Vanguard reviews

3.7

68% would recommend to a friend

(6,294 total reviews)

Salim Ramji

73% approve of CEO

65% positive business outlook

Vanguard has an employee rating of 3.7 out of 5 stars, based on 6,294 company reviews on Glassdoor which indicates that most employees have a good working experience there. The Vanguard employee rating is in line with the average (within 1 standard deviation) for employers within the Financial Services industry (3.7 stars).

Reviews by job title

6K reviews
2.0
Mar 17, 2016

Competing Priorities

Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Good co-workers and a great and trusted place to invest your money.

Cons

Competing Priorities: a) Picks Winners/Losers - Winners are defined as anyone "identified" by management and placed on the "Talent List". Losers being everyone else, and particularly anyone over 40. Employees over 40 are not on the "Talent List" no matter how talented, because "there isn't enough runway left for their plane to take off" (a direct quote from an officer of the company). Since managers put employees on this list, it tends to become a self fulfilling prophecy that these individuals get the top raises, top bonuses, and are setup for success in their assignment. No manager wants to look stupid for putting someone on the list that isn't a top performer, so even if they fail it is often over looked or dismissed as beyond their controll. Last year, I witnessed a spectacular screw up by a "Talent" person. Managers argued that they did not deserve a "Distinguished" rating or high bonus due to their performance. This was overridden by a Vanguard Officer that insisted the get a top review, rating, and bonus. b) Lower cost - keep expenses low. Hits employee benefits and pay. Leads to "right sourcing", hiring H1Bs, "managing out" older employees. Vanguard used to talk about paying in the 75th percentile of market compensation. The target since around 2000 has been the 50th percentile. This together with restructuring YE Bonuses so only "high performing" employees are eligible for a top tier bonus (1 in 10 - and generally those are the luck chosen few - see talent list discussion above). The rest get a much smaller bonus or none at all. Think zero times "x", 1 times "x", 2 times "x", or 3 times "x" as a bonus. With "x" being a dollar amount defined for each level. The "Talent" people get the 3x, or 2x (10 to 15 percent of population), 70 percent get a 1x bonus, 10 - 15 percent get no bonus at all. Raises work in a similar fashion with only the "talent" getting a decent raise. c) Diversity - Trying to solve it's diversity numbers (see numerous lawsuits) by targeting older white employees mainly (with a few others sprinkled in) to be managed out or moved aside to be replaced by more diverse younger replacements at lower compensation. Still upper management and the officers remain largely older and white. It's like they are in the "club" and take care of each other. All the other stuff described in this review is how they manage the rest of us not in the club. d) Forced Ranking - "We don't do this anymore". But as a manager try to come in at year end without a "normal" distribution curve and you may be targeted as not having "managerial courage", an unwillingness to manage and identify poor performers. Likewise if you have too many "Distinguished" performers, you clearly aren't doing your job. Every year people are bumped down to make things fit. That should give you an idea what it is like working here. Get out before you are 40, after that you are just waiting for your number to be called. Next!..........

1.0
Jul 23, 2016

Silent Leadership

Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Most of the people that work at Vanguard are talented and caring. It is easy to work for a company that puts client's first and attempts to eliminate conflicts of interest. People, purpose and complacency keep most employees around.

Cons

Instead of telling you what it’s like to work at Vanguard I want to describe how it feels; a recent business decision helped sum it up for me. There has been quite a bit of turnover for financial planners and managers in PAS recently, and they are having a tough time hiring enough external candidates to handle the volume they are creating. After close to two years in the making, they finally adjusted planner salaries to be competitive in the market. There have been years of pleading from advisors about increasing compensation based on the added responsibilities under the new PAS model. Instead of understanding the considerations of the advisors, they doled out salary increases because of turnover. And that’s how it feels to work at Vanguard; you don’t feel like they want you to work there, you feel like they don’t want you to quit. They make decisions out of fear, not appreciation. Big picture (or what useless managers call the 30,000-foot view), Vanguard gets it right. They have a pristine reputation, industry leading products, and quality services that have led them to over $3 trillion under management. At a very local level, they also get it right by micromanaging their call centers as bare bones and efficiently as possible. This has led to the lowest fees for their products in the industry. But it’s somewhere in the middle where they screw it up. Somewhere between the board’s dogmatic focus on mission and the entry-level turnstile positions. Positions that require highly skilled, intelligent employees; that’s where they struggle. I think a lot has to do with management in these positions. If the regulatory bodies didn’t require a certain amount of licensed managers, the people Vanguard hires to fill these middle management roles would barely have the skills to manage an Arby’s. Just imagine someone fresh out of college, or someone with no industry experience, with no experience doing your actual job, telling you what you are doing wrong. Not to make you better, but to make it look like they are making you better. This lack of experience and lack of empathy leads to bigger issues. These managers need a consistent performance measure to show they aren’t discriminating, and a way to manage people that doesn’t expose their own lack of talent. There are some performance measures that are logical like retaining or enrolling clients. Then there are others they come up with that are confusing and illustrate their disconnect, like how many times you can get an 80-year-old client to go into a video conference room online. You know, because forcing people to use outdated technology is a good measure of financial success. Vanguard knows management is weak in the middle, that’s why they promote a management style called “Quiet Leadership”. Managers can’t actually make you better or solve any issues you have, so they try to make you do it by answering your questions with questions. “Quiet Leadership” means they literally ask you questions and give no answers. It’s brilliant from a business perspective. They can save money by hiring under-qualified managers that don’t mind treating adults like children. More specific to Personal Advisor Services, the poor change management has turned a promising career path into just another job. The surveys they give to assess crew engagement have shown just how poorly management has mishandled the transition into PAS. Change is never easy, but the way Vanguard does it makes it so stressful on employees. They will make decisions that have ripple effects they never think through. They screw up fundamental elements of a financial service and refuse to fix it (ask an advisor to describe how the performance is measured, and how confident they are in the numbers). Whether it’s the lousy technology, overly conservative policy changes, or the cumbersome processes they roll out, none of it helps advisors or clients. All of the responsibility is on the advisor to apologize for mistakes, make clients aware of coming changes that will adversely affect them, and to be familiar with extremely complex processes that should not even be the advisor’s responsibility. For some reason, Vanguard has taken away all of the support advisors used to have under the AMS service model, and replaced it with technology that doesn’t work and contractors that can barely make trades for clients without a paragraph of instructions. If you think the technology doesn’t work, you should see the employees that are required to generate leads. The leads advisors get set the expectation that client's will have a free financial plan and consultation, but in reality we are going to try to sign them up for a paid service. It’s not a good experience for the client. With all of the known issues, nobody in management ever takes responsibility or even apologizes for the mistakes. They just make you feel like everyone else is dealing with it, so you should too. The whole company lacks transparency. They tell you PAS is not a sales job, but you have to enroll 20% of the clients you speak with everyday. Just because advisors are salaried doesn’t mean it’s not a sales job, it just means Vanguard won’t compensate employees properly. We tell clients we are financial advisors and they should pay us for wholistic advice, but all we do is rebalance their portfolios (we also offer the same service for free). The problem is that Vanguard restricts our ability to plan for clients based on limited resources and strict standards for our discussions (like not being able to discuss capital gains, that is not a joke, we received a memo stating we could not estimate capital gains while telling clients to generate them). Vanguard had a research paper to help clients try to see the value of the service; in it, Vanguard estimated the value of an advisor was about 3%. Regulators have recently told Vanguard they can’t use that research with clients because it is misleading. It’s pretty telling when the seminal research paper used to justify the value of your service gets pulled by regulators. They pitch the service like it’s wealth management. They make employees and advisors tout the estate planning, tax planning and insurance planning we can do. In reality, we only have surface discussions. It would be like going to a mechanic, and the mechanic saying “I can change your oil, but I can only discuss all the other stuff wrong with your car. You will need to go somewhere else to get all the other stuff fixed.” He’s not a mechanic, he’s an oil changer. We are not financial advisors, we are portfolio managers. And that’s fine, just be honest about it. There are a lot of talented employees at Vanguard, and PAS is a great opportunity to help clients manage their portfolios. Up to this point, Vanguard is wasting talent, and missing an opportunity to market and develop what could be a fantastic service, honestly. It seems like Vanguard has a lot of satisfied clients, and very few satisfied employees. The main objective is keeping costs low, so maybe that’s the way they want it.

2.0
Jul 17, 2018
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

I've read some very accurate reviews of this role on Glassdoor. I'm going to try my best to build on those, and be as objective as possible. I can only speak for my experiences in Personal Investor, and I understand the experiences may be different depending on which office you are located in. Pros: The people - The vast majority of people that I've met at Vanguard have been extremely kind, and easy to get along with. Vanguard hires a lot of fresh out of college graduates for their entry level roles so it's easy to find common interests and build friendships within your new hire class. My team leader has also been a tremendously positive influence, but I understand that this is going to depend a bit on luck. I have heard some horror stories about some bad TLs. The mission - Vanguard is a company that claims to put the client first. And boy, do they put the client first. That is not just a catchphrase. The entire company is built on making sure our clients prosper, and you can go to sleep at night knowing you aren't ripping anyone off.

Cons

There aren't a lot of positives in this role, so time to move on to the cons. The job - Vanguard does an extremely poor job of communicating what the actual role is going to be like. You will be slamming 40-50 calls a day. That is every day. Aside from a couple weeks after tax season, it has been calls back to back with no break. While this may initially sound doable, it quickly drains your soul. These calls can range from an elderly client trying to gain web access to being yelled at because an incorrect form was sent out by another representatives. 99% of the calls will be clerical. Like many other reviews have pointed out, if you are interested in finance or investing or the markets or pretty much anything that isn't customer service, find something else. You will not be happy here. I can guarantee you that. Vanguard claims to care about employees but churning and burning talented, motivated college graduates through 40-50 calls a day really shows they don't care about you as an individual. If you don't like it, they'll replace you with some other poor fellow out of college who doesn't know any better than not to take this job. The pay - The pay is sub par to say the least in Arizona. God only knows how my Vanguard brothers and sisters over on the east coast are getting by on 43k. You cannot expect to retain talent, or even keep anyone that is proficient at their job while paying this salary. For a financial services firm, the salary is an absolute joke. In a recent town hall meeting, one of the senior executives said that they were having trouble hiring in AZ. Well, I'm not exactly Einstein but I wonder why. Then they wonder why everyone who continues to work at Vanguard are mediocre, and clients aren't happy with the service they're receiving. It's because all the competent people have left for a salary that they can actually afford to feed their families on. No opportunities to move beyond a phone role - For anyone looking to move out of this phone role, it will be an absolute dogfight. Any department that isn't on the phones will have hundreds of applicants per open role. You have a better chance of being accepted to Harvard. Vanguard doesn't care to give talent a chance to prove themselves or even better themselves. The most qualified candidates don't usually get the job. Vanguard is super heavy into networking. It's like you have two jobs. Crush phone calls all day, while somehow finding time to bother people in other departments. It's absolutely ridiculous. For the unlucky 99.9% that don't get these roles off the phones, they're happy to string you along to another crappy phone job where they can churn and burn you for more calls for a tiny raise. Everything else is also a mess - Literally everything in the Scottsdale office is broken. The water fountain was broken for weeks. The coffee machines are broken. People get stuck in elevators. Vanguard is a 5 trillion+ company, yet people are getting stuck in elevators because we are too cheap to spend money to fix anything. Our technology is eons behind anywhere else. We're still using monitors and laptops from the early 2000s. We use software that looks like it was created in the 60s. It's an absolute mess. There's being at-cost, and then there is being plain cheap. Times are changing. Firms are moving toward being technologically focused, and not only are we behind; we're pretty much not even in the race at this point.

Viewing 7 - 9 of 6,294 Reviews

Glassdoor has 6,984 Vanguard reviews submitted anonymously by Vanguard employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if Vanguard is right for you.