Related Posts
Larsen & Toubro Infotech Larsen & Toubro Infotech
HI All,
I have a round 2 Scheduled for LTI.
1. R1 - Technical - last week
2. R2 - Scheduled later this week - Is it again a Technical Round ? Or is it Techno Managerial one?
3. HR Discussion : Currently they are saying they will fit based on my interview and skills, no specific project or location mentioned yet.
Any idea if this is happening for all..?
12.5 YOE
Azure -Senior Role
What should be the designation / band we can request for 13yoe
Larsen & Toubro Infotech
Please like to activate dms
Is anyone have opening related to HR fielfield
Hi Fishes,
Please help me get 11+ likes.
Pro
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
First of all, MBB doesn’t hire many lateral hires esp compared to those firms.
Secondly, few of those come from these firms.
This means that majority of partners are home grown and thus are embedded and entrenched.
Coming into this laterally is incredibly tough. Furthermore, notionally at least, the bar is higher at MBB than most other firms
Lateral hires are never accepted and integrated. Junior consultants will avoid working with you. Other partners will not bring you to talk with clients. The content of your work will be limited to technical subjects. You will not be part of any cohort of peers that joined the firm together. You will be part of an extremely small minority with few opportunities.
Way longer than the honeymoon period - there are many very successful laterals at BCG. It’s not just me. Like any organization some struggle to integrate and the sponsors aren’t always as supportive as they should be. However, the narrative that laterals can’t be successful at BCG is objectively false. My global leader is a lateral. My regional leader is a lateral. The Sr Partner and one of the largest rainmakers at the firm I’m partnering with now was a lateral. A high percentage of the MDPs we promoted in my practice over the last 5 years were laterals. Lots and lots of lateral success at BCG
Mentor
The MBB model at all levels, even more acute at the equity partner level (up or out until senior partner), is so different than B4 it’s almost like starting a new career path or having to re learn the basics of consulting as an individual contributor. Top that off with having to rebuild a network and convince a pyramid of staff to follow, almost impossible.
Much harder than moving to AlixPartners or A&M
I’m not sure I buy the idea that there’s this MBB superhuman exceptionalism and they are smarter, harder working, taller, have nicer teeth and are better endowed than us hobbits (although maybe their dental plans are better than ours).
Going up against them in the market, and beating them, I’d venture that they are good consultants, smart people and have a particular POV of how to ‘consult’. But nothing they do is inimitable.
Nope…NYC
What are some of the common mistakes lateral Partners make, or deficiencies they have/don’t resolve, when moving to MBB?
Sure. But I’m moreso referring to other posters who indicated that laterals are not accepted - not because of shared experiences (understandable) - but because of lesser quality, or the perception thereof. I.e., “it’s me not them”
I was lateral hire into BCG and stayed 5+ years but it was a slog
It’s also still up or out so if you don’t make senior partner by a certain time or your yearly target, you don’t get a long runway to fix it.
Many people will say that it is very hard but I have many ex-Accenture friends who moved (Mck, Bain and BCG) at the Partner and Associated Partner / Principal level and succeeded. They are there for more than 5 years doing well. I. Out of this group of friends, the ones in the US, all had M7 MBAs, but the ones in Europe, Asia and Latam just some of them.
How many made it to st partner? That’s the ultimate goal and success measurement
Does the same apply if moving to Kearney or Oliver Wyman?
I think it’s even easier to adapt to these two (but still a considerable work) given the smaller size and therefore less closed social groups.