Zurich Financial Services Reviews in Zurich, Switzerland Area

Pros

Work like balance very good
Relatively low expectations on performance means both frustration as well as sailing

Cons

Constant reorganizing, restructuring
Always need to look for next role

Advice to Senior Management

Communicate with the employees and get McKinsey out

Pros

global organisation, interesting deals, culturally diverse, solid performer, leadership is genuine at CEO level.

Cons

no transparency from mid-managers
don't want to hear new ideas, happy to keep doing the same
rigid and controlling

Advice to Senior Management

Be transparent, be open, treat employees respectfully, trust employees

Pros

The compensation is adequate and expectations are low. If you are looking to see out the last days of your career or have no ambition whatsoever then this is a comfortable place to see out your career. You can expect no challenges, no desparate demands on your time and they're unlikely to go bankrupt.

Cons

The management structure is completely opaque, there are no clear lines of responsibility and no consequences for failure. As a result, nothing much ever gets done. The IT infrastructure is horrible, truly embarassing, and the company is a mess operationally. The business is heavily siloed, each segment operates completely independently, as do the business units within each segment. This gives zero insight into actual accountability, projects are duplicated and often killed off at a late stage due to lack of interest or energy... it's a mess.

Advice to Senior Management

The first step is to remove the heads of Group Operations and IT. The company also needs to radically revise its incentive and review structures to reward performance, identify and disincentivise failure and to thin the wheat from the chaff in middle management. A 360 degree review process and a more generous but variable bonus scheme based on actual performance metrics would be a good start.

Pros

Zurich is company careers go to die. If you are looking to idle away the last few years of your career with zero challenge then it is perfect. The offices are full of happy pensioners.

Cons

The IT is horrendous - nothing works. Neither does anything else, really. There are no consequences for failure while success is either appropriated or envied. The bureaucracy is unfathomable, truly surreal. You soon learn not to go for the prize... as everybody has learned long before you.

Advice to Senior Management

Introduce a 360 degree review process. Fire the heads of operations, IT, and replace 60 percent of the staff in those functions. Introduce a three-strikes policy for your senior executive with zero tolerane for failure.

Pros

* Global Company - offices in most countries world wide. Depending on your role, the opportunity to interact with colleagues in other cultures is great. From a business perspective, it's good for a company to be diversified especially in the insurance business since it "carries" risk.

* Decent facilities and perks (e.g. gym, company owned "hotel", discounts on certain products due to tie-ups with service/product providers etc) depending on the division you work for. Some places are better and some worse.

* One of the over-achieving (relative most others) companies given the current state of the world economy. So it is relatively secure in some ways. That is a definite plus given the economy. However, there are have been a few "changes" over the past 12 months and it is possible that more restructuring could occur in the near future.

* Despite my criticism of the overall management below, keep in mind that there are quite few talented people in this company and also the new CEO, Martin Senn seems to be a fairly reliable and honest person.

Cons

* Career progression can be very slow due to size and work-culture. However, there are divisions/discipline where one can progress faster. For the aspiring employee: research as much as you can about the specific divison or team (if possible) that you are about to join.

* Despite being a global company securing international assignments are difficult to obtain. To be fair, the current state of the economy and costs involved make it harder than usual.

* Processes and overall oversight is not as transparent or as streamlined as it could (and should) be.

* The pay-for-performance is not adequate and poorly reflected in bonuses, salary increments etc. This was the case even when the economy was "booming".

Advice to Senior Management

* Clear communication about any restructuring plans. Despite management's concern for "panic" and losing valued employees, proactive and honest communication with clear plans to manage the change while mitigating threats to job security are possible and may even enhance employee trust.

* Despite the global economy and uncertainty of the future, Zürich is performing well and this should trickle down to employees by way of appropriate compensation, job-related rewards for recognition. Using the uncertainty of the future to withhold or reduce job related benefits is a poor approach because the future is always relatively uncertain and when times are good everyone should benefit.

Pros

Open and respectful culture, good balance between work and pleasure. Currently improving some HR processes. Good information sharing between managers and employees

Cons

Slow decision making process, many layers and unclear accountability, a lot of consultation, committees but lack or unwillingness to take hard decisions by line managers at head quarters. Lack of clear career development opportunities for employees, rather selective and unclear criteria

Advice to Senior Management

Simplify the structure and create accountability. Develop and implement clear career development programs for employees

Pros

Diversity in businesses (life, non-life & fee-management)
International
Safe workplace
limited downside

Cons

Complicated
Compliance driven
No pay for performance (no up-side)

Advice to Senior Management

Pay for performance

Pros

Employees benefits from higher salaries and nice benefits that are typical in the Swiss financial services sector. It is an international company where you have the chance to work with people from all over the world. Career opportunities are abundant and it is relatively easy to move from position to position within the organization, even abroad when there is a good fit. There is a strong focus on performance management, career development and growth, but the employee has to take the lead to drive it. The work environment (e.g., colleagues, offices, locations) is nice. Colleagues and managers are competent in their field.

Cons

Zurich is a big, matrix company and decision-making and change comes slowly. Frequently, too many people have to approve or comment on initiatives before they can more forward. While awareness is good, it really slows down getting things done quickly. IT services are fair; many software applications which we must use are outdated (e.g., Office 2002, Microsoft Content Management System, Notes 6.5), thus leading to inefficiency. Getting the latest software to do your job well can be a challenge. Work-life balance can difficult. An employee really has to take charge and manage the situation, because your supervisor is frequently under pressure that gets passed on to you..

Advice to Senior Management

Cut the number of people who have to approve an initiative. Allow us to be more agile and move ahead without have to inform and seek support from so many managers. Give us the tools to find the right people in the organization.

Pros

The culture is very relaxed and comfortable, in the country head offices and especially in the corporate center. The work environment is also highly international and most colleagues are socially competent.

Internal networking can bring good opportunities to a lucky few.

Cons

The matrix organization is overly complex and reporting lines are often unclear. This is due in part to the ongoing shift from a organization based on independent country units to one trending towards global functions. Also, much of ZFS management comes from accounting or consulting backgrounds and thus have recreated a sort of academic partnership-style of leading which does not emphasize individual accountability.

Due largely to continuing organizational changes and poor communication between reporting units, McKinseys permeate the place both as consultants and as internal hires (ZFS is one of their largest global contracts.) Given the tradition of employing masses of consultants, management has been coddled to the point that decision-making is viewed largely as commissioning another set of slides. Major initiatives rarely get pushed through to completion given the lack of management ownership.

Data is also fairly poorly coordinated / unavailable on most levels.

Advice to Senior Management

Increase follow up on initiatives to streamline operations, promote and appropriately mentor internal hires.