Er, why do some people end up in the "C-Suite"? (And earn mega bucks)

[doublechocchipper]

Sorry for the name change, a couple of friends know my normal login and I'm going to talk about other people I know IRL here which I don't really want to mix up.

We've just said goodbye to two friends of my DH who came for a late lunch at ours - DH knows the husband from uni days basically.

Anyway, I've only met the couple a few times, and I was struck as the day went on about much more successful the man (outwardly) is compared to my DH. They certainly didn't flaunt it - they're perfectly lovely people - it just struck me in a rather sudden way that they're clearly on a financial rung far beyond what we can reach. It hadn't really occured to me until this afternoon, but it's very obvious now that I think about it (the car they drive, their huuuge house, private education for their 2 DCs). And yet DH and this man (both the breadwinners of each family) did the same degree.

Of course I love DH to bits, and I recognise that it will be influenced by the choices we've made (we have 2 more DC than these friends, we live near my parents to help with childcare, which has limited DH's ability to move). I also know that DH isn't as ambitious as others may be. And I wouldn't even want more money - we're perfectly happy.

But it does seem fascinating to me that two people can start off from uni days in such similar positions and end up where one is a middle manager on £35k/yr and the other lives just 40ish miles down the road and is in the stratosphere when it comes to management responsibility/earning potential.

DH and I have had a long disucussion about this tonight, because he's my best friend and he knows I'm talking about this from a "isn't this interesting" rather than a "I'm unhappy and jealous" perspective. He started talking about C-Suites and senior management, but apart from the obvious things (not being able to move more than day 50 miles from the south east due to my parents, taking 2 more paternity leaves) we can't really pin down exactly what magical ingredient it is that launches one career into the "C-Suite" (i'd never heard that phrase befoer) and which ones don't.

It must be something to do with personality or ambition then. ANyway, I thought it would be interesting to question this on MN - IABU to ask what (from an unbiased perspective) makes someone so clearly marked out for senior management vs. someone who isn't? Or is it just the things DH and I pointed out?

It isn't all about appearances and arse licking, what a ridiculous thing to say. I'm great at that and I earn £0.

I'd never heard of the C suite, but the factors in doing well in certain careers seem to me to be a combination of:

Good education. Good degree. Working your contacts. Playing the office politics game. Lots of being in the right place at the right time.

I have an Oxbridge degree. I am very very good at the job I do. BUT whilst I earn a decent salary it is a fraction of that earned by my peers (who earn up to 10x the amount I do). But I have made a lot of wrong choices with my career. Had I made better ones I might now be feeling the financial benefit...

bibbitybobbitybloodyaxe, I find it interesting because this man (who I only know through DH, admittedly) and DH started out in such similar positions. And it struck me for the first time specifically today that the choices people make (and in our case, are happy with) can have huge repurcussions many years later.

AnyPhantomFucker this isn't meant to be a judgey thread - as I said, this couple seems perfectly lovely to me, and although I wouldn't really call them my own friends, I certainly don't need a biscuit to comment on this... do I? I also wasn't making any presumptions about whether he deserves his hundreds of £s a year - I'm sure there's a lot of travel involved, and I'm not saying he works any harder, or any less hard, than my own DH. Surely it's possible to post something from a detached viewpoint on here to raise as a discussion without having to resort to a [hbiscuit]?

p.s. DH and this man are not in the same industry. DH is in sales from a b2b angle (regional, some travelling, but not over night), this other man is in retail management (national company). but both essentially did buisness at uni.

squeakyfreakytoy Sat 22-Oct-11 20:52:47
"I have to also say "c-suite" in this context sounds like a very poncey word that you can just imagine a load of suited tossers in the city discussing in a little bistro..."

I agree . I was expecting a reality TV show of paid c sections.

it stands to reason that there are less of these jobs around so not everyone who can do them will get the chance iyswim.
my ex h was a middle manager on the salary you mention and he doesn't have a degree or a levels so it may be that your dh is underselling his talents.
with most people we know who earn a v good living there is a large part of it down to luck/family/being in the right place at the right time.
i was very lucky to get a job years ago which has served me very well over the years - they are even paying a pension for me now.

It always amazes me when I see interns coming into my office with amazing CVs and the best university qualifications and it doesn't necessarily mean they are going to be any good at the job. At all.

Could it just mean that despite their similar starting points your DH just isn't as good as the other guy?

Not a nice thought, sorry, but it's the most obvious...

If I look at my group of friends who graduated with same degree at same uni, the wild variations amongst us in current salaries/lifestyles come down to more strategic choices early on in career, creating and converting opportunities, becoming famous for something, delaying having children and workaholic tendencies. This is true of every c-suite person I know.

I disagree - you can be career minded and not be chosen or not have the connections. I mean try explain the pay gap? We all have worked at places where the most talented and hard working people did not get rewarded the best. There are fantastic people with dedication and who are committed to their work but they might just work in an industry that does not pay well or they may work in an industry that does pay well. I don't know too many companies that have really true transparent pay structures.

I think how much money you earn when you are younger has a great deal to do with it and wealth creation - the poster who was earning 100K at 27 years of age could step out of the rat race, or outside of the law firm, simply because of the sheer level of earning at 27.... but I'm sure the cleaners that come in and clean those city legal offices will still be cleaning and working 3 jobs with no real option but to keep continuing in that pattern.

Also take the last banking crisis. Lots of people on loads of money who made disastrous decisions that impact many others - were they more talented than others? No. Were they paid astronomical amounts? Yes. I imagine if I was on 1-2 million a year then I would expect to get calls at all times, so I don't buy this it is all so tough and I am so driver, blah blah blah.

People can also do the same job at different companies and get remarkably different pay packets.

I know a CEO who is worth millions and yes does work 6 days a week often - but does go out to dinner, have wonderful holidays, is chauffeur driven everywhere, gets to give a great deal of money away to charity and feels great about it - loves hiring people and creating employment, has an amazing PA.

He says works no more harder than when he was in lesser position - but had connections and a lucky break but certainly has work life balance, simply because he is the boss. Also when speaking to him he does say but having the title of CEO actually brings more business his way.

It is just the way the cookie crumbles.

also known as "C Class" jobs.

I work as a PA for a headhunter, my last boss (pre mat leave) placed people in NED/Chairman roles and C Class (current boss does some C class and NED but mainly next tier down, £250k is the normal package we place). It's interesting the sort of people you get in for interview, the CVs don't seem that different from our friends for the first couple of years post uni, but late 20s, early 30s it becomes obvious that some people 'take off' and others don't.

Now being in that stage, I can see 1 or 2 of our friends who might get there (but still, loads get to the step below and never take the next step up), and realising the choices they are having to make and sacrifices in terms of family time, travelling with work, expecting their DWs to basically be single mums with money, to expect their DW's to just drop their career ambitions etc mark them as men I wouldn't want to be with, as lovely as they are.

oh, and DWs are either an asset or a killer of careers, it's interesting how well networked the 'non-working' wives of these top people are, it's another problem for woman to get to that level that's not really addressed, the supportive role of the 'professional wife' is hard for a husband to replicate, esp. if he has his own career to focus on...

the CVs don't seem that different from our friends for the first couple of years post uni, but late 20s, early 30s it becomes obvious that some people 'take off' and others don't.

Yes - yes that's exactly what I found interesting. I know that others have expanded on some of the other things that I hadn't even thought of (e.g. ability to network - such an obvious one actually) that DH and I hadn't discussed. There are so many intangible elements to it, really. As well as the practical aspects I already mentioned. And no one real secret - just a mix of fortuitous things, as posters have said.

Lydia - but don't you think that as a system headhunters just perpetuate inequality, by their very operation? You know, people are shoulder tapped, the headhunters gets enormous fees, it is all hush hush and so on and the role is never really open to the market.

That is why it is suggested that more open recruitment processes will hopefully provide a more diverse talent pool, especially in terms of the make up of company boards.

I agree about the networking aspect. In a previous role I stopped using headhunters and greatly increased the number of diverse talented people into the business, and increased the number of females into senior roles. I only realised that this had happened when I reflected back on the talent that had come in.

Anyway - just an aside... but thought I would mention it.

Late 20s and early 30s is when people usually get married and have children. It is also a key time for whether people do or don't get to that next level. I think that's a key difference as its difficult to focus on both.

My DH earns pretty well (£100 per hour). I would say that the difference between him and others in the same profession who earn less is an innate confidence in how good he is at his job (aided immeasurably by the fact that he is indeed very good at his job) and a refusal to accept less than he realistically knows he's worth. He's also very very good at negotiating.

Sometimes I feel really unusual because I am totally unmotivated by money. And I couldn't be less interested in what people earn or why they earn it.

The v big earners I know personally work in entertainment and advertising.

I tend not to mix with lawyers and bankers.

Ambition, careful planning, grabbing opportunities when they arise, confidence, 16 hour days and a good dose of luck.

this thread does make me chortle a bit
a friend has recently been made ceo of a 'proper' yes 'proper' big company and mutual friends have asked 'what does he HAVE???' to have got him that far..

He is obviously very good at what he does - has great drive - forsight and to top it all in my eyes - is incredibly affable and un- assuming. He also has a great and very driven wife!

Maybe he's just smarter than your dh.

Well, headhunters aren't quite so old fashioned when you work with them! Most people come to their knowledge via sending their CVs in. That CV is usually read by a researcher firstly, who will then tell me if they think it's someone my boss should met or not - either for a particular search we have going, because they think this is the sort of person certain companies would like to be introduced (loads of jobs don't get advertised as they don't exisit until a head hunter sticks a really interesting person in front of a senior person in a company who then decides to make a role for them), or because they might be a 'high potential'.

When we have a role come in, my boss will normally think who might be good for it off the top of his head, so yes, previous people he's worked with / went to school/did his MBA with etc, but also from those random CV drop ins he's met over the last 6 months or so. Research will also come up with a list of at least 50 people who could do that, normally several hundred names are on the first list (for lower level jobs, there aren't that many people for higher level jobs!). Also, my boss will call people he knows who aren't quite right for the job, but ask them if they're working with anyone/met anyone they'd recommend.

Re advertising, it's a bit pointless really, it's not like for C class jobs you can just get anyone to do it, if they've got to hit certain criteria from certain markets, then there's often less than 30 people who could do the job in the UK (once you allow for people being available to move jobs). It's perfectly reasonable to expect a headhunter who has been working for a few years to have met all those people. If they need to go outside the UK, we're multinational so often my boss will get me to send round the role specs to the consultants covering his market area in Europe, then world wide to get other names. If we were really stuck, we'd advertise, but normally only advertise when we're doing a government contract and have to.

One thing that is interesting re diversity, is how important it is for headhunters, it's part of the 'added value' we do rather than clients filling their own vacancies, we can find them people who are a bit different to their norm. We host woman events, have a global research team dedicated to identifying "high potential woman" and trying to get consultants to meet them. It's not as organised, but 'high potential' ethnic minority member's CVs are passed round the office encouraging as many people as possible to meet them. Often it's the headhunter trying to argue with clients that they shouldn't just hire a 'mini-me'.

oh, and there's headhunters, and then there's just recruitment consultants, on a percentage of what they make, who are basically salesmen for getting the fee, not actually any good at doing the job of finding a candidate. I've worked with a few different firms, their pay structure can massively affect what the client gets...

Yeah thanks Lydia.

Yes I'm well aware of the role of researchers, and I agree about the pitfalls of advertising but my original point stands - I just think it isn't such an opaque process.

I think lack of role and pay transparency is a big deal. And yes I agree there are headhunters and then there are recruitment consultants but I still see it as a sales process - which it is.

Recruitment consultants ... don't even go there, I know what you mean with some of them - unethical, just throwing CV's in left, right and centre, not telling candidates what the company / role brief is, chasing their targets and so on!

I also think you bring up an interesting point - but by the time people get to these jobs the door is closed so to speak, hence the limitations of advertising, which is why the headhunter feels s/he has met everyone in the industry.

Are they in the same industry, OP? Engineering graduates in Engineering, Consulting or Banking would all earn totally different salaries.

"C-suite" is also a new one on me...I thought I'd heard them all after years of working for second-rate American companies!

Well, DH and I met aged 23 and were working at same company, same level, same salary at the time. Except that I had a (way) better education than he did.

I'm currently a SAHM but pre-DCs his salary + bonus equated to about 3 times mine. His career path continues to climb upwards, mine is non-existent.

Why?

• because he has natural confidence, easy-going personality and charisma, got on well with the MD of the company where we met, got a lucky break as a result. DH does not, and has never, arse-licked. He's one of those people who tells it like it is and will go for a beer with you, whether you're the cleaner or the CEO, and people respect that
• he has always cultivated relationships and contacts - it's how you at least get your foot in the door for many jobs which are headhunter, not advertised (even got his brother a job the same way - using his contacts). Going for a beer after work is important! He still goes for a beer with someone or other at least 2-3 nights a week.
• he is restless, has never stayed in a job for more than two years, never risked becoming stagnant. He moves onwards, and upwards. When you move job/company is your best chance to negotiate salary.
• he has taken risks. Set up a company aged 26 with some more experienced contacts. Was in the "C-Suite" then. Didn't stay there but it looked amazing on his CV.
• by contrast, because he was taking risks and job-hopping, I stayed put in a boring and lesser-paid job. Because I had hopes of needing maternity pay and a job where I could go part-time and return easily. I wish I could turn back the clock and slap my 26 year-old self because I took ages to conceive and got made redundant anyway.
• because education doesn't matter as much as you think it does. It gets your CV considered, but having the right personality and ambition is what gets you the job. That said, some of DH's traits and confidence do come from having had a private education. I went to a state comp. Hope that DCs will go to state schools but we will try to ensure they are confident, well-rounded kids through other means.

And here's the big one:

• he has worked Bloody Hard. Made personal sacrifices (paternity leave? Don't make me laugh!) Long, hard hours, 16+ hour days. In fact, he's tapping away on his Blackberry and laptop next to me at almost 11pm on a Saturday night. Holidays are few and far between, and the Blackberry is ever-present. The DCs and I hardly see him, and I have no downtime. It is really shit really isn't all it's cracked up to be. We were happier as skint 23 year-olds!

What MrsTroll said re "the big one". I worked at a very high power consultancy when younger, it was said you either married the company or a spouse.....

Also contacts. Who you know etc....

Interesting thread, especially from those with inside knowledge of how headhunting works.

It's about priorities - I know people who earn loads and people who earn a pittance - neither are happier, cleverer or better people - they just planned their lives out differently.