Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Consultants in general are insecure overachievers, whether MBB or Deloitte.

No. College kids can not casually fall into MBB. You have to be a top rung overachiever; target school, perfect grades, outgoing, polish, captivating. While dime a dozen drifting state school kids with half-decent grades can fall into Deloitte internships and ft offers. Totally different leagues.

Maybe true but they still have no clue what they are talking about.

Getting A’s does not equal to being wise.

Sends *

Anonymous wrote:Deloitte has 457,000 employees. McKinsey has 30,000 people. Use that as a reference when comparing firms and likelihood of personalities.

Idk

McKinsey sand 12 year olds… okay maybe they are 28 to tell us how to “do it better”, it’s such a waste of money.

Anonymous wrote:Consultants in general are insecure overachievers, whether MBB or Deloitte.

No. College kids can not casually fall into MBB. You have to be a top rung overachiever; target school, perfect grades, outgoing, polish, captivating. While dime a dozen drifting state school kids with half-decent grades can fall into Deloitte internships and ft offers. Totally different leagues.

Anonymous wrote:Deloitte employees that stay a long time share one characteristic -- ambition.

lol. This is sarcasm, right?

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain this to me from a DC angle?

Average frumpy midwit strivers from large public universities who "fell into it". Many try to seek out a more prestigious university for their MBA because they're painfully insecure about their degree mill BA. No kid goes to college dreaming of becoming a consultant, let alone a consultant at freakin' Deloitte.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are simply too many employees at top consulting firms for any of them to, on average, qualify as "very smart," or really to possess any common desirable characteristic. They are fine, that is all. In fact, there are so many merely above average people that end up at top firms that I'm not sure employer or position means much of anything. Source: I have taught thousands of students at three universities who end up in these positions, both at the undergraduate and graduate level.

Actually, I should add one exception. If there is any characteristic jointly shared by people at top firms, it is that they are good at managing impressions (self-presentation)

That’s part of winning genetic lottery and have upper social economic resources (shy kids going to private school, shorter kids get to pay for less popular sports classes, knowing how to interact with different people with confidence).

What I was suggesting is that they did not win the IQ genetic lottery nor the critical thinking genetic lottery. Nor the EQ genetic lottery lol

This is such a fascinating thread.

Any insight on how Deloitte compares to the other big 3 - EY, PWC and KPMG - in terms of quality of people, quality of work, general perception.

I was at Deloitte, and then later I worked with a couple of their teams when I was on the client side. Sure, it's a huge org with a lot of heterogeneity. Some people in leadership are really smart, and the retired military/ex-fed SMEs are not "Deloitte" (in a good way).

But the experiences I had both working there and later as the client and working in a different context with one of their ex-MDs were similar. The people who were smart and technical generally left quickly. Ambition and polish were rewarded over actually being good at your job. And ethics was, to put it mildly, not a priority.

Some of the people they put forward as experts - it's really wild how little they know on the topics they're being put forth on. But I guess they're counting on the client knowing less.

Deloitte left a bad taste in my mouth after they stole some data from our association (against their contract) and resold it to folks in the industry as their original research.

Deloitte employees that stay a long time share one characteristic -- ambition.

Anonymous wrote:What does the fed need consultants?

Do you mean why does the government need consultants? Because we are woefully understaffed and it's hard to get people with the specific expertise that we need.

Deloitte has 457,000 employees. McKinsey has 30,000 people. Use that as a reference when comparing firms and likelihood of personalities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are simply too many employees at top consulting firms for any of them to, on average, qualify as "very smart," or really to possess any common desirable characteristic. They are fine, that is all. In fact, there are so many merely above average people that end up at top firms that I'm not sure employer or position means much of anything. Source: I have taught thousands of students at three universities who end up in these positions, both at the undergraduate and graduate level.

Actually, I should add one exception. If there is any characteristic jointly shared by people at top firms, it is that they are good at managing impressions (self-presentation)

That’s part of winning genetic lottery and have upper social economic resources (shy kids going to private school, shorter kids get to pay for less popular sports classes, knowing how to interact with different people with confidence).

Anonymous wrote:There are simply too many employees at top consulting firms for any of them to, on average, qualify as "very smart," or really to possess any common desirable characteristic. They are fine, that is all. In fact, there are so many merely above average people that end up at top firms that I'm not sure employer or position means much of anything. Source: I have taught thousands of students at three universities who end up in these positions, both at the undergraduate and graduate level.

Actually, I should add one exception. If there is any characteristic jointly shared by people at top firms, it is that they are good at managing impressions (self-presentation)