Not feeling hot about your career lately? Needing some love from TPTB? Apparently one E&Y office is taking a stab at a solution. Not a Starbucks card. Not a year’s subscription to the jelly-of-the-month club. And sorry, Christmaskah is still cancelled. No, this is a completely arbitrary way to win your love.
According to a tip we received, in the Dallas office, all positions that are manager and above are now known as “executives”. As if you didn’t need another reason to stick around until making manager.
Despite the much needed kick-start this may give to the psyche of managers, won’t this cause confusion among the staff?
Manager, director, partner. Simple. If everyone is considered an “executive” the whole hierarchy might become meaningless. And if there’s no hierarchy, we very well may have chaos.
The other problem is that some people take their title very SERIOUSLY. Ever called a “senior manager” a “manager” by mistake? You haven’t known the wrath of an unmerciful, passive-aggressive God if you haven’t. Now if you accidently forget that someone is also an “executive”…Watch out.
It’s not entirely clear if this is a firmwide thing so run it by Steve-o tonight or discuss your feelings on this latest attempt to rally the troops (some of you anyway) in the comments.
blog comments powered by Disqus
One time I was auditing a regional retail bank. Everyone was a vice-president. They did that so that customers feel like they are dealing with someone that matters and are therefore getting better service.
Based on this logic, I think all professionals (above intern) in public should be executives.
You are a shitty auditor if that is what you think. Banks use the role of VP so much because they are mandated to name certain people as bank officers based on their role within the organization and fiduciary responsibility and thus because they are an office they are titled as VPs. You dipshit.
@2, a little angry no? Perhaps you were an illustrious “VP” of a bank yourself in the past
@2 – can you name the authority under which it is “mandated” that a bank name certain people as officers?
And correct me if I’m wrong, but how VP doesn’t necessarily = officer.
typo – but VP doesn’t necessarily = officer.
A VP is an officer title. Have you worked at a bank @4/5?
@ 6 – just having a title of VP does not make you an officer. Sounds like someone’s a little angry because they just realized their important VP title really means nothing. Congrats on being a secretary’s secretary
FDI Act mandates it. As well as the bank holding company act. It is a bullshit title but that is the rationale why so many people in banks are named VP.
Here is the link to the FDI act:
http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/1000-100.html
Here is the link to the bank holding act:
http://www.fdic.gov/regulations/laws/rules/6000-100.html
Where does it mention that banks have to have 20 million VP’s?
This is old news. When I had E&Y auditing my company during 2008, they used this term freely. NYC based team…and yes they will correct their clients if you get the title wrong. Let me tell you, the manager and senior manager were far from Execs and it was a judgement call on the partner.
This is really much ado about nothing. We don’t use the term “executive” outside the firm, and particularly not with clients. It’s used in the context of when we’re, say, inviting people to planning meetings, where it’s only the senior members of the team (senior manager, executive directors, and partners) or to training, which is geared to executives.
Your tippor in the Dallas office is full of it.
@11 – False. I’ve heard several EY auditors use that at client sites.
Gee, 12, I guess you’re as stupid as they are.