Goldman Sachs Promotion Track, From Vice President to Managing Director, Explained

Every two years, a quiet but intense reckoning takes place inside Goldman Sachs. Vice presidents and executive directors across the firm wait to learn whether they will be elevated to managing director, a rank that sits just one level below the partnership and represents one of the most consequential career milestones in finance. The firm typically prepares its announcement for early November, a moment that effectively kicks off Wall Street's annual promotion season and sets off a wave of similar announcements at rivals including Citigroup and Morgan Stanley in the months that follow.

Understanding how this process works, what it measures, and what it means for your trajectory is essential if you are anywhere on Goldman's career ladder.

The Promotion Ladder

Goldman's senior hierarchy runs in a clear sequence: vice president, then executive director, then managing director. The partnership sits above all of that, and in the firm's cultural shorthand it functions as a separate tier entirely. Business Insider has described the partners as "the bank's all-powerful politburo of top execs," a characterization that captures how insulated and consequential that inner circle is. Managing director is the rank that puts you on the edge of that world, which is precisely why the selection process for it is treated with such gravity internally.

For analysts and associates lower in the hierarchy, the MD promotion cycle serves as a visible benchmark for what long-term success at the firm looks like and signals which colleagues and divisions are in favor.

How Often It Happens and Who Gets Promoted

Because MD promotions occur only every two years rather than annually, each cycle carries compounded weight. Missing one cohort does not mean a promotion the following year; it means waiting for the next full cycle. That cadence raises the stakes considerably for eligible vice presidents and executive directors who know the window is limited.

Historically, Goldman elevates roughly 600 employees to managing director in each cycle, a figure that represents approximately 1% of the firm's total workforce. The 2025 cycle came in above that baseline: 638 employees were promoted, the highest number since 2021. More than 70% of those new managing directors came from revenue-generating divisions, with global banking, markets, and asset and wealth management accounting for the bulk of the class. That distribution reflects where the firm has been generating the strongest results, and in 2025 the expectation was that high performers in AI banking and sales and trading would be particularly well-represented, given how much revenue those areas had driven.

The Evaluation Process: What "Cross-Ruffing" Actually Means

The mechanics of the selection process are rarely discussed openly inside the firm, which is by design. The process is described as highly confidential and stretches across months of evaluations before any announcement is made. Central to it is a practice Goldman insiders refer to as "cross-ruffing": senior leaders discreetly solicit feedback about candidates from colleagues across different parts of the firm, building a picture of each person that is not limited to their immediate team or business line.

This cross-functional feedback loop is meant to surface how candidates are perceived beyond their own division, whether they are seen as collaborative, whether their reputation holds up across functions, and whether peers and superiors in other areas view them as someone capable of carrying broader institutional responsibility.

The scale of this review is significant. In the 2025 cycle, the process involved over 6,000 internal interviews, a number that underscores how many people across the firm are drawn into the evaluation even for a cohort of 638. That works out to roughly ten interviews or feedback conversations per promoted MD, though in practice the distribution is uneven; contested or high-profile candidates likely generate considerably more review than those whose cases are more straightforward.

What the Firm Is Actually Evaluating

The stated criteria go beyond recent revenue numbers or deal credits. Candidates are assessed on their long-term contributions to the firm and on leadership potential, not only on short-term performance metrics. That distinction matters in practice: a strong year in a volatile market may help a candidate's case, but it is unlikely to be sufficient on its own if the broader feedback on leadership and institutional contribution is thin.

Writing in the memo that announced the 2025 class, Goldman CEO David Solomon put it plainly: "These decisions are extremely difficult, and this year was no exception. We had to make tough choices among many talented colleagues across the firm, and we congratulate those who have earned this significant career milestone."

That language is not boilerplate. It reflects a genuine constraint: the pool of eligible and qualified candidates is far larger than the roughly 600 slots available in any given cycle, and the cross-ruffing process exists precisely because the firm believes it needs a mechanism for distinguishing among people who all have strong performance records.

Which Divisions Carry the Most Weight

The 2025 data makes the division-level dynamics explicit. With more than 70% of new MDs coming from global banking, markets, and asset and wealth management, those in revenue-generating roles have a structural advantage in cohort composition. That does not mean promotion from support or control functions is impossible, but the numbers reflect where the firm concentrates its senior investment.

The emphasis on AI banking and sales and trading in 2025 is consistent with a broader pattern: Goldman tends to promote most aggressively into the ranks that are driving current revenue cycles. For vice presidents and executive directors in those areas, strong performance during a hot market creates a genuine tail wind. For those in divisions not in the spotlight, making a case for promotion requires demonstrating cross-firm impact and leadership that is visible beyond the immediate team.

What the Promotion Means in Practice

Reaching managing director changes your relationship with the firm in ways that go well beyond title. Compensation structures shift, with a greater proportion of pay tied to the firm's overall performance and longer vesting timelines. The expectation of institutional responsibility increases: MDs are expected to develop and retain talent beneath them, manage client relationships at a senior level, and contribute to the firm's direction in ways that vice presidents are not formally required to do.

The managing director rank also represents the point at which partnership consideration becomes a realistic, if still highly selective, possibility. Most managing directors will not become partners. But you cannot become a partner without first being an MD, and the habits, reputation, and institutional relationships built at that level are what the partnership process evaluates when the time comes.

What to Know if You Are Eligible

If you are a vice president or executive director at Goldman and a promotion cycle is approaching, several things follow from how the process works. Because feedback is gathered through cross-ruffing well before any announcement, the reputation you have built across divisions and functions, not just within your immediate group, is already part of your file. Waiting until the cycle opens to think about cross-functional visibility is too late.

The confidentiality of the process also means that candidates typically receive no formal signal about where they stand until an outcome is communicated. The firm does not run a transparent merit ladder with posted criteria; it runs a judgment process conducted by senior leaders who weigh multiple inputs across months. That opacity is a feature of the system, not a gap in communication.

The two-year cadence, the 6,000-interview review scale, and CEO-level involvement in finalizing the class all reflect an institution that treats this particular decision as one of its most consequential. For anyone working toward it, understanding the mechanics is at least a start.