Partners in Performance Reviews

Pros

A lot of very nice and very smart people work here. I’ve made some friendships that have long outlasted our mutual employment at PIP. There is a lot of opportunity to learn if you are prepared to make it happen for yourself Depending on your manager, there is usually a reasonable level of flexibility in the workplace The lack of bureaucracy can be very refreshing after working in larger organisations The bi-annual regional conferences are a lot of fun Within Australia at least, it is a decent name to have on you CV.

Cons

It has taken me several months since leaving the firm to decompress enough to feel I can write a balanced review. Which says a lot in and of itself. I think there are enough other reviews that speak to the pros and cons of life here as a consultant. Let’s talk about working in PIP Global Services (head office / support services, aka PGS). 1) You will be paid significantly worse than consultants at a similar level of experience/seniority. Unless you really go in fighting, your salary will only ever increase in line with the CPI. Your bonus will be token at best, potentially non-existent, and it will not reflect performance. Unlike consultants, you will never get 110% bonus for excellent performance and unless you are really screwing up, you will not receive less than 100% – generally there is very little effort put into the performance / salary / bonus review process for PGS staff. Consultants can also earn “firm building points” for activities such as presenting at a team meeting, or writing a blog post, or posting on linkedin, which translate into additional bonus. As a PGS employee you are not eligible to earn FB points, but you will still be encouraged/required to undertake these activities. 2) You must learn to live with a lack of job security. Redundancies happen constantly, both in the consulting pool and at PGS. Redundancy is frequently used in lieu of performance management and it is shocking the number of roles that get made redundant only to be filled again within a matter of months. It’s been particularly unpleasant watching this firm’s response to COVID – they cut headcount early and they cut deep, all the while plastering LinkedIn with posts promoting how they were doing great and could help other firms to respond to the crisis. 3) Within PGS there is very limited scope for career progression. This is mostly due to the fact that PGS teams are generally quite small and fairly flat; there is simply no ladder to climb. However, there is also very little acknowledgement or support for those who do wish to progress. Almost all training provided to PGS staff is soft skills, and/or aimed at helping you do your current role better, rather than preparing you to take the next step. Movement between teams/depts is very uncommon and promotions only happen when a manager leaves; making career advancement of a war of attrition. Also PGS roles are very niche (eg: there is no such thing as an HR generalist; the HR functions are split across 4-5 distinct teams), meaning you will become an expert in one very limited area only, which might not translate well to roles at other companies. 4) There is a huge chasm between how the consultants are treated vs how PGS are treated. All the company’s energy is focussed on the consultants, any benefits felt by PGS is merely a by-product. Be prepared to feel like a second class citizen. Examples: 1) a few years ago the company had a massively busy end to the year, everyone was exhausted and approaching burnout, so they decided to thank staff for their efforts. While this was a nice gesture, it feel a little hollow when consultants were given a nice bottle of champagne and two extra days of annual leave, whereas as PGS staff only received the champagne. 2) when implementing a new parental leave policy, there was serious conversation between the (98% male) director group whether this would be offered to all staff or only consultants. 3) All consultants receive regular, ongoing training aimed at helping them progress in their careers. Until recently, PGS staff weren’t even allowed to complete the company’s own in-house trainings, and even now it’s only if you push for it, it’s never offered. 5) The firms still needs to do a lot of work on diversity and inclusiveness. While they are aware of this and pay a lot of lip service, there are yet to be any tangible results. They talk about recruiting more (any!) senior women, yet all five directors hired in the last 18 months are men. Within PGS, gender diversity is less of an issue and on the surface it looks like a relatively racially diverse department also. But look a little closer and you’ll notice that every single management position is filled by a Caucasian. More generally: 6) There is a serious lack of emotional intelligence at senior management level. This is true both across the firm as a whole and the top echelon of PGS, and it is very evident in the way the firm treats its staff and the culture within the firm. 7) Take the glassdoor ratings with a large grain of salt. Notice that the positive reviews come in clusters (eg: 18 five-star reviews over the course of 3 days in January 2020) – this is 100% because management have asked people to go and put up good reviews as part of their marketing/recruitment strategy.

Pros

Caring: though growing and professionalizing in recent years, the firm has remained tightknit enough to know its people and flexible enough to adapt to individual needs. Leadership demonstrates caring through personal KPIs to support work-life balance during engagements and the firm is expanding alternate staffing models for times when consultants are facing extenuating personal circumstances and therefore need to reduce travel/workload Focus on development: fast professional and personal growth through exposure to firm’s network/IP engagement and to consistently excellent clients; there’s always something new going on / being tested in the practice areas Interesting industry and functional mix: very diverse industry mix (>10 industries in 2.5 years, inclusive of industrials, utilities, financial services, media, retail, etc.) and functional mix with broad exposure to business improvement, strategy, due diligence, and sourcing

Cons

Relative to its peers, I think Partners in Performance has fewer engagements in capital cities other than Sydney (especially Melbourne, Brisbane) so the travel requirement is high

Pros

- They take development seriously at every level and really work to stretch and build you throughout your work - You’ll get exposure to various different industries and opportunities and not be forced to become specialised too early - People actually care and aren’t just robots inside or outside of work, they have smaller egos and really care about the wellbeing of the people with which they work

Cons

- The travel for engagements can be challenging for people with certain circumstance

Pros

Consulting as an industry is pretty great - you work on interesting, impactful, high-value projects, your colleagues are super smart and interesting, you learn tons of life skills, and it has a learning curve like no other (many newbies meet company CEOs on their first day on the job). In terms of Partners in Performance specifically, I haven't worked at other consulting firms, but I've heard many anecdotes (from people ex-McK, Bain, BCG, etc) that would suggest we have quite a different culture to the others. Leaders are really willing to roll their sleeves up and get stuff done. There is a HUGE focus on implementation and practicality (no handing over 300-slide powerpoints and then walking off site). It's an extremely low-ego firm where you can voice your opinion from day 1, and teams will generally make an effort to have some fun & have a life outside of work. Development is a huge focus, and I personally have had really positive experiences with my mentors (they are willing to drop everything for me when needed, they have REALLY championed me when it comes to promotions and reviews, and they give practical and useful advice when I've asked for help). Also, as a company we are still growing rapidly, so there is a very entrepreneurial culture - if you spot an opportunity, a gap, or something you think we could do better, you can basically make a business case for yourself and you may well end up running your own division, helping out central services, selling new work, whatever it is. Finally, our CEO is someone I really admire. She really lives and breathes our company values, rocks up to work in jeans and a hoodie whenever she can, doesn't take herself overly seriously, and is approachable and interesting. On top of all that she very is conscious of (and speaks up about) climate/environmental issues, social issues, political climate, etc etc. It's really nice to work for someone who I respect and who I feel understands many of the biggest issues facing the world.

Cons

I've seen lots of people criticizing the travel and long hours. I just want to be clear that this is NOT a Partners in Performance problem, it's an industry problem! Again based on the anecdotes I've heard, it seems we do much better than our competitors at giving people time in their home cities, aiming for sustainable travel rosters, etc. So basically if you want to be a consultant, yes, this is one of the downsides to the work, but you should know that before you decide to apply to any one company, and Partners in Performance is probably better than average.

Pros

- They hire sharp, diverse, low-ego people who make great colleagues! - They focus on coaching each other (and of course clients) to succeed - not the internally competitive culture I've experienced elsewhere. - A lot of variety in the work and industries - especially in ANZ and SEA where they have branched beyond heavy industrial clients. - Skipp has great values and really works to ensure consultants hold true to them throughout the firm. - Open culture: all about having the tough conversations and problem-solving together - They won't force you to do hard travel rosters (i.e., understanding of personal/family circumstances) - May offer roles with minimal travel where suitable (e.g., practice building roles) - Constantly working on innovating and diversifying offerings to meet market demands and deliver superior results - No "Up or Out" like some firms; focus on development, but realise some are not as fast/ready as others to step up - Work-life balance can vary quite a bit, but in my experience an average 10-11 hour day with no work on weekends is often achieved

Cons

- Travel - Choices rarely offered when it comes to staffing engagements, you typically don't find out until you are staffed (esp. junior ranks)

Pros

Helping clients become better at their jobs is one of the many things that make this job rewarding! Not only do we get to help them solve their biggest problems, we provide thought partnership and real, tangible, assistance in helping get improvements. Plus, the people at Partners in Performance are sensational. They are genuinely interested in helping others, both internal and external - and they are smart and hard working, which makes for a great team atmosphere. Also, Partners in Performance have an awesome dedication to energy efficiencies and helping business achieve more sustainable energy - a really cool initiative that will not only save client's money, but will also help our planet.

Cons

The only real downside is that sometimes our clients are not in my home city, and therefore requires a bit of travel - but this is fairly typical of management consulting.