I was wondering if Deloitte will hire experienced individuals with an MBA below the level of senior consultant. Talk of what level to place at concerns me since it seems that someone with 8 years experince and two graduate degrees wouldn't be placed at anything below senior consultant.
| +26 | Nervous about MBB - incoming BA | 18 | 13h | |
| +10 | Chances at MBB - Reality Check | 1 | 5h | |
| +9 | Premed to MBB Recruiting | 0 | 1h | |
| +6 | How much do your MDs make? | 1 | 3d | |
| +5 | Restructuring market | 4 | 15h | |
| +1 | Portfolio Operations Group--DFW area | 2 | 14h |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
Not sure I completely understand your post, but I'll try to answer.
Post-MBA hires are brought into Deloitte at the Senior Consultant level. If you have eight years of relevant consulting experience prior to your MBA/graduate degree, you might be brought in as a Manager. However, you would not be brought in as a consultant.
Hello.
Thanks for the response. Let me clarify. I have 8 years financial service industry experience in an institutional asset manager. I also got my MBA last year and my MSF this year. I am applying as an experienced hire. I just was concerned when they talked about what level to bring me in as. Since I was applying as a senior consultant that type of talk made me think they would consider below SC at a consultant on analyst level.
You shouldn't have anything to worry about if that's your concern. Assuming your industry role provided relevant experience to the consulting practice you're interviewing for, you should be a good candidate for SC/Manager. It really depends on the responsibilities you've had in your previous career. At the Manager level, they would want strong project management, strong industry knowledge and solid relationship management. If you need a year or two to develop in those areas, they would probably bring you in as SC and perhaps accelerate you to Manager after a year.
Second the above... Worst case scenario, you'll be brought in as an SC. Just make sure to state that you are going for fast-track to Manager to your counselor, should you get the position. Good luck!
Thanks so much for the info. I am just in the waiting game now since third round finished today. Hopefully it won't be too long until I hear back. Overall it went well and all three individuals gave compliments and mentioned that they saw me as someone that could fit into the field. Internally I essentially was a management consultant among other things within my firm.
Hello all. I just finished fourth round interviews yesterday. Apparently they are flirting with the idea of bringing me in as a consultant rather than a senior consultant. It seems a bit strange since I already have an MBA and a second masters degree plus eight years of experience in industry. Would they actually try and lowball an experienced hire when someone recruited straight out of an MBA with far less experience is considered senior consultant material?
Were you a part time student?
I was in the part time MBA since I still worked in industry while earning my degrees.
Bet your MBA and Masters are from a not so good school.
I second this. An MBA by itself means very little, where you got it from definitely has an impact.
I just checked for 2014 it is ranked 57 for my program. Regardless of that I was one of the top students with an extremely high GPA and my school is a target recruiting school for analysts for the firm.
Also of note for my school "Ranked in the top 10 nationally 14 times by U.S.News and World Report for the part-time MBA program in the Kellstadt Graduate School of Business."
So it's basically DePaul part time MBA? It's not really ranked or target for undergrad, MBA or anything as far as I know. And what was your real role in Asset Management? Reputable firm? Portfolio or research analyst or more like compliance? In my previous life in consulting, I saw people brought in at analyst level w 10 yrs of experience, and it was always because of both low ranked school and irrelevant experience. People who came at senior consultant level at least had very relevant experience even if they went to low ranked school. If you want to move, you'll have to take the poison.
I am at one of the largest Chicago based asset management firms right now as a senior consultant in operations. My experience has been heavy project management and implementation, workflow optimization, and all around middle office operations for our global asset manager. The work experience from my perspective is very relevant since I worked on the same kinds of projects that would be worked on at a consulting firm. I have worked on both implementation and strategy.
Ok so let's say the worst case possibility happens and I am brought in as a consultant rather than a senior consultant. How long would I be looking at to move to the sc role? Would it hurt my earning power over the long term? As an example when I would hit senior consultant, would compensation be lower than a senior consultant coming in from a ft mba?
Promotion depends on when you start, as it revolves around the yearly performance calendar. If you perform well, would be less than two years to SC. And yes, your SC salary will likely be lower than a SC coming to the firm from a top-tier MBA program.
When does the yearly performance calendar start, January?
No they won't. Random part time MBA never gets leveled up to target MBA pay. Even at Senior Consultant level, my guess is that the gap will be something like 95-100k vs 140k.
So here is something I am interested to know. Where does the perception that a PT MBA is inferior to a FT MBA or that a Target school vs non target school guarantees quality? From the experiences at my school, the requirements and materials from a part time MBA are the same for FT MBA students. I have dealt with individuals from both target and regular schools and find the potential of individuals is evenly distributed. A target school diploma simply does not guarantee quality of work or the potential of a candidate. Rewarding someone based on their diploma alone seems counterproductive to aligning compensation with performance. In my opinion it would create an incentive to those not at target schools to avoid putting their best into the work since their compensation would not be targeted to performance while simultaneously creating a sense of entitlement to those coming from a target school since their compensation is guaranteed even for the lowest performance. In my humble opinion firms would be better served to bring individuals in on the same level and adjust based on performance. Drop the lowest performers and reward superstars.
I think you're looking at it the wrong way. Several things:
1) Client opinions matter. For a Harvard MBA, they can hypothetically charge more to a client per hour. 2) Consulting firms care more about potential than experience. The type of work you do is very diverse, so even if you're experienced, on any given project your prior experience might not be that relevant. From their perspective, a 760 GMAT from a top 5 school has more potential 3) Supply and demand. A lot of people want the Stanford MBA, and that individual has a lot of options. A person from a part-time ~50 ranked MBA, not so much.
I think you're looking at it the wrong way. Several things:
1) Client opinions matter. For a Harvard MBA, they can hypothetically charge more to a client per hour. 2) Consulting firms care more about potential than experience. The type of work you do is very diverse, so even if you're experienced, on any given project your prior experience might not be that relevant. From their perspective, a 760 GMAT from a top 5 school has more potential 3) Supply and demand. A lot of people want the Stanford MBA, and that individual has a lot of options. A person from a part-time ~50 ranked MBA, not so much.
Consulting firms aren't paying recent MBA's $200k total comp out of the kindness of their hearts, they are doing it because they have to.
And these firms use a strict up or out system, so you don't need to worry about people being rewarded for low performance. Low performers are counseled out; they didn't get to where they are by keeping the fat around. And don't forget that the interview process for these guys is extremely challenging; no one is getting anything "just because of their diploma". Just ask all the people from target schools that don't make it every year.
Finally, there's a lot of value to an MBA, but almost none of it comes from the classes and requirements of the program. This false belief tricks people into PTMBA programs instead of FT ones every year; I'm glad someone in my admissions department clued me in before I made the same mistake.
To be fair I believe Deloitte S&O to be the least prestige obsessed among the "top" consulting firms. Don't take this as a slight, but Booz/LEK/OW, let alone MBB would be unlikely to interview resumes like yours for even an analyst position. Volumes have been written about why elite firms recruit heavily from target schools (and whether or not that's "fair"), but the gist of it is that it's simply easier and more cost efficient for firms to hire/promote the known commodity rather than maverick.
Eaque enim non quae accusamus. Praesentium in quia numquam nisi et quod quasi. Eos quia delectus commodi nostrum voluptas qui totam.
Cupiditate maiores eum ad qui qui. Sunt aut nisi architecto. Ipsa est voluptatem ut.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Sint occaecati similique voluptatem. A sed adipisci quia rerum quae fugiat vero libero. Vel eos eos repudiandae ipsam sit.
Eligendi dolor quos voluptas et. Qui libero animi omnis unde est ut. Sapiente ipsa cum ad eius repellat vero consequatur dicta. Eveniet inventore qui ut est voluptatem.