Vivaldi Partners Reviews

Turn over: During my time I watched 13 people leave the firm, 7 of them joined after I did, and 3 of those were AP level and above. While turnover is common in consulting, the amount of turn over in this small office is surprising. In addition to this turn over, VPG’s size makes each exit hit especially hard. It is widely understood that hiring a new employee is more expensive than keeping a seasoned employe. New employees take about 3-6 months to ramp up and be effective and this takes it's toll on more seasoned consultants of the firm who now have to triple check work, hold hands, or spend their time teaching someone about every aspect of their job rather than focusing on project work. No long-term growth path: Due to the turn over, there are few cases where individuals move more than one or two promotions. Thus, when promotion time comes the firm, as a whole, has a difficult time identifying what causes someone to "be ready" to perform at the next level. For example, when moving from a brand analyst to a consultant, then to senior consultant – the criteria to move up seems to be understood throughout the firm. However, when it comes to moving to an Engagement Manager or above, the firm is not aligned on what it takes for someone to reach that level. This is because most people stay at Vivaldi for a few years then leave. The reason for their departure is different for many cases, some want to just do something different or are "figuring it out" and others dislike the top brass at VPG. Small: Small firms have a great deal of benefits (whiskey cart, wicked ping pong table, flexible hours, ability to talk to C-Suite whenever) however they have their downsides. In the case of VPG, which may be the case for many small firms, they are heavily focused on the cost of everything. From investments in events, to bonuses (which are rare in the lower levels, even in good years), to skill development and bringing in top people. This focus on cost gets in the way of "firm building", perks, activities, 401K match, etc. Difficult CEO: While I stand by my great people "pro", there is an exception to every rule. While I believe that Erich is well meaning, he can be very difficult to work with (i.e., rude, extremely moody, hypocritical and egotistical). The issue isn't that he is all of those things, as that's germane to many self started CEOs, it's that it makes for a difficult work environment for the rest of the organization, especially if you work with him one-on-one. What compounds this problem is that everyone (top to bottom) knows this is how he is yet, to my knowledge, the inappropriateness of behavior and attitude is never addressed. This behavior and the fear of his reaction to certain choices resonates through out the organization The company has accepted his behavior, and with the exception of a few moments, elects not to confront him about it.

- The culture is toxic - A few good people but many are difficult to work with and have learned bad behaviors over time - Minimal appreciation for work-life balance - Projects are under-resourced and under-staffed - They have review cycles but there’s minimal investment in or consideration for your career - The firm is trying to expand into new territories but can’t see that legacy POVs will prevent that from happening - There is no training - Little to no recognition; self promotion is mandatory - Minimal diversity