Related Posts
More Posts
Best startups in the utility space?
Conversation Starter
Recommendations for montana?
Additional Posts in Consulting
Football’s coming home 🏴
Rising Star
Why do people go into Accounting?
American or delta?
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
My husband works at McK and I love the way my snobby peers fall all over themselves when they ask where he works and I say McKinsey.
This seems like such an irrelevant question - you’re moving up in the world which will be great for your career - not sure why you would spend time focusing on perks
Justified condescension toward most other consultants ... if that’s a thing you’re into
General consensus is that our perks are worse than Bain/BCG
We don’t really measure utilization at junior levels, and don’t have targets. I suspect McK is the same.
So far, sounds marginal with a side of smugness. But who doesn't love the smell of their own smugness, amirite??? But seriously, business class flight upgrades, gym benefits, nicer laptops, you name it. Any differentiators?
OP, those aren’t differentiators in the sense that no one chooses McK over other BB due to marginal differences in travel policy. Theirs is slightly less generous than ours but both are significantly better than tier 2 firms.
Moved to McK 8 months ago after 4 years at a Big4. Benefits are definitely better. Caliber of coworkers is quantum jump upwards. Sure, every now and then I come across someone who is not McK caliber but I used to come across such ppl at Big4 almost all the time. McK prides itself in doing things differently and this reflects in their perks but also in the demands that they make on their ppl. Biggest change - you are really, and I mean really, expected to OWN your work. I have been on 1+1 studies where the Associate was doing the equivalent of 4 big4 resources-worth of work. So there is trade-offs yes. Is it worth it? Thats upto each individual to figure out. Keep in mind that a lot of McK people feel it is NOT worth it, that is why they leave.
No utilization targets; managers and below don’t even know what their utilization is.
Making a choice of consulting firm based on travel upgrades is missing the wood for the trees.
Two big benefits: “Beyond Cadillac” healthcare for about $1000 a year; and a large ($20k ish) additional contribution to your 401k.
They get to fly first class on like 3+ hours (?), free Cadillac insurance, automatic 401k contribution, and endless bragging rights!
It is like comparing Toyota with a BMW.
SA1 - exactly. Which is why we don’t bother looking at it or worrying about it. Focus on what matters - being excellent at your job and developing your skills and capabilities so you can be better at helping your clients.
^ I’m actually a bit surprised at how much worse McK’s is from BCG’s benefits. We have zero spend for health plans, and until this year we have had $5 across the board deductibles. Giving birth is $5. It went up to $20 for ER visits this year and everyone lost their minds.
BCG. While a $100 deductible is clearly worse than a $5, it hardly counts as “surprisingly worse benefits”. Both firms basically offer free healthcare.
BCG1, I'm not comparing to BB, I'm comparing to other firms, specifically Accenture. I understand there are bigger differences, but was also looking for small things that aren't always mentioned. For example first class travel upgrade isn't something Accenture offers and is attractive since I travel 100%.
Confirm we aren’t judged on utilization. Free HC (which is wonderful), solid retirement option, a bunch of other perks you’ll learn about once you join :)
Utilization is irrelevant; in B4 if you are good you aren't on the bench, and MBB you are counseled out if you aren't good - the net result is the same
McK5 - I’m ex Big 4 as well and concur. Night and day.
SA1 - both. Massive investment in training and development. Massive investment in institutional knowledge. Massively high expectations on pace of your own individual self-development (ie figuring out “how to swim”)
@Manager2: Not what @McKinsey5 was saying, which perhaps highlights a fundamental misunderstanding here.
He/she’s saying the McKinsey resource did the WORK of 4 Big4 resources. So instead of allocating 4 people to work on it, McKinsey allocates 1 person, who can 80/20 a bunch of stuff and get to the same meaningful answer more efficiently.
Not 4x better, or 4x the hours, or whatever else. Just getting to the same (right) answer, with 1/4 as many people, when you cut out the minutiae and nitpicky details.