Which schools DON'T go to the "other" pile for McKinsey?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:+1 I read that nauseating NY piece, too.

I hate what this area has become. Students aspiring to be MBB consultants instead of nonprofit workers. FinTech instead of medicine. BigLaw instead of ADAs or DoJ. I’m not even that old but I feel angry and resentful, missing the more innocent days of the nineties.

What really gets me is that they aren’t going to medical school, engineering, urban planning, PhD biology programs … I don’t care so much that they aren’t going to “do gooder” jobs, but they aren’t doing *anything* enriching to themselves (other than $$) or society. What a waste of brainpower and the privilege of a top college education.

If you don’t want students chasing money, then tell top schools to stop charging an outlandish fortune. Even after the schools supposedly “meet need” kids have a ton of debt. It is utterly unrealistic to saddle them with debt and then expect them to go do something “enriching” to themselves or society.

Not true IME. 80% of Harvard seniors graduate debt free.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What other companies are as evil as McKinsey?

Nestle is still the most evil company in the world as far as I'm concerned. Not many others knowingly killed babies

Pfizer, Moderna, etc.

Monsanto has to be in this list too.

[Anonymous]

That’s because so many graduates are wealthy to begin with. They still enroll a very low % of Pell grant recipients.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That’s because so many graduates are wealthy to begin with. They still enroll a very low % of Pell grant recipients.

Pell grant recipients graduate from HYPS debt-free because their financial aid policies for low and middle income families is very generous.

Also, Harvard has around 20% of undergrads on Pell. That's not a "very low percent."

[Anonymous]

I worked at one of MBB out of college (10+ years ago) and even then, remember there being very real conversations around professional standards and which clients/cases to work out. I wasn’t staffed on any morally questionable cases (think tobacco, opioids) and generally felt good about my time there.

I would take anything the NYT says with a grain of salt. They are not without some very real biases (think: anything large and corporate) that make me question their reporting. Still, as a former consultant, I do think there’s some element of truth here that McK really needs to reckon with. Companies are only Teflon for so long.

And as to some of the comments here - standard DCUM that think the only meaningful and moral work can be found in the public sector. I think it’s short sighted to say anyone going into these jobs simply only cares about money. It’s intellectually dishonest and weak argument at best. Most people go into consulting (or law or medicine or finance) because they are also very intellectually curious and competitive. The work and analysis is *hard*. It’s refreshing and invigorating to “crack” a case as we used to call it and then implement that solution. Not everyone wants to work as a teacher or public servant and that’s ok!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I worked at one of MBB out of college (10+ years ago) and even then, remember there being very real conversations around professional standards and which clients/cases to work out. I wasn’t staffed on any morally questionable cases (think tobacco, opioids) and generally felt good about my time there.

I would take anything the NYT says with a grain of salt. They are not without some very real biases (think: anything large and corporate) that make me question their reporting. Still, as a former consultant, I do think there’s some element of truth here that McK really needs to reckon with. Companies are only Teflon for so long.

And as to some of the comments here - standard DCUM that think the only meaningful and moral work can be found in the public sector. I think it’s short sighted to say anyone going into these jobs simply only cares about money. It’s intellectually dishonest and weak argument at best. Most people go into consulting (or law or medicine or finance) because they are also very intellectually curious and competitive. The work and analysis is *hard*. It’s refreshing and invigorating to “crack” a case as we used to call it and then implement that solution. Not everyone wants to work as a teacher or public servant and that’s ok!

But as another PP said, it’s not a binary choice of consulting vs digging ditches in a village in Honduras. There are lots of jobs and companies and places to work. Why did PE and consulting become the holy grail?

[Anonymous]

I would never recommend consulting to my children. Been there, done that, it was a miserable experience.

[Anonymous]

I had no idea what McKinsey was or did until I clicked the link.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I worked at one of MBB out of college (10+ years ago) and even then, remember there being very real conversations around professional standards and which clients/cases to work out. I wasn’t staffed on any morally questionable cases (think tobacco, opioids) and generally felt good about my time there.

I would take anything the NYT says with a grain of salt. They are not without some very real biases (think: anything large and corporate) that make me question their reporting. Still, as a former consultant, I do think there’s some element of truth here that McK really needs to reckon with. Companies are only Teflon for so long.

And as to some of the comments here - standard DCUM that think the only meaningful and moral work can be found in the public sector. I think it’s short sighted to say anyone going into these jobs simply only cares about money. It’s intellectually dishonest and weak argument at best. Most people go into consulting (or law or medicine or finance) because they are also very intellectually curious and competitive. The work and analysis is *hard*. It’s refreshing and invigorating to “crack” a case as we used to call it and then implement that solution. Not everyone wants to work as a teacher or public servant and that’s ok!

No one here said the only meaningful and moral work can be found in the public sector and certainly it's ok if not everyone wants to work as a teacher or a public servant but feeling good about working there just because you didn't staff opioids yourself warrants a closer look. And what exactly about the NYT reporting are you challenging?

[Anonymous]

McKinsey is long past "teflon" as is evident from this thread

[Anonymous]

Now do Accenture.

[Anonymous]

Boston Consulting is supposed to be hot too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I worked at one of MBB out of college (10+ years ago) and even then, remember there being very real conversations around professional standards and which clients/cases to work out. I wasn’t staffed on any morally questionable cases (think tobacco, opioids) and generally felt good about my time there.

I would take anything the NYT says with a grain of salt. They are not without some very real biases (think: anything large and corporate) that make me question their reporting. Still, as a former consultant, I do think there’s some element of truth here that McK really needs to reckon with. Companies are only Teflon for so long.

And as to some of the comments here - standard DCUM that think the only meaningful and moral work can be found in the public sector. I think it’s short sighted to say anyone going into these jobs simply only cares about money. It’s intellectually dishonest and weak argument at best. Most people go into consulting (or law or medicine or finance) because they are also very intellectually curious and competitive. The work and analysis is *hard*. It’s refreshing and invigorating to “crack” a case as we used to call it and then implement that solution. Not everyone wants to work as a teacher or public servant and that’s ok!

"crack" a case = figuring out how to squeeze money out of poor sick people that they don't actually owe! whee!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I worked at one of MBB out of college (10+ years ago) and even then, remember there being very real conversations around professional standards and which clients/cases to work out. I wasn’t staffed on any morally questionable cases (think tobacco, opioids) and generally felt good about my time there.

I would take anything the NYT says with a grain of salt. They are not without some very real biases (think: anything large and corporate) that make me question their reporting. Still, as a former consultant, I do think there’s some element of truth here that McK really needs to reckon with. Companies are only Teflon for so long.

And as to some of the comments here - standard DCUM that think the only meaningful and moral work can be found in the public sector. I think it’s short sighted to say anyone going into these jobs simply only cares about money. It’s intellectually dishonest and weak argument at best. Most people go into consulting (or law or medicine or finance) because they are also very intellectually curious and competitive. The work and analysis is *hard*. It’s refreshing and invigorating to “crack” a case as we used to call it and then implement that solution. Not everyone wants to work as a teacher or public servant and that’s ok!

"crack" a case = figuring out how to squeeze money out of poor sick people that they don't actually owe! whee!

+1 I pray I am never in a position where I would describe "cracking the case" of helping a corporation to get richer as "refreshing and invigorating." Cringe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I worked at one of MBB out of college (10+ years ago) and even then, remember there being very real conversations around professional standards and which clients/cases to work out. I wasn’t staffed on any morally questionable cases (think tobacco, opioids) and generally felt good about my time there.

I would take anything the NYT says with a grain of salt. They are not without some very real biases (think: anything large and corporate) that make me question their reporting. Still, as a former consultant, I do think there’s some element of truth here that McK really needs to reckon with. Companies are only Teflon for so long.

And as to some of the comments here - standard DCUM that think the only meaningful and moral work can be found in the public sector. I think it’s short sighted to say anyone going into these jobs simply only cares about money. It’s intellectually dishonest and weak argument at best. Most people go into consulting (or law or medicine or finance) because they are also very intellectually curious and competitive. The work and analysis is *hard*. It’s refreshing and invigorating to “crack” a case as we used to call it and then implement that solution. Not everyone wants to work as a teacher or public servant and that’s ok!

BS. I have worked at one of these companies too. The work for the first couple years is mind numbingly boring and the hours suck. You only do it for $$$ and prestige