If Schwab is serious about expense management, start holding MD levels accountable.
Not sure how many are in STS about 50% can be reduced… they all just enable politics and misdirection as they are not needed…. If we already have 2 MD layers why are 1-2 more layers needed?
Such a wasteful org model, and mismanaged dept that is hindering our firm. Starts at the top.
10 replies (most recent on top)
And on top of that now a restructure in CTO and CIO org.
Advisor Services Sech org is bloated with nothing much to show but the custody asset growth is what they take pride on
You guys obviously don’t understand. They purpose for all the layers of management is to insulate the decision makers from the consequences of their policies. There are tons of layers so that the “leadership” can blame someone else while not being held accountable for those decisions. It is a feature not a bug of bureaucracy. But yes, you are obviously correct.
Amen! What do any directors do?
My MD spins a wheel and gives out Gift Cards once a quarter. Zero Technical or People Skills. Why do we even have such folks working at Schwab is beyond me.
@b3 And yet they are giving MORE responsibility to the mastermind of the endless STS inefficiencies! Can only shake your head and repeat to yourself, "Not my problem, move on as soon as something better comes up"
I agree. If the firm is serious about expense management, MD levels are the obvious place to start.
In my department over the past five or so years, experienced leaders, however flawed, were pushed out and replaced with MDs who arrived through connections rather than qualifications.
Teams have been told for years there’s no budget for raises, backfills, tools, or even basic support, while the firm continues to overpay MDs and fund unnecessary travel, including off-sites, site visits, leadership conferences, and the high-end dinners and drinks that come with them.
All-hands meetings are filled with self-congratulation and MD storytelling about new homes, second homes, ranch life, and travel plans, framed as “authentic sharing,” but completely disconnected from a system where resources are reserved for those who already have them.
If cost-cutting is truly the priority, the excess isn’t hard to find.
Wow what an interesting thread. Everyone is advocating to increase the level or work, ownership, number of direct reports for the same pay. Sounds right In line with the EC... Work more for the same pay.
Reality is most sr managers and directors are below market rate for the size of responsibility. That said they still work 1/2 the hours of a tech company so guess that's that.
Either way feels either they need to raise director pay and shove more meds into a director level if that's what this thread is about?
And too many managers! Why do we need so many managers? They contribute nothing but just increase our work load.
It’s not just MD layers. It’s roles and time to get all the buy-in.
Governance, budget, strategy, and architecture represent a 50x cost compared to actual needed implementation and operations. It would be fantastic if that 50x resulted in greater downstream efficiencies, but it doesn’t. It’s mostly overhead.
And I say that as someone who contributes to that overhead.
We’ve failed so many initiatives and haven’t cleaned house. The CIO and CTO have failed, but their failures are hidden in changed objectives and reinterpreted KPIs.
STS might be accountable if the business didn’t make obscene money to cover epic failures.
I work in STS and agree the MD layers are exhausting. Just the amount of time needed to educate and provide status on my projects is just for them then they argue on directions and requirements.
I agree we can operate more focused with that layer having Plans in place. So much overhead and people not assigned to a product or application