Managers.
The reasons why are quite similar. The idea was to help them to make sales, to impress the potential client who hopefully thinks they are dealing with someone more important and experienced then they might actually be. Some of the people I worked with deserved the titles, some did not.
These titles were courtesy titles but carried no actual authority. However, each corporation or firm might have slightly different rules.
How one obtains the title of VP relative to a financial firm/investment bank and so on (vs. elsewhere in the corporate world) is the basis of the entire point, lol. It has everything to do with the differences in corporate structure elsewhere in that it doesn't always (or even typically) involve any managerial function in the former. This is exactly why it's relative to the thread (and VP titles in Finance, as a whole) - per OP's thread title.
Maybe you simply don’t understand the title attainment at a bank vs investment firm. If you were are it would be more than obvious at the difference at the OP specifically mentioned two investment firms so how Jimbo at a chase bank branch got a title is irrelevant
Maybe you simply don’t understand the title attainment at a bank vs investment firm. If you were are it would be more than obvious at the difference at the OP specifically mentioned two investment firms so how Jimbo at a chase bank branch got a title is irrelevant
Clearly, you aren't understanding the attainment of VP/titles in Finance as a whole (per the thread), nor do you understand you are essentially stating the same thing i.e. bank vs. investment firm (essentially a catch-all for the asset management sector of the financial industry - banks included).
Quote:
Originally Posted by LINative
When I was in banking, titles like Vice President were often given out not just to Financial Advisors (FCs) but to others in sales like Loan Officers, Business Bankers and Branch Managers.
These titles were courtesy titles but carried no actual authority.
Agreed re: no actual authority (though 'courtesy title' is hilarious) i.e. it's void of any managerial function (and certainly saturated/meaningless, as a whole, per the thread).
Clearly, you aren't understanding the attainment of VP/titles in Finance as a whole (per the thread), nor do you understand you are essentially stating the same thing i.e. bank vs. investment firm (essentially a catch-all for the asset management sector of the financial industry - banks included).
The ask in the OP wasn’t about finance as a whole. The specific reference was investment firms of which I’ve spent more than a couple of decades at. To suggest I don’t understand the difference is pure ignorance. I understand the difference and have outlined how the two are different. You are arguing in a space I’m well versed in and you clearly aren’t
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What do these "Vice President" titles mean at Financial firms? (commission, corporations)
