Deloitte vs A.T. Kearney Offers

I've heard that ATK package is kinda weak?

Would love some advice on this as well currently trying to chose between Deloitte and McGladrey, having similar thoughts based on exposure to senior management verse prestige.

If you really cared about prestige, top 3 bschools or senior client exposure, you wouldn't be considering either ATK or Deloitte.

Not sure I'd agree with this, especially with regards to Deloitte. Having done a bunch of proposal work, I know they win some and lose some.

Plus you can really only choose from the offers you have...

deloitte -- big 4 (especially deloitte consulting) will likely yield some bonus in the 10%+ range so don't to worried about that.

They're probably pretty equivalent in terms of b-school placement. Did you have a sense of which culture you liked more? I'd rather go to the firm where I'd get along best with the people.

67% is pretty unbelievable. Doesn't pass smell test to be honest. Wouldn't be surprised if the number is significantly higher than national average... but 67% is a whole different league.... Probably even higher than % for the folks who went to H undergrad.

easy choice

which offices?

personally i would pick ATK if its in the US

ATK if you want to stay in consulting. ATK is a leg up imo

the high rate of acceptance, i believe, is due to the fact that it's already a sorted group...they show you the graph of acceptance from people who are already accepted to the GSAP program (grad school assistance program, i believe)...so sure, it's a high rate if you're in the group, but otherwise, i don't think it's in that 60% range

I think ATK is a bit more prestigious than S&O. You might want to ask your contacts or hiring manager too. I found that most managers in consultancies appreciate honesty and questions when you are considering the firm's offer.

AT KEARNEY all the way

Honestly you should go off the people you like more. You're going to get different opinions from everyone. I would say Deloitte each and every day, but that is because I like the people and culture more/I personally think it is more prestigious. But really, from all the people that you have met at both places pick the one that you fit in best because that will make you the happiest. They are both relatively similar in prestige.

One thing to note though is that AT has a reputation for being a Supply Chain company, and from what I have seen they try to cover this up with the people that they bring to presentations and meet/greats. So that is something to be aware of. Good luck, you'll be fine with either.

let's assume that deloitte S&O and ATK have similar business school placement. which firm would provide greater exposure to 'strategy' work?

The answer to that is:

Your odds are pretty high you'll get into a top 10/15 program if you went a decent undergrad, get a 720+ on your GMAT, can write a decent essay, and don't screw up horribly in your 3 years so that the partners won't write you a recommendation letter. That's the sum of it all. Neither Deloitte nor AT Kearney are going to hurt your chances after you accept the offer. And neither is going to give you a dramatic edge either. And I hope you aren't naive enough to believe that every other consulting firm keeps track of all their analysts who got managed out and factors their placement into their percentages.

congratulations on your two solid offers. if you ask anyone who is in consulting industry, chances are likely that they will tell you Deloitte S&O and AT Kearney are roughly of same quality. both these firms are very strong

I would make a decision not based on supposed minimal differences in 'prestige' or 'exit ops' or whatnot, but choose based on location, comp, culture, and the people that you'll be working with.

anecdotal accounts don't count for much, but my cousin worked at Deloitte S&O for 3 years and he went to get Wharton MBA. However, that was 4 years ago, so I am not sure how relevant that would be to your case

To the OP, what everyone has been alluding to is true: Deloitte and AT Kearney are pretty similar on the whole as regards to the analyst experience and the future career propects they offer. Generally, you aren't going to have any remarkable advantages or disadvantages when you take one offer over the other. However, two additional things you'll want to consider:

1) Office location - All else being equal, you're going to want to go to a large metropolitan office (NYC, Chicago, SF, etc.). For one, it's where the "bigger name" partners have a tendency to be based out of so therefore you'll be more likely to get staffed with them and on higher-profile projects. Second, you'll have a larger incoming class of fellow analysts. This will help a lot when it comes to b-school applications as a lot of your peers will be doing the same thing so you'll have people to prepare applications with, bounce thoughts off of, etc. in a similar way to the way you and your classmates worked together to prepare for job recruiting while in school. Lastly, MBA admissions officers are more prone to stop by the larger consulting offices as part of their "tour process" where they have an information session about the school (similar to the way a company has a corporate presentation on campus). In my time at Deloitte, I remember Johnson, Wharton, and Fuqua officers visiting the offices. This will give you a chance to meet members of the adcom one-on-one and get inside information.

So if one offer is for a small satellite city and the other offer is for a large metro area, then choose the large metro area one.

2) Specialty/Interest - Assuming you have an industry/functional interest that you want to pursue, you'll want to go the firm that is stronger in that area. For instance, when I was at Deloitte there wasn't a very strong retail/consumer practice. If I had wanted to pursue a career (either post-Deloitte or post-MBA) in the retail/consumer area, it would have been tough. In addition, following the same example, it's going to be hard to write a b-school essay on why your future goal is to become a chief marketing officer in a consumer goods F500 company if you don't have any prior experience in the area. .

From a prestige standpoint, I always thought that ATK was on the same level as OW, Monitor (before it went bankrupt), Booz & Company (essentially firms right below MBB) with companies like Deloitte S&O, Parthenon, and LEK were slightly lower. At least this is what my cousin at BCG has always told me?

From a prestige standpoint, I always thought that ATK was on the same level as OW, Monitor (before it went bankrupt), Booz & Company (essentially firms right below MBB) with companies like Deloitte S&O, Parthenon, and LEK were slightly lower. At least this is what my cousin at BCG has always told me?

Also, I think Deloitte S&O has changed a lot over the last couple years, definitely on its way up, and now they acquired Monitor. Their strength in Strategy and variety of projects has increased a lot, even since 2010. Couple that with their dominance in the public sector, especially since the Bearing Point acquisition, and they are a much bigger player. If there has been one change in consulting over the years, its been that the firms that have scale are winning. I would say go with firm culture since that differs- the size of Deloitte and opportunities (and maybe their University) differentiate them, but if you are focused in one area or like the small company feel, other firms may be better for that. Also, location can play a role.

Also, I think Deloitte S&O has changed a lot over the last couple years, definitely on its way up, and now they acquired Monitor. Their strength in Strategy and variety of projects has increased a lot, even since 2010. Couple that with their dominance in the public sector, especially since the Bearing Point acquisition, and they are a much bigger player. If there has been one change in consulting over the years, its been that the firms that have scale are winning. I would say go with firm culture since that differs- the size of Deloitte and opportunities (and maybe their University) differentiate them, but if you are focused in one area or like the small company feel, other firms may be better for that. Also, location can play a role.

Hey Op, we're talking U.S. here right? Cause in my European country ATK is way above Delloite. From my knowledge both of these firms are more operations-focused than strategy (which is not necessarily a bad thing but just a thing to keep in mind). Culture wise one special thing I noticed about ATK is they employ a lot of engineers and technical people (in general consulting roles).

Here's some more information and data for Deloitte's GSAP (Grad School Admissions Program) admissions rates for top-tier MBA programs. It is a little old as it's from 2005 but unfortunately it's all that I could find; though my guess is that the data hasn't changed too terribly much since then.

One thing to note is the white number which shows the total applicants accepted. It can be a little misleading at first to see a 100% acceptance rate, however in some of these cases it's that just 1 or 2 people are in the sample set so keep that in mind.

http://mycareer.deloitte.com/vgn-ext-templating/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=0…

From Deloitte´s sell day process, ~80% of applicants get into GSAP

Deloitte > ATK; Deloitte is on the way up and at least among those I know in consulting seems to be among 2-3 first closest to MBB. A thoughtful MBB partner recently shared a graph with me...the vertical axix is profitability ...the horizonatal axix is size...the char looks like something like cross between a U and a V. The top left has small, profitable boutiques.....you then dip down...and then the top right has huge firms...like the big four..now interestingly...MBB has somehow defied gravity in the middle by not dipping down..they are floating in the high profitablity, mediumish size range.....for these firms there is a race to the right while the big 4 are moving to make a land grab to the left to stave them off at the pass. Deloitte is very well positioned. ATK, no so much.