Difference between vice presidents and directors
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
I can't understand what is a middle manager vs a senior leader anymore. Many of my friends are in finance, yet they all seem to be VPs. But they aren't VPs of the entire bank,.l just some small branch or office or something. But then there are VPs and senior VPs. My other friends are directors at other companies where it seems harder to move up. Are they equivalent to VPs? But then there's associate director, director, and senior director......
I always thought there was only one VP at a company, and they were #2 overall next to the CEO/President. And I can't tell anymore what the difference is between a manager vs the 3 levels of director. |
Anonymous
| It varies entirely from company to company. My corp has both VPs and directors. We also have multiple CEOs. And presidents. Don't ask me why. Best I've heard is that VPs are strategically oriented while directors are delivery oriented. |
Anonymous
| Finance is notorious for making everyone a VP. |
Anonymous
Been true my entire adult life. |
Anonymous
|
VP at citi is a junior manager
Director at Morgan Stanley is like a senior associate |
Anonymous
| Depends. We have multiple VPs. They can make big decisions for the company and sign documents. Directors can't. |
Anonymous
| Director is one step lower than CFO? |
Anonymous
Thisis pretty accurate for banks. VPs are considered "officers" of the bank and can sign and bind a broader range of transactions. Which can raise some problems because banks have so many. For example, I was involved in a transaction years ago where we had to have every officer to sign under Pennsylvania law. Our client had nearly 2000 officers. |
Anonymous
Which confuses me even more. So I'm understanding this in finance as: Manager > VP > Director > executive director > CEO Is that somewhat accurate? Then at other companies we have Team leader > manager > associate director >director > senior director> executive director > VP > senior VP > CEO Correct? I thought it was something simple like Worker > manager > director > VP > CEO |
Anonymous
|
My son is 25 and all his friend who work in finance or for banks are called VP on LinkedIn.
I was laughing about it and my son was not understanding why 3 years experience and VP or even associate VP lowers the meaning of VP. |
Anonymous
For Citi is analyst - AVP - VP - SVP - Director - managing director Morgan Stanley - associate, director, VP, executive director Carlyle senior analyst - manager - AVP - VP - principal - MD (some MDs are IC making over a million without managerial responsibility). JP Morgan - VP SVP ED MD Cap1 senior analyst principal analyst manager - senior manager - director - senior director - VP So VP can mean a first year manager or high earning IC or executive. |
Anonymous
Yeah, maybe I'm old, but I was always under the impression there was only 1 VP who is #2 overall next to the President/CEO. Clearly VP these days means low level worker with a few years experience. It's kinda crazy how watered down that title has become in certain industries. |
Anonymous
Not if they are paid VP level and have managers of managers. |
Anonymous
| At my company, VPs are primarily producers but may have a team under them. Directors are the lowest level managers which includes HR, budgeting, regional administration, etc. |
Anonymous
+2 |