M&G plc Reviews

Cons

Find it hard to critique them, been more than pleasant the entire duration of my employment.

Cons

no parking near the london office

Cons

Technology Leadership is atrocious. The techLT are more interesting in reporting stuff as "green" then actually doing things properly. It's a major incident waiting to happen. Risks are swept under the carpet and not written down and managed. Groupthink and fakeness galore. It's embarrassing watching some of the TechLT try to display "energy" to be more like the CIO. Beware of the annual hunger games where jobs are selected for outsourcing to India.

Cons

It’s a business which is in total denial of reality. Never resources available to front line teams to do anything strategic and meaningful to drive revenue and get ahead of the competition. For years the business has existed in a permanent state of cost-cutting and decision-paralysis, while the C-suite instead pours millions into external consultants to attempt to patch holes below the waterline (IT, finance, culture, customer service etc) and making ill advised acquisitions (eg responsAbility and PSA). As a result AUM is falling, not rising, and the once well-known brand has become near-irrelevant. A lot of really good people and their knowledge have gone, while lots of box-tickers and jobsworths remain. It’s sad for those (clients and employees) who loved and respected M&G, but there’s not much left to love: the values of care and integrity and the culture of independent thinking which were such a big part of M&G aren’t talked about any more. Instead we have lots of corporate window dressing and pay a huge dividend to try to convince everyone that it’s all OK.

Cons

No scope for learning with in role Outsourcing most.positions Not open to constructive criticism on processes You have to be very loud and make yourself very well heard to get any recognition

Cons

Salaries are below the norm for financial sector in London

Cons

I joined M&G when it was a great company to work for 2 years ago and around Spring 2022 the new board members joined and the company has been abysmal at best. Overworked, understaffed and nothing I did appeared to be ever enough because the leadership appeared to have no sense of direction. The overall morale of the company has fallen to disgraceful levels.

Cons

Weak leadership, inexperienced managers, and bad work life balance despite claims to the contrary.

Cons

Poor culture and a lot of restructuring /cull happening.

Cons

- poor strategy to replace legacy AUM which is paying out far quicker than any current initiative can bring money in. - lacks innovation, in part due to no empowerment of employees to make improvements. A desire to genuinely change processes or methodologies is viewed with derision and skepticism. - Flashy PowerPoint slides are more important than getting the content remotely decent quality. It’s all style over substance. - little job security in support functions such as technology, operations etc, as these are not regarded as being of value, so are often outsourced to the lowest bidder. - many senior managers are post turtles with no clue what they are responsible for and therefore make bad decisions. Many lack the basic understanding of their field to realise when they are being ill informed or manipulated. - cliquey, and you will be viewed as a trouble maker if you express an opinion - terrible risk management and risk culture is to dismiss any risks raised as if the goal of risk management is to have the fewest risks in the register. - governance processes are rarely followed. For an organisation weighed down by bureaucracy, many policies and processes are either poorly documented or not documented at all, leading to inconsistency., incompatibility of process flows, and excessive resource utilisation as every change needs the requirements and constraints to be determined afresh.