It was a really interesting place to work at a Software Engineer. It made me understand the business. It made me understand that doing the right thing isn't valued. You do the thing that has the shortest ROI.
It also made me realize that it is horrible to build software with people who expect short term deliveries like the usual McKinsey engagement. People who expect that the automation of an Excel file takes the same time as getting a BA to do it.
I am now in a full time engineering position. I don't talk to clients anymore.
What I miss the most is coming into contact with people with a huge variety of backgrounds.
Which surprisingly were the people with who I had to spent the most amount of time explaining how software works.
Maybe I'm bad at it? Who knows. But I learned a lot, and I'm happy where I'm at now, so any bitterness would be misplaced.
I work with a guy who used to be at McKinsey. He's literally the worst coworker I've ever had. Everything needs to be done yesterday, except he takes weeks between responses. He delegates nothing to his people, and constantly tries to take over things from other departments, making himself an INCREDIBLE constraint and burden. They have an insanely toxic culture there.
> What I miss the most is coming into contact with people with a huge variety of backgrounds.
> Which surprisingly were the people with who I had to spent the most amount of time explaining how software works.
How is this surprising? I read this as "huge variety of backgrounds", meaning, all kinds of backgrounds which are NOT software. It would make sense to me they don't understand how software works.
I had a hard time working for an ex-McKinsey/Deloitte/MBA type a while ago for similar reasons: it was always favourable to push a quick hack to resolve an immediate issue, and literally nothing else mattered.
If you had to fight fires all hours day, night and weekend to keep on top of it, then so what? That’s the job. Getting heart palpitations because the red circle came up on the Slack icon on your screen? That’s the job.
Even with a clear path to a mid-term or even sustainable solution, it was like you weren’t building software but in a constant race to keep ARR ahead of churn, like in Wallace and Gromit where Gromit is frantically laying down track to keep his train going. Does the software even work? Who cares… it’s the $$$ that count.
I wasn’t really built for that, I felt like I was at odds with my own passion and I didn’t really want to put my name to the work I was doing.
Used to be at BCG. I think it's worth bearing in mind that relatively little consulting revenue -- even at the top strategy shops -- comes from pure strategy work anymore.
You can push much, much more volume and absolute impact through by running big merger integrations, digital transformation, and other large scale change projects at big companies.
It is basically a better business to become something like a premium Accenture, a "get stuff done" kind of consultancy. You can staff an army of junior people for a very very long time on those kinds of projects.
It's just not that easy to keep people staffed on 5-6 person teams solely on 8-12 week pure strategy engagements.
These kinds of projects are also the first discretionary spending yo get cut when times get tough.
If you're going to be focused on the pure strategy work, you'll probably want to stay really really small. We've seen some of this in investment banking with firms like Allen & Co or Qatalyst. Challenge is that consulting doesn't come with scalable monetization via success fees.
It's just not great business to be a boutique consultancy, I think.
It’s true in the IT analyst business too. While there are people in 1-10 person firms who earn a living, they’re mostly not getting rich and this is a long term trend line with a lot of consolidation of medium sized firms over time. To be reasonably successful you probably need a real focus and be good at selling.
Had a conversation with an ex-Gartner analyst—now at a product company—and his comment is that even at the big analyst firms, comp isn’t great at least below senior management.
> It's just not great business to be a boutique consultancy, I think.
You bill per hour and there’s only so many hours to bill and your rate can only be so high. The only way to scale revenue is headcount so you can bill more hours.
It’s like handling radioactive dynamite but I think a boutique firm specializing in fixed price projects could make a decent amount of money. You have to be really really good though because one bad project contracted at a fixed price could mean lights out.
It's not just that they're too big—it's that they're morally corrupt and largely unregulated. These firms have been involved in everything from tobacco lobbying to the 2008 financial crisis to pushing opioids, and that’s just scratching the surface. Despite their role in these crises, they’ve faced zero accountability and continue to rake in massive profits.
As for their supposed value (which comes directly from ex-employees): big consulting firms are essentially hired as a liability shield for the C-suite. Their main job is to back up whatever the CEO already wants to do (usually cost-cutting). This way, executives can claim: a) "McKinsey recommended it, so it must be right," and b) "If it goes wrong, it’s on McKinsey, not us."
I have a small story about McKinsey from friend of mine in the Indian Bureaucracy from about 10-12 years ago.
McKinsey was doing some work for their dept. I asked him what they did. He said, "McKinsey asked us for lots of information. Then they put it into a dossier and gave it back to us."
Don't all these consulting firms have a really bad record when it comes to large-scale infrastructure projects? Some of the worst examples are Ciudad Real International Airport (Spain/McKinsey), Karuma Hydroelectric Project (Uganda/Deloitte), Chongwe River Water Supply Project (Zambia/Boston Consulting Group), Isimba Dam Project (Uganda/McKinsey), Haramain High-Speed Rail Project (Saudi Arabia/Deloitte), and Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant on Long Island, New York (McKinsey).
In constrast, China's infrastructure projects are highly successful - high-speed rail now covers 42,000 km across 100 corridors, and the first one was only completed in 2008. Based on their example, the most efficient way to build modern infrastructure is to cut the consultancy firms out of the loop entirely.
With labor becoming fungible in the eyes of c-suites, the holders of institutional knowledge are the libraries of the consulting firms. Consulting firms also have tech talent that traditional businesses had no access to in the past, so any large scale data driven related project is done with consultants.
However: 1. The costs are insane and probably we reached the point where the benefits do not justify the prices they are charging.
2. Wfh is a cheat code to get access to cheap tech personnel that is pissed with the RTO of big tech. I keep hearing tech folks working at traditional manufacturing shops remotely these days.
The big firms just need to be big and known. There value delivered isn’t in the PowerPoint explaining that cutting costs and increasing revenue will increase profits. The value added is that companies buy a stamp from a famous firm when they deliver staff cuts, reorganizations or other controversial news.
As such it doesn’t really hurt to go for scale. They’re a standards org for headcount reduction.
Current McKinsey here. I don’t think anyone expects the current difficulties to last indefinitely. Its fairly well established that consulting struggles during times of economic uncertainty (but does fine when things are outright bad or good).
McKinsey has been doing "silent layoffs" in the last few review cycles, i.e., shrinking overall headcount after performance reviews – as there's not enough work to go around. Hard do meet the bar for a one-year BA, if you've only been on 1-2 studies – which is not exactly your fault.
Yes. Company continue to pay them for political reasons mostly. Just look at how many McKinsey partners became CEOs and failed terribly at it (latest example Starbucks
What's interesting to me here is that in the period 2013-2023, only E&Y, KPMG and McK of the "great eight" moved up or down in the ranking, and they only moved around in the 4 through 6 spots by tiny revenue amounts. Maybe that was a max scale decision on the part of those companies' management. On the other hand, I'd love to know the yield per employee. That would be an interesting read.
I've por es as an external consultant to KPMG as a software engineer and I loved that all processes are clearly defined. I think is big because all steps are clear for everyone in the company so the do not misstep that often.. I also felt like we had so few meetings and a lot of work was done in little time with almost 0 interference from management.
For a more detailed recount of McKinsey adventures (including their involvements in South Africa and with the opioid crisis), check out the book "When McKinsey Comes to Town" by Walt Bogdanich and Michael Forsythe.
> The quicker corporate clients become comfortable with chatbots, the faster they may simply go directly to their makers in Silicon Valley. If that happens, the great eight’s short-term gains from AI could lead them towards irrelevance. That is something for all the strategy brains to stew on.
The cloud divisions of "big tech" might be the catalysts for this upcoming disintermediation.
After enduring months of suspicion and doubt, I decided to take action when my ex-husband's behavior grew increasingly secretive and distant. His frequent business trips and the sudden decline in the quality of our relationship left me feeling isolated and anxious. That's when a friend recommended Crypto Pandemic Hunter, a professional investigation service, and it was a decision that would ultimately change the course of my life.
From the moment I contacted Crypto Pandemic Hunter, I felt supported. The team responded swiftly providing guidance and reassurance in what was a very difficult and emotional situation. They took the time to listen to my concerns and laid out a plan of action that was both discreet and thorough.
The investigation began with the installation of sophisticated spyware on my ex-husband's phone. This allowed them to track his calls, messages, and monitor his social media activities. The process was straightforward, and the team walked me through each step with patience and clarity. Within days, the evidence began to emerge, and the reality of his infidelity became painfully clear.
The information gathered was nothing short of shocking. My ex-husband had been cheating on me with another lady double life. The Crypto Pandemic Hunter team was meticulous in their work, piecing together a timeline of his deceit that left no room for doubt.
Armed with this damning evidence, I was able to confront my ex-husband with confidence. The proof was undeniable, and his web of lies couldn't help the situation. The pain of betrayal was intense, but the knowledge that I had taken control of the situation provided a strange sense of empowerment. The evidence they provided was instrumental in negotiating a fair settlement and ensuring my rights were protected.
In the end, Crypto Pandemic Hunter not only helped me bust my ex-husband cheating but also gave me the tools to move forward with my life. The peace of mind that comes with knowing the truth is invaluable, and I am forever grateful for their assistance.
If you find yourself in a similar situation, battling infidelity and suspicion, I cannot recommend Crypto Pandemic Hunter highly enough. They provided the answers I needed to take back control of my life, and for that, I am forever thankful.
Their email is cryptopandemichunter@consultant,.com
fuck mck, every company they get their hands on is turning into a piece of shit human capitalism slavery where max profit is the only important thing fuck consultancies
Let me propose an alternate theory: fines and enforcement have become too small, so-as to become just a cost of doing business.
Many of these employees are so-incentivized by fiscal profit that they fail to see the immorality, just seeing opportunity. Maybe if our regulators weren't in bed with so many of the major funds...
"If you think there's a solution, you're part of the problem." —George Carlin (Conan O'brien interview)
> Excitement among clients over this type of “generative” AI is also creating opportunities for new work. Mr Schweizer says that BCG has already completed hundreds of projects with clients around the technology. Accenture has booked $1.1bn-worth of generative-AI work in the past six months.
During a gold rush teach people how to use their shovels.
Of course they got too big, and especially they got too enmeshed with the auditing business.
It's time to break them all up. The "firewall" that should be there from a legal perspective is a joke in practice, and when there are only three to four companies, there is no place for fresh blood and with it fresh ideas to enter the market.
https://archive.is/qlF5n
It was a really interesting place to work at a Software Engineer. It made me understand the business. It made me understand that doing the right thing isn't valued. You do the thing that has the shortest ROI.
It also made me realize that it is horrible to build software with people who expect short term deliveries like the usual McKinsey engagement. People who expect that the automation of an Excel file takes the same time as getting a BA to do it.
I am now in a full time engineering position. I don't talk to clients anymore.
What I miss the most is coming into contact with people with a huge variety of backgrounds.
Which surprisingly were the people with who I had to spent the most amount of time explaining how software works.
Maybe I'm bad at it? Who knows. But I learned a lot, and I'm happy where I'm at now, so any bitterness would be misplaced.
Not to mention they paid for my GC.
I work with a guy who used to be at McKinsey. He's literally the worst coworker I've ever had. Everything needs to be done yesterday, except he takes weeks between responses. He delegates nothing to his people, and constantly tries to take over things from other departments, making himself an INCREDIBLE constraint and burden. They have an insanely toxic culture there.
> What I miss the most is coming into contact with people with a huge variety of backgrounds. > Which surprisingly were the people with who I had to spent the most amount of time explaining how software works.
How is this surprising? I read this as "huge variety of backgrounds", meaning, all kinds of backgrounds which are NOT software. It would make sense to me they don't understand how software works.
>Not to mention they paid for my GC.
What does GC mean in this context?
I had a hard time working for an ex-McKinsey/Deloitte/MBA type a while ago for similar reasons: it was always favourable to push a quick hack to resolve an immediate issue, and literally nothing else mattered.
If you had to fight fires all hours day, night and weekend to keep on top of it, then so what? That’s the job. Getting heart palpitations because the red circle came up on the Slack icon on your screen? That’s the job.
Even with a clear path to a mid-term or even sustainable solution, it was like you weren’t building software but in a constant race to keep ARR ahead of churn, like in Wallace and Gromit where Gromit is frantically laying down track to keep his train going. Does the software even work? Who cares… it’s the $$$ that count.
I wasn’t really built for that, I felt like I was at odds with my own passion and I didn’t really want to put my name to the work I was doing.
>You do the thing that has the shortest ROI.
This is a tombstone for humanity and lots of companies if we all do this.
How is the work culture overall? I am of the opinion they are ruthless and will cull you if they think you are underperforming.
Used to be at BCG. I think it's worth bearing in mind that relatively little consulting revenue -- even at the top strategy shops -- comes from pure strategy work anymore.
You can push much, much more volume and absolute impact through by running big merger integrations, digital transformation, and other large scale change projects at big companies.
It is basically a better business to become something like a premium Accenture, a "get stuff done" kind of consultancy. You can staff an army of junior people for a very very long time on those kinds of projects.
It's just not that easy to keep people staffed on 5-6 person teams solely on 8-12 week pure strategy engagements.
These kinds of projects are also the first discretionary spending yo get cut when times get tough.
If you're going to be focused on the pure strategy work, you'll probably want to stay really really small. We've seen some of this in investment banking with firms like Allen & Co or Qatalyst. Challenge is that consulting doesn't come with scalable monetization via success fees.
It's just not great business to be a boutique consultancy, I think.
It’s true in the IT analyst business too. While there are people in 1-10 person firms who earn a living, they’re mostly not getting rich and this is a long term trend line with a lot of consolidation of medium sized firms over time. To be reasonably successful you probably need a real focus and be good at selling.
Had a conversation with an ex-Gartner analyst—now at a product company—and his comment is that even at the big analyst firms, comp isn’t great at least below senior management.
> It's just not great business to be a boutique consultancy, I think.
You bill per hour and there’s only so many hours to bill and your rate can only be so high. The only way to scale revenue is headcount so you can bill more hours.
It’s like handling radioactive dynamite but I think a boutique firm specializing in fixed price projects could make a decent amount of money. You have to be really really good though because one bad project contracted at a fixed price could mean lights out.
It's not just that they're too big—it's that they're morally corrupt and largely unregulated. These firms have been involved in everything from tobacco lobbying to the 2008 financial crisis to pushing opioids, and that’s just scratching the surface. Despite their role in these crises, they’ve faced zero accountability and continue to rake in massive profits.
As for their supposed value (which comes directly from ex-employees): big consulting firms are essentially hired as a liability shield for the C-suite. Their main job is to back up whatever the CEO already wants to do (usually cost-cutting). This way, executives can claim: a) "McKinsey recommended it, so it must be right," and b) "If it goes wrong, it’s on McKinsey, not us."
I have a small story about McKinsey from friend of mine in the Indian Bureaucracy from about 10-12 years ago.
McKinsey was doing some work for their dept. I asked him what they did. He said, "McKinsey asked us for lots of information. Then they put it into a dossier and gave it back to us."
Don't all these consulting firms have a really bad record when it comes to large-scale infrastructure projects? Some of the worst examples are Ciudad Real International Airport (Spain/McKinsey), Karuma Hydroelectric Project (Uganda/Deloitte), Chongwe River Water Supply Project (Zambia/Boston Consulting Group), Isimba Dam Project (Uganda/McKinsey), Haramain High-Speed Rail Project (Saudi Arabia/Deloitte), and Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant on Long Island, New York (McKinsey).
In constrast, China's infrastructure projects are highly successful - high-speed rail now covers 42,000 km across 100 corridors, and the first one was only completed in 2008. Based on their example, the most efficient way to build modern infrastructure is to cut the consultancy firms out of the loop entirely.
With labor becoming fungible in the eyes of c-suites, the holders of institutional knowledge are the libraries of the consulting firms. Consulting firms also have tech talent that traditional businesses had no access to in the past, so any large scale data driven related project is done with consultants.
However: 1. The costs are insane and probably we reached the point where the benefits do not justify the prices they are charging. 2. Wfh is a cheat code to get access to cheap tech personnel that is pissed with the RTO of big tech. I keep hearing tech folks working at traditional manufacturing shops remotely these days.
The big firms just need to be big and known. There value delivered isn’t in the PowerPoint explaining that cutting costs and increasing revenue will increase profits. The value added is that companies buy a stamp from a famous firm when they deliver staff cuts, reorganizations or other controversial news. As such it doesn’t really hurt to go for scale. They’re a standards org for headcount reduction.
Current McKinsey here. I don’t think anyone expects the current difficulties to last indefinitely. Its fairly well established that consulting struggles during times of economic uncertainty (but does fine when things are outright bad or good).
The mentioned memo can be read here: https://web.archive.org/web/20240316081510/https://obligatio...
McKinsey has been doing "silent layoffs" in the last few review cycles, i.e., shrinking overall headcount after performance reviews – as there's not enough work to go around. Hard do meet the bar for a one-year BA, if you've only been on 1-2 studies – which is not exactly your fault.
Yes. Company continue to pay them for political reasons mostly. Just look at how many McKinsey partners became CEOs and failed terribly at it (latest example Starbucks
What's interesting to me here is that in the period 2013-2023, only E&Y, KPMG and McK of the "great eight" moved up or down in the ranking, and they only moved around in the 4 through 6 spots by tiny revenue amounts. Maybe that was a max scale decision on the part of those companies' management. On the other hand, I'd love to know the yield per employee. That would be an interesting read.
I've por es as an external consultant to KPMG as a software engineer and I loved that all processes are clearly defined. I think is big because all steps are clear for everyone in the company so the do not misstep that often.. I also felt like we had so few meetings and a lot of work was done in little time with almost 0 interference from management.
For a more detailed recount of McKinsey adventures (including their involvements in South Africa and with the opioid crisis), check out the book "When McKinsey Comes to Town" by Walt Bogdanich and Michael Forsythe.
> The quicker corporate clients become comfortable with chatbots, the faster they may simply go directly to their makers in Silicon Valley. If that happens, the great eight’s short-term gains from AI could lead them towards irrelevance. That is something for all the strategy brains to stew on.
The cloud divisions of "big tech" might be the catalysts for this upcoming disintermediation.
PHONE SPYING AND PHONE HACK SERVICES
After enduring months of suspicion and doubt, I decided to take action when my ex-husband's behavior grew increasingly secretive and distant. His frequent business trips and the sudden decline in the quality of our relationship left me feeling isolated and anxious. That's when a friend recommended Crypto Pandemic Hunter, a professional investigation service, and it was a decision that would ultimately change the course of my life.
From the moment I contacted Crypto Pandemic Hunter, I felt supported. The team responded swiftly providing guidance and reassurance in what was a very difficult and emotional situation. They took the time to listen to my concerns and laid out a plan of action that was both discreet and thorough.
The investigation began with the installation of sophisticated spyware on my ex-husband's phone. This allowed them to track his calls, messages, and monitor his social media activities. The process was straightforward, and the team walked me through each step with patience and clarity. Within days, the evidence began to emerge, and the reality of his infidelity became painfully clear.
The information gathered was nothing short of shocking. My ex-husband had been cheating on me with another lady double life. The Crypto Pandemic Hunter team was meticulous in their work, piecing together a timeline of his deceit that left no room for doubt.
Armed with this damning evidence, I was able to confront my ex-husband with confidence. The proof was undeniable, and his web of lies couldn't help the situation. The pain of betrayal was intense, but the knowledge that I had taken control of the situation provided a strange sense of empowerment. The evidence they provided was instrumental in negotiating a fair settlement and ensuring my rights were protected.
In the end, Crypto Pandemic Hunter not only helped me bust my ex-husband cheating but also gave me the tools to move forward with my life. The peace of mind that comes with knowing the truth is invaluable, and I am forever grateful for their assistance.
If you find yourself in a similar situation, battling infidelity and suspicion, I cannot recommend Crypto Pandemic Hunter highly enough. They provided the answers I needed to take back control of my life, and for that, I am forever thankful. Their email is cryptopandemichunter@consultant,.com
Quick reminder that McKinsey helped Purdue Pharma & co boost their opioid drugs sales, starting the opioid dependency and overdose epidemic in the US.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McKinsey_%26_Company
Is it fair to say that ...
Consulting is the oldest profession ;)
fuck mck, every company they get their hands on is turning into a piece of shit human capitalism slavery where max profit is the only important thing fuck consultancies
Obligatory John Oliver video on the topic: https://youtu.be/AiOUojVd6xQ?si=anI1_FKkDM4oDI1M
Let me propose an alternate theory: fines and enforcement have become too small, so-as to become just a cost of doing business.
Many of these employees are so-incentivized by fiscal profit that they fail to see the immorality, just seeing opportunity. Maybe if our regulators weren't in bed with so many of the major funds...
"If you think there's a solution, you're part of the problem." —George Carlin (Conan O'brien interview)
> Excitement among clients over this type of “generative” AI is also creating opportunities for new work. Mr Schweizer says that BCG has already completed hundreds of projects with clients around the technology. Accenture has booked $1.1bn-worth of generative-AI work in the past six months.
During a gold rush teach people how to use their shovels.
I think more than becoming to big the solutions are founded on a narrow matrix of logic or group think.
[dead]
[dead]
Gotten*
C'mon, The Economist
[flagged]
Deloitte sends a large delegation to Davos annually, but they do it ironically.
Of course they got too big, and especially they got too enmeshed with the auditing business.
It's time to break them all up. The "firewall" that should be there from a legal perspective is a joke in practice, and when there are only three to four companies, there is no place for fresh blood and with it fresh ideas to enter the market.