Related Posts
Additional Posts in Accounting
How hard is the CFE exam? Worth the price?
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
That was just a preview…
Sign Up to see all discussions
Sign Up to see all discussions
- Discover what it’s like to work at companies from real professionals
- Get candid advice from people in your field in a safe space
- Chat and network with other professionals in your field
Sign up in seconds to unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
"" is an unusual email domain. If correct, please proceed to the next step
Messaging rates may apply
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Share
Embed this post
Copy and paste embed code on your site
Preview
Download the
Fishbowl app
Send download link to your phone
OR
Scan your QR code to download
Fishbowl app on your mobile
Sign up for free to view this conversation on Fishbowl
Sign up for free to continue using Fishbowl
Messaging rates may apply
i can only speak to audit. but it seems right now there’s varied lines of thought. some people are
looking at the SM role as just experienced manager and Director as being what SM used to be before the level was created. But others are treating the new progression as an accelerated path to SM and the Director title just means 2+ years experienced SM.
In Tax and we’ve never had SM previously. I see it as distinguishing the group that have chance at partner if you make it to Director. Otherwise, you’ll know sooner when you are just career manager.
In tax, you make director simultaneously with entering partner program. I think they’ve made this clear in various webcasts
Also agree with M2
Director = senior manager in old system, senior manager = manager in old system, manager = senior in old system
You’re missing the point. Due to staffing issues managers have always needed to pick up the slack for lack of senior support and do “senior” work. That’s always been the case. But to say that “managers” now are “seniors” in the old promotion system is ridiculous. Some seniors have only been with the firm 2-3 years, so by your logic those 2-3 year staffers who were “seniors” in the old system have now been promoted to “manager.” That’s certainly not the case. Seniors are still seniors who need 3 years of experience before being promoted to manager. That hasn’t changed. If you want to debate the roles and responsibilities of each different staff class then fine but despite the change to director / senior manager, there was never a change to the manager or senior level.
Eventually Directors will be people on the Partner Path. With the transition last year (ie they made all audit Sm directors), currently its Director = Old SM, SM = Old experienced manager