employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Morgan Stanley

Is this your company?

Morgan Stanley reviews

3.9

76% would recommend to a friend

(19,811 total reviews)
avatar

Ted Pick

80% approve of CEO

73% positive business outlook

Morgan Stanley has an employee rating of 3.9 out of 5 stars, based on 19,811 company reviews on Glassdoor which indicates that most employees have a good working experience there. The Morgan Stanley employee rating is in line with the average (within 1 standard deviation) for employers within the Finanzas industry (3.7 stars).

Reviews by job title

20K reviews
2.0
Mar 21, 2018
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Well paid, very good insurance, retirement plan contributions. Felt welcomed from day 1, people are very friendly and nice to hang out with after work when there is an event. The culture and politics (like diversity, workplace harassment, equality) was very well defined and I felt like it was actually enforced. Offices in Montreal have standing desks.

Cons

Terrible banking style, lots of management, doesn't move fast, tedious unnecessary meetings, hard to focus because people are always talking or there are constant interruption. Some things were good technology wise, but most of it was very old and update meant copy pasting code. The work was just not fun, spending a lot of time in 15+ years old systems. Saw some truly horrendous code. Wouldn't recommend for people out of school because you will not learn anything valuable. Your skills will degenerate quickly as you will not really "code" per say because most of the tasks are artificial. I would say the job is closer to a business analyst than a technologist.

1.0
Sep 8, 2013
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Great gym. Free parking onsite.

Cons

This review specifically applies to wealth management trading floor based primarily in Purchase that covers top Financial Advisors' UHNW, middle market and HNW Clients. The division falsely advertises itself as Capital Markets, that is NOT to be confused with the venerable Global Capital Markets desk in the city that brings deals to the market for major companies. Firstly, the horrible compensation ranges say it all: After ones first three years, compensation (both base and 'bonus') is far below street avg even within UHNW/how bucket: - Analyst ( yrs 1-3): $95k-$120k - Associate ( yrs 3-6): $110k- $160k - VP ( yrs 6-10): $110-$170k --> you are stuck now and doing exact same work as A2 ED (yrs 10- infinity): $150-$250k In the past four months alone, the unit has lost 12 of its stronger performing analysts, associates and younger vps. It even lost its HR Rep in charge of "retaining talent." One would think management would be inquisitive as to this brain drain, especially when they trumpet the wealth management's staff support's "intellectual capital" as a point of strength in helping the firms top individual Clients. But they have not nor do they seem to care. They recruit finance and Econ majors from schools like Harvard, Brown, Georgetown, BC, Nova etc, train them up over a year period, only to lose many by year three. THE ENTIRE ANALYST CLASS OF 2008 IS GONE; all left to greener pastures. Over the last four years, there has been 4 different heads of this division. That's right- MDs in charge of managing a 300 person division that produces a half billion in revenue per year just can't seem to stick around. This volatility at the top trickles down to the next rung of management (EDs and newer MDs) where a culture of solo performance, selfishness, complete lack of communication and mendacity permeates the environment. Some examples: - Multiple colleagues have told me, and I've heard it myself, that their manager told them that their performance review nor rating does NOT determine ones compensation. When pressed on what actually determines compensation, no manager has ever explained it. If for example you are a trader at the associate or vp level and produced $15MM in PnL for the year, you could very well get a 'bonus' of $20-30k pretax, and a low base; very uncompetitive for a 11 hr/day job with a 1 hr commute each way. This has occurred multiple of times to multiple ppl; don't think you'd be an exception. Regardless, no manager has ever explained the discrepancy between performance and pay. One can only infer it is because the division's management is of extremely poor quality and does not advocate senior execs on the divisions value add. - stagnate compensation between analyst-vp. Many second year analysts get paid as much if not more than first-third year vice presidents. One third year associate recently left to lesser competitor and was offered twice their MSWM capital markets total compensation. - three star associates who made VP in the last four months left to competitors after they found out their promotion came with a DROP in year on year compensation. They wete doubled at other firms. What kind of management promotes its up and coming officers only to then lower their year on year pay? Bad managers. - There is an institutional desk in the city at Broadway and 42nd- where management should encourage relationships and communication to open up, there actually is a policy that says sales staff in Purchase cannot communicate with their colleagues in the city about any market/ job related issue. - On top of a traders' PnL not being linked to anything comp related, neither are the sales force's sales commission. A sales person may do proactive trades that generate $10mm in gross credits over a year, but the managers do not attribute that work at the end of the year to that persons' efforts. Instead liken it to something that would have happened anyway. Well, what's the point of having a sales force then. If you don't believe those numbers just do a check on glassdoor but select "Purchase" as location, not nyc. If you decide to join this desk despite this warning, realize you will. E joining a glorified help desk

1.0
Oct 10, 2012
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Glasgow office staff try very hard to keep the office fun. Nice gym and nice canteen.

Cons

Where to start.......? Hardware is obsolete. PC was under spec'd and 4 years old when I joined. Servers were 10+ years old. Software developers need decent spec'd PC's. Time is money and when your PC can take 30+ seconds to display Outlook due to only having 2Gb of memory (2010!!) and using 4Gb of swap... well.... Software quality is non-existent Only manual testing performed by un-trained over worked team who know little about software they are testing. No automated testing to speak of. No unit tests. 1 manual test cycle per release. Any issues found are brushed over. Most code is not tested. Monthly releases done between 11pm and 7am Friday night to Saturday morning. Release dates can change and in 20 months working there I had two holidays cancelled due to changing dates without recompense. (lost hotels, concert tickets). When I complained I got told "perhaps investment banking is not for you" Staff totally over stretched. Very bright people are producing terrible software due to lack of continual personal development and absolutely no peer review system. Many of the engineers don't understand source control. Code is regularly copied around. Most engineers don't understand md5sum's, diff, patch etc. No code reviews whatsoever. Literally anything could be put into the code base. Think Superman III and Richard Pryor's half penny scam etc. Simply unacceptable in a place working with so much money. Lots of paperwork filling and box ticking - Understandable if the processes we're doing the paperwork for work. Pointless if they don't. Regularly people don't know what they are doing or the area they are working in and so lie / make things up so as not to look bad in front of management. Results in countless hours / days wasted each month with people having to double check things as you simply can't trust what anyone outwith your immediate team says. Interview process was dreadful. Many applicants had no proper competency testing and their applications were fast tracked because of their previous employment history and not their actual skills.

Viewing 37 - 39 of 19,811 Reviews

Glassdoor has 24,386 Morgan Stanley reviews submitted anonymously by Morgan Stanley employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if Morgan Stanley is right for you.