Related Posts
More Posts
Mentor
Where is the best street to go bar hopping?
Thank you for making us feel less alone Walter ♥️
Additional Posts in Consulting
KPMG to acquire LEK? Thats so cool!
Got a random email from a supposed Amazon recruiter for a SDE position (which is not at all a fit). The email is amazon.com domain and there are no red flags in the body but it doesn't feel like an Amazon recruiter due to the tacky signature, etc. Has anyone seen this kind of cold-calling from FAANG recruiter?
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Chief
I like small boutiques
What? My T2 is super well known in my sector. Our clients are packed with alums. I have tons of resources. We are a really big company? Such an out of touch post.
Sure, unnecessary but you claiming t2 names are “unrecognizable” is fine. Elitist. Good luck!
You over estimate the brand power of a big 4
Chief
Seriously. It really means nothing
Pro
T2s are not unrecognizable. Which T2 is it?
Chief
Are we talking about true T2’s like LEK, OW, S& or like your local 15-employee risk consulting shop
Chief
Oh, what? T2 no brainer—those names are definitely recognized on a resume. General B4 consulting is squarely T3
T2, by definition, has better brand power than B4.
If it’s “unrecognizable” it’s not T2.
Recruiters know the T2 names and often offer better exit ops to individuals from those companies
BCG2 is correct. Nothing wrong with any of the companies that are lower on the list, but the groupings are for generally similar firms (grouped by pay/“pedigree”/work). All of the major firms that are listed frequently have data and employees here on fishbowl that provide a fairly clear insight into pay, culture, and promotional structure/leadership at those main firms. Firms not listed or discussed frequently aren’t by default worse, they just aren’t on the general radar of fishbowl as much (potentially are too small for enough data points, or generally operate in a different environment like the econ consulting firms do and so aren’t applicable to fishbowl consulting rankings).
Why are you assuming T2 firms don’t give you a lot of resources? Unless you mean the number of people you work with but I don’t see how that’s a pro
I would go for T2. Their brand is less known to the general public, but recruiters know how harder it is to get into them and will see it as a plus
You are just number everywhere you go
Chief
Summed it up ^
Pro
Big 4
Where is the pay trajectory better?
If it’s a smaller firm it isn’t a T2. T2 refers to Strategy&, EY-Parthenon, LEK, OW, Kearney, and sometimes A&M/AP. T2 is really just a fishbowl term, but at all of those T2s there are equal levels to advance and a higher comp ceiling than at any of the Big 4.
Start at Big4 to learn then go to T2 to climb the ladder faster unless you want to stay at the Big4 you chose for life at that point.
I’ve done Big 4 already
I would go for the T2. I would still think you get recognized on your resume. I don't think just because you dont work at the B4 you don't get recognized.