Choosing between BCG and McKinsey fulltime offer - Considering recent press?

Congrats on the offers. I am not in consulting. IMO you can read what you like online, but the reality will be very different when you experience it yourself. Try and network and have the conversations with the potential teams you will work with to find out if you would like it or not. If not you'll end up having a random monkey spilling stupidity about prestige etc. which is a good argument for some, but given you read alot already, you already know that. 

Second point: Every major financial player/consultant has negative press. Very very rarely are they enough to bring the downfall of a company, mostly if it is during a crisis. Not too long ago the world defined BBs and top Consultancies as:

BB: First Boston Corporation, Goldman, Sachs, Merrill Lynch & Company, Morgan Stanley & Company, Salomon Brothers and Shearson Lehman Brothers

Consultancy: Booz Hamilton, Arthur D. Little, Mck, ATK...etc.

What Im trying to get that is that firms rise and fall. This list looks very different today. Don't think about you surviving with the firm, think about how will the opportunity progress a career you want, if a  manager will vouch for your career, give you solid opportunities, pay you like, and you join a team you drive and die with in a industry you enjoy, IMO beats any offer at any place.

I was in the same boat (also out of undergrad) a few months ago. Interned at BCG and chose McKinsey. Happy to go over my rationale in more detail, but I would say take whatever you read on the internet about 'culture' etc with a fistful of salt. In the grand scheme of things these scandals will bring down the firm, and all it takes is a few years and a change of leadership to whitewash reputations. Think of how far GS reps come since 2008.

After meeting quite a few people from McKinsey, I can also confidently say that McK and BCG are very similar- the differences within each and far greater than generalised differences between them.To succeed, it's far more important to find 'your people', i.e. people who will mentor and sponsor you and people who you genuinely trust, get on with and rate on a personal level. The reason why so many people say pick the firm where you got on with the interviewer is because if you had chemistry with him/her, you already have an idea about where to find 'your people' at that firm.This is harder than it sounds- some people genuinely spend years working in different practice areas/ teams over months or years trying to find their people.Both McK and BCG have incredibly similar people dotted about- it wasn't uncommon for Ps or MDPs to have worked at McK for instance, and there are cross offers.My two pence- go with your gut, ignore the internet, pick the firm where you think you'll be able to find your people quicker- the sooner you can do this, the more fun you'll have and the quicker you'll get given responsibility

2 things. BCG gets just as much bad press - a friend sent me an article last night about how BCG was a power broker in South Africa or some shit? And I read on WSB (take with a grain of salt as I didn’t actually research the story myself) that BCG fucked up some European hostpital system they were supposed to fix. So point being is that both companies probably have mixed press.

One of my siblings worked at BCG and had a pretty good experience. They have a cool program where you can go work for a client after a few years, which is a great way to transition out of the industry.

https://hard-drive.net/kid-who-used-to-drown-guests-in-rollercoaster-ty…

I’d pick McKinsey no question. The press stuff is all temporary and about events that took place a decade ago. 

Republican machine is driving a lot of the McKinsey bad press imho. And for the record I am Republican so Im nit throwing shade. Obviously they are not fabricating the headlines as they are factual realities of McKinsey past however I feel the Republican machine is keeping these stories alive in the news as a way to marginalize Pete Buttigieg (sp?). He is someone who could be a potential 2024 Democratic contender and his identity somewhat been married to Mckinsey  from the last Presidential race. So if the can make McKinsey look "evil" in the early innings leading up to 2024 and the old Petey shows up as a candidate they can aggressively tie him to evil McKinsey and basically negate him as a legit candidate.

I mean you see Republican senators (Rubio et al)  badmouthing Mckinsey in press clips..why would they do that if it were not for some political gain. 

What's interesting though is there are Republican potential candidates who also worked with McKinsey like Tom Cotton but his image never seemed to be publicly tied to McKinsey like Mayor Pete's. Or perhaps the republican machine wants to marginalize guys within their own party like Cotton as well fully laying the path for Trump?

Just flip a coin - heads Mck, tails BCG

Lol was in the same situation very recently - McK vs BCG. In short, I chose BCG in the end partly because they offered a higher sign on.

These media stuff are trivial compared to ur potential exits, though I enjoyed the political analysis above too. IMO media tastes among these firms mean no more than the prestige wanking game - some people need it because of their own demands, but it shouldn't mean much to ur own decision making.

Seriously speaking, in terms of my thought process, McK and BCG are equally strong and have equally strong alum networks in my region. Ppl are both nice and both indicate that work is gonna be tough.

The differentiating factor: I knew I want PE after (most likely). There's one partner I know at BCG that's very well connected. I got along with him during interviews and he already started introducing me to ppl before I even started (well mostly within BCG). I liked that, along with the sizeable sign on. So that's it.

.

I was at Bain so MBB but less biased--I would choose McKinsey over BCG if all else is equal. Also, if it's BCG Dallas, then you need to reject that offer ASAP and stay far, far, far away.

First off, people on WSO split hairs between firms like crazy when it doesn't matter much at the end of the day. Your career outcomes won't be any different if you're at Mck vs. Bain vs. BCG. In that sense, regardless of any other factors and whether it's rational or not, if Mck's negative press makes you uncomfortable, that's a valid reason for you personally to choose BCG. It's not like you're giving up development opportunities at all if we're being frank.

Whether all firms have dirty hands depends on where you draw the line morally. For example, just about every major consulting firm is salivating at winning more work with dictators in the Middle East (like MBS). Is this in and of itself bad? Some people would say any work for a government like that is bad. But what if it's a project that has to do with improving healthcare access for a dictator? (some projects are objectively bad though...like McKinsey's dissident list work).

McKinsey has had objectively "worse" projects hit the news. Everyone is eager to jump to their defense that it's reporting bias. That could be the case. It's also a possibility that there's simply more to unearth. The truth is that all major consulting firms have sociopath partners with an insane amount of hubris and no morals. Some will have higher rates of this behavior and some are in a better position to control this behavior. My VERY PERSONAL hypothesis is that McK has a higher sociopath rate because it attracts the types who would choose McK for "prestige" and nothing else even if Bain or BCG would be better fits otherwise.

In any case, you most likely will not touch projects anywhere close to these big evil engagements. Much to the chagrin of candidates (many of whom I think are secretly eager to have this kind of "influence", even if it's dark), the vast, vast majority of projects are super pedestrian.

This is honestly a long-winded way to say "go with your gut". If McK makes you feel uncomfortable, that's a valid enough reason IMO to go with BCG, unless there are some other specific factors swaying you towards McK (industry focus, office location, etc.). Just my 2 cents.

Look how people make excuses for all the ethical problems McKinsey has made. Do you really want to be associated with this? “Everyone has issues…” Well, no. That’s not true and that’s a lazy attitude. 
 

There is a material difference in experience between BCG and McKinsey. The differences come up in culture, the way we staff, expense budgets, case opportunities and more. 
 

It’s worth choosing wisely. 

Would personally take McKinsey > BCG for sure. 

neither - touch some grass bro

MBB in the US wrapped up FT recruitment back in September (and had done an Accelerated round in July). I got my offer in the September cycle. I think this is either a Troll post or OP is talking about a region different than the US...

as somebody who has worked at both firms -- albeit not in North America -- I moved from McK to BCG mainly bc McK had a toxic Type A filled environment. Full disclaimer, I am a Type A as well so nothing against that, but when you're surrounded by plenty of us, it is no longer a welcoming environment. People were extremely competitive and there was a lot of internal politics going on at the BA level (mainly for cutting in front of people for M7 MBA admissions). We would not hang out with one another on a weekend etc. At BCG, we constantly have weekend socials that a good portion of the firm attends. I even went Scuba diving with a Partner and Director (expert track Partner)a few weeks ago. BCG might have a few 'nerdy' folks, but while I do not socialize with them over the weekends, it is great to have them in the office. Guess who will spare 30-minutes of their time even on a busy day to help you out with an Excel model?
Somebody above said that McKinsey is the Goldman Sachs of Consulting, which I fully agree. But do you care if the plumber knows the firm you work at? I personally don't.. Anybody in a professional setting already knows BCG, Bain, Oliver Wyman, Kearney etc.
Bottom line: Go to whichever firm you feel like you connected better and can see yourself spending weekends/holidays with people there. This job is quite taxing (having no time to do anything on Monday-Thursday), so if you do NOT want to burnout, prioritize the people over the firm name.