Accept McKinsey Associate offer when already VP at tier 2 IB?

Always tough to read when people with high paying, high status jobs and comfortable schedules just hate their work. I'm too busy thinking about how we could switch places.

I'd personally stay put. Unless you're Tom Brady or Mick Jagger, chances you'll ever really like a job are pretty slim. Perhaps some jobs might be fulfilling enough, but so long as you've got a boss AND clients it will mostly feel like work. I guarantee that you won't love starting over as an Associate w/ all of the grunt work you'll get assigned.

The prestige will burn off quick. You don't really sound that excited about the opportunity. I don't think anyone should transition into a grueling role like McKinsey associate unless they're passionate about the profession. You'll just be burnt out again in 9 months. Think about what parts of the role itself excite you. Otherwise, find a different path to pursue.

Thanks. I feel mostly like above posts, and have raised this to Mck (in a different way of course) and they assured me they have people even with 15y of experience transition into associate roles and they are all fine (vs the typical 2-3y experience mba graduate)... current bank and job dont give great exit ops, which i guess is a 3rd reason why i am still considering mck (first two being change/prestige).

im not complaining but do need to decide soon hence turing to the Internet for wisdon...

I'd think long and hard about switching. As they say, "Better the devil you know than the devil you don't".

You seem more excited about getting out of your current job while still maintaining "prestige" than about consulting in and of itself. Those 80-hour weeks, combined with all the travel, WILL eventually wear you down if you aren't passionate about your job.

IMHO your time is better spent assessing what's really important to you, what you really want out of a career. Being a VP in investment banking should open many doors for you.

What is your end game?

You say your current job doesn't have "great exit ops," but a job with much higher pay and fewer hours is exactly the exit opportunity most McK associates are looking for when they leave.

end game? not sure, im thinking more medium term..and in medium term bank i am currently in might not even exist...hence my desire to leave...as said at the moment is all too easy, too comfortable, which i feel is not good for ones career at this stage...so wanted to see if mck is the right choice or should i focus on going to a diff bank at same level...seems like most people say mck associate is a lot fo grunt work, PPT, long hours..coupled with pay its not ideal..but some of us might be name wh@R&s deep down without being willing to admit it ...therein lies the fear...

well it might not exist in the shape and form it is now! ie reduced IB etc... but at least for a year it will be there.

Lateral to a different bank as VP.

Get a girlfriend and a hobby.

rofl @ this thread. OP might want to explore what exactly "fulfilling" means for him.

thanks guys very helpful!

OP, what is your functional profile at the current bank? Are you in a Revenue generating division or in a support function? I agree with you about growth down the road. Making an MD / Partner at a bank is very challenging unless you are in a sales/revenue generating role.

.

You will not work 80h/week. Average at Mck is closer to 60-65 hours/week.

There are ups and downs of course but you will learn and get exposure to business (not just finance). My biggest issue is if you do the MCK program for 2 years and you want to leave (which a lot do) you will likely exit to the same pay you are today (if perhaps at a better company).

It's a tough one. If you are really unfulfilled at work and it's a dead-end in terms of progression / uncertainty about your position than it's worth considering. I would think of what positions you 10 years out and ignore the short-term.

For what it counts, I know a VP at a lower tier BB in FX sales that transited to an elite boutique in M&A. He lost a few years of tenure, gets paid less and works twice as hard, but for him it's well worth it for long-term potential and optionality.