Equitable Career Growth & Development

Key Insight for Candidates

• Internal Mobility: Internal mobility is explicitly positioned as part of a “Career Model Framework,” and practices like “Opportunity Fairs” are described as mechanisms to surface internal candidates and make internal hiring more transparent. Company materials also quantify that a meaningful share of openings are filled by internal candidates, reinforcing that internal moves are an established pathway.
• Training & Education Access: Ongoing training is emphasized through initiatives like New Ways of Working (e.g., adaptive leadership, OKRs, design thinking, enterprise agile) with substantial training hours cited in disclosures. Tuition reimbursement, continuing education, and supported licensing/designation pathways (e.g., CFP/ChFC, FINRA licensing for advisor tracks) are described as ways to make upskilling more accessible.
• Leadership Development: Structured talent programs are described (e.g., Emerging Leaders rotational program and other named cohorts/partnerships) that provide mentoring, coaching, and exposure across business lines. These programs are positioned as intentional pipelines to prepare employees for larger roles and strengthen internal leadership benches.

• Manager Growth Support: Development outcomes are repeatedly framed as dependent on the immediate leader, local office, and business unit, indicating inconsistent day-to-day coaching and support. The experience is described as varying across corporate teams versus field/advisor environments, making local execution a key determinant of growth.
• Career Path Clarity: Progression is described as enabled rather than guaranteed, with advancement depending on openings, location, and business-unit dynamics. The advisor path is framed as practice- and production-driven rather than title-ladder driven, which can make “promotion” less clearly defined compared with corporate ladders.
• Unclear Advancement: Advancement is characterized as variable by function and timing, and even the internal-fill metric is noted as subject to change across hiring cycles. Differences between corporate roles (clearer skill ladders) and advisor roles (self-directed, performance-tied progression) can make expected advancement trajectories uneven across the organization.