Brunswick doesn’t have a real strategy as a firm. As an employee, you will hear a lot of positioning about it being a “critical issues advisory firm,” but once you cut beneath the facade, there is little substance. In my time, I found the firm seeks to latch onto the next shiny thing (Geopolitics, ESG/climate, Tax) which it can dangle in front of clients, but doesn’t truly invest in building a durable offering with the resource backing to truly scale.. So instead you have some world-class experts who come into the firm, get frustrated over time as their skill sets are not being deployed, and then inevitably move on. Part of this may simply be a reflection of the business model. When you advise 1/3 of the FTSE, you are conflicted from working with competitors, so in my view, this lends itself to an anti-entrepreneurial environment where those who own the client relationships are reticent to push the boundaries in how they advise clients and really take the time to understand the expertise available to them in Brunswick. It’s far easier to keep the client happy and just give the client what they are asking for, especially when you are unlikely to see any comp upside from growing the account (see below), Another contributing factor may be the “black box” nature of comp and the incentive structure. In my time as a Partner, I did not meet anyone who had a clear understanding of how they would be compensated if they were successful in growing business, So instead everyone creates this impression that they are incredibly busy, doing really important work for clients to help them on their latest crisis, when the reality is much different.
