Related Posts
More Posts
Additional Posts in Consulting
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Download the Fishbowl app to unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Copy and paste embed code on your site

Scan your QR code to download
Fishbowl app on your mobile

Following for future reference
F
I went the opposite direction, but I think I can shed some light:
1) The methodologies and approach are a lot more established. At the Big 4, you can easily see that the methodologies are made up on the fly (but sold as if we have this established approach). For due diligence type work, Big 4 are pretty good, but this is for non-CDD work.
2) Culture is more cutthroat, but you are rewarded for performance. This is manifested in the total compensation structure, mostly surrounding the bonus.
3) WLB is slightly worse, but varies by case. I actually found that because of #1 above, sometimes WLB is actually better.
4) Peers are overall higher caliber, but I would say top performers at Big 4 are on par with top performers at MBB.
5) The types of work sold is usually more “strategic.” However, there is a fair amount of work sold as strategy but it really isn’t. I would say the likelihood you get a truly strategic case is higher at MBB vs. Big 4.
KPMG - at that level, you’re expected to operate at a high level of autonomy. Some case leadership is a little more hands on than others, but that was generally my experience. If you make it known that you’re new to the firm / the type of work, I am sure you’ll get a good level of support and guidance.
Tax - I guess a better way to describe it is I found employees generally more self centered. For context, I see a much higher level of friendliness and collaboration at EYP, but that’s not to say MBB isn’t. It’s just a different environment given the (on average) higher performers and career development structure.