Will the reorg eliminate the SVP position like in other large banks? SVP is indeed a bloated title and position, the tasks/fuy of which are usually also executed by VPs
10 replies (most recent on top)
In some companies, not sure if Citi does this or not, you HAVE to move up or move out.
You can’t just be stellar at your job. You can be stellar, top performer, love your job but only for so long. You have to move up or its perceived that your “stagnant” even though you are not. So, make’em a VP for a while….years go by, ok now time to make them a SVP.
This is so weird to me. I’ve seem people absolutely LOVE what they do and are top performers at it with no plans to ever leave Citi. It doesn’t matter, you have to move them up. If you don’t, then some number cruncher will run an excel spreadsheet formula and then…..”OMG, this person has gone an extended time without climbing the ladder. Yep, they gotta go. Put them on the list.”
There’s some forward thinking for you.
I concur with you, the plan is to eliminate or bring SVP's as Technical experts than pure managerial background. This will take more time to implement...
Most SVP's are promoted due to their stint in a single project . They have to expand their area. Most of these SVP's are not hands-on but just keep running budget and doing the work of Directors. There is a repetition of work between SVP's and Directors. Either the Director or the SVP has to go and usually the lowest rank.
Here are the targets:
Director's with more SVP's
Director's reporting under Director
SVP's reporting under SVP
More SVP's under a Director
Why we have SVPs with no reports is beyond me. But one of the biggest issues is the number of Ds and MDs. I have 5 D / MDs in my reporting line all the way to the top.
The amount of dead wood at that higher level, but not quite the top is incredible.
Many SVP I. My group are doing same work as vP in my group and are individual contributors but listed as senior manager. Just got more money. SVP is a friendship role only
I've only been here a year but it seems SVPs mainly manage VPs and AVPs. I can see SVP being inflated if one is an individual contributor. That being said, my org is pretty flat as we've been without a director for almost six months now. We've had SVPs in the role fill in as interim director, but it's not a permanent thing. I'd almost make the case we really dont need a director because we've already gone six months without one. My SVP manager works a ton of hours and because our group is the only one that does a certain function at Citi, it may warrant her being an actual Director as long as they gave her some real decision-making discretion.
https://h1bgrader.com/job-titles/digital-software-engineer-lead-analyst-150n77d1kg/lca/2023
The LCA tracking sheets show, Lots of VP's hired in Texas for around 170-180 range of salary and SVP's hired around 220K range of salaries.
A Legal case for holding SVP's in H1B criteria will definitely save some US workers in these roles. SVP H1B's are not hands-on and simply perform managerial roles. This has to be scrutinized heavily.
If you know any SVP's or VP's performing managerial role without hands-on and in H1B, you can report to USCIS in the below link provided by Government:
https://www.uscis.gov/scams-fraud-and-misconduct/report-fraud
I hardly see a SVP who is hands-on. Its a redundant position and can be removed.
Infact, as other users mentioned in the forum, lots of H1B managers are in SVP.
The change can be gradual to eliminate these positions to be compliant with USCIS standards.
Everyone is vulnerable, no matter what your title is.
Who is worth not eliminating in YOUR view ? (which DOESN'T matter in anyway btw)..You and I are just head counts that's why we are found here on this portal.
they should svps are more or less worthless