Deloitte consultant stereotype

[Anonymous]

It's like a cult, that's why people don't like it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Fed and in my experience, Deloitte sells a good game and brings in all their top people to talk to senior Feds, but then brings in 22 year olds to do the work and the results are subpar.

Fed (15) and bullseye what you wrote.

Ding, ding, ding!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I still have no idea what a consultant does.

Nothing, especially nitwits at Deloitte. It’s a racket industry created from thin air in the Reagan 80s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still have no idea what a consultant does.

Nothing, especially nitwits at Deloitte. It’s a racket industry created from thin air in the Reagan 80s.

Eh, specialized consulting is completely valid (and I say this as someone who doesn’t care for it personally). I find the general college types worthless because they lack domain knowledge. They also don’t really have strong quant skills to do the data legwork. McK has data teams but they don’t get paid as much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still have no idea what a consultant does.

Nothing, especially nitwits at Deloitte. It’s a racket industry created from thin air in the Reagan 80s.

Eh, specialized consulting is completely valid (and I say this as someone who doesn’t care for it personally). I find the general college types worthless because they lack domain knowledge. They also don’t really have strong quant skills to do the data legwork. McK has data teams but they don’t get paid as much.

When my company retained McKinsey because some big boss wanted to, the McKinsey project leads spec'd out a market research project and then it was carried out by internal company staff. We essentially treated them like an internal company customer. Our experienced team listened to what they wanted, then we gave them consulting assistance and designed a market research project to answer their questions. We fielded it through our supplier, gave them the results, and then a recent engineer grad from Rice did some extra data analysis on his own (front-line project team analyst). The McKinsey project team then did some promotion of the research results and ran a workshop (bunch of talking, discussing, and prioritizing).

Not impressed. Did not need their expensive assistance. Completely lived up to the joke of "A consultant looks at your watch to tell you what time it is".

I have worked with specialized engineering consultants who provide actual technical assessments vs. "strategy". They add value, assuming the question asked of them has merit.

Basically what companies are paying for with strategy consulting is access to a set of people who might not want to work for their company because it's not a prestige employer. Or a company might not want to continuously employ a lot of high-priced talent. Then there are lots of political reasons for hiring strategy consultants - every reason you can probably imagine. Then there are execs' emotional issues/needs. One of them is insecurity..."What do those genius consultants know that I don't?" Another is..."I am friends with Consulting Partner X and want to do business with them because they are a really great/smart/interesting person."

I have seen and do understand the large-scale IT project implementations that bring in lots of consultants for a few years. This is basically paying a premium for specialized labor.

Employees at client companies who see the consultants at work know a lot more about the b.s. that goes on and how the consultants are doing than the top execs. A lot of times people in leadership don't want to hear it...especially when they made the decision to spend the money or there are political considerations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still have no idea what a consultant does.

Nothing, especially nitwits at Deloitte. It’s a racket industry created from thin air in the Reagan 80s.

Eh, specialized consulting is completely valid (and I say this as someone who doesn’t care for it personally). I find the general college types worthless because they lack domain knowledge. They also don’t really have strong quant skills to do the data legwork. McK has data teams but they don’t get paid as much.

When my company retained McKinsey because some big boss wanted to, the McKinsey project leads spec'd out a market research project and then it was carried out by internal company staff. We essentially treated them like an internal company customer. Our experienced team listened to what they wanted, then we gave them consulting assistance and designed a market research project to answer their questions. We fielded it through our supplier, gave them the results, and then a recent engineer grad from Rice did some extra data analysis on his own (front-line project team analyst). The McKinsey project team then did some promotion of the research results and ran a workshop (bunch of talking, discussing, and prioritizing).

Not impressed. Did not need their expensive assistance. Completely lived up to the joke of "A consultant looks at your watch to tell you what time it is".

I have worked with specialized engineering consultants who provide actual technical assessments vs. "strategy". They add value, assuming the question asked of them has merit.

Basically what companies are paying for with strategy consulting is access to a set of people who might not want to work for their company because it's not a prestige employer. Or a company might not want to continuously employ a lot of high-priced talent. Then there are lots of political reasons for hiring strategy consultants - every reason you can probably imagine. Then there are execs' emotional issues/needs. One of them is insecurity..."What do those genius consultants know that I don't?" Another is..."I am friends with Consulting Partner X and want to do business with them because they are a really great/smart/interesting person."

I have seen and do understand the large-scale IT project implementations that bring in lots of consultants for a few years. This is basically paying a premium for specialized labor.

Employees at client companies who see the consultants at work know a lot more about the b.s. that goes on and how the consultants are doing than the top execs. A lot of times people in leadership don't want to hear it...especially when they made the decision to spend the money or there are political considerations.

It sounds like your boss rather shell out 120k per engagement than giving you 12k more to do the same job. But such is life…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yep, especially at DU all they do is get lit, it's pretty pathetic....that twitter rant above couldn't be more accurate! Even after doing it ALL they find a way to promote those who are "favored" for the partner track and deny the others....

+1

This is true. I know one. She was passed out drunk, forgot to call her husband. Hungover, he almost called the police.

Agree it’s very accurate too, alcohol is pushed at every team bonding and firm event. I used to be envious they would all go out and not need to pay for drinks. But now that would be the last thing I want to do when I have kids to get home to.

Midwit laptop class lunatics with drinking issues who cheat on the spouses when on the road

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People glorify MBB and say they are so much better, but you wouldn’t believe the number of ex-BCG and McK people ending up in middle of the road strategy manager roles at companies like Target, etc.

Totally. Very few exit to a pre IPO success. Most end up as Director, Sr. Director, VP level at a regular ole F500. Working next to the kids from Rutgers, UDel and UMD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People glorify MBB and say they are so much better, but you wouldn’t believe the number of ex-BCG and McK people ending up in middle of the road strategy manager roles at companies like Target, etc.

Totally. Very few exit to a pre IPO success. Most end up as Director, Sr. Director, VP level at a regular ole F500. Working next to the kids from Rutgers, UDel and UMD.

Yes and 90% of the Deloitte consultants end up stuck at senior managers for 20 years before landing a director role. So Mbb does have a leg up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People glorify MBB and say they are so much better, but you wouldn’t believe the number of ex-BCG and McK people ending up in middle of the road strategy manager roles at companies like Target, etc.

Totally. Very few exit to a pre IPO success. Most end up as Director, Sr. Director, VP level at a regular ole F500. Working next to the kids from Rutgers, UDel and UMD.

I always thought VP is pretty good for F500? The one of my dept was ex-McK and he was pretty sharp. Engineering degree though.