QUOTE(ComingBackSoon @ Dec 23 2016, 12:22 PM)
I heard a different story.
What I hear is that basically the firm received too many complaints that the quality of the audit managers were not up to standard. The harshest complaints came from ex-audit managers who have left the firm and joined commercial, becoming the firm's clients. These old-timers were comparing the current audit managers to the audit managers of their era, which were more experienced by the time they hit manager level.
So the firm decided that average AMs should stay 1 more year to gather more experience before being promoted to managers.
I supposed it's the same story from different perspective. the managers may not be up to standard because they do not have enough experience, because we are talking about average performers, not high performers. In the end, although more people would be motivated to stay for longer than 3 years, it is still lose lose situation when they become managers and leave almost immediately.
So I believe their revised solution is to higher more juniors so they keep the good ones for longer instead of slave drive the good ones and they leave prematurely.
QUOTE(calvinmax @ Dec 23 2016, 03:50 PM)
Is it a lot of people that left after a year? What is the option thereafter?
Leave after a year you don't get far at all, would still be account exec level. I never understand why would anyone leave after a year, but there are more and more people doing that. They are just determined that they hate audit
QUOTE(ketupatpalas @ Dec 23 2016, 05:03 PM)
my friend says his brother failed his final professional paper and only promoted to AM in his 5.5 years there. He left after half year
Yup, in my past posts I did mention about the importance of completing your professional papers. Your promotion would be delayed. It is a firm HR policy across most big4, even the top performer would suffer. So the most important thing in your first 3 years is, whatever happens, exam comes first