“I found my mentoring session with André very helpful, particularly because I came into it with very little understanding of commercial banking. My background is in life sciences and healthcare, and most of my career exploration so far has focused on consulting. Although I had become interested in commercial banking, I had not previously explored the area in any depth. I therefore needed a clear starting point and an honest conversation about what I should understand before deciding whether to pursue it.
André helped me establish that starting point. The session gave me a clearer way to think about commercial banking, how it differs from consulting, and what I still need to learn. Before the conversation, I was looking at opportunities and wondering whether I should begin applying alongside consulting applications. Afterwards, I understood that I needed to take a step back and make a more informed decision about whether the work genuinely interests me.
One of the most valuable aspects of the session was how it helped me recognise the gaps in my current understanding. I knew that I was new to banking, but I did not necessarily know which questions I needed to answer for myself. André’s guidance helped me think more clearly about where I am now, what I am missing, and what I should begin doing next. Having that direction was useful because it made the process feel more manageable. Rather than treating banking as a broad and unfamiliar industry, I now have a clearer starting point for learning about it.
A particularly helpful message was that I should first develop a better understanding of commercial banking and assess whether I actually like the work. I took away a sensible sequence: understand the area, decide whether it appeals to me, and then, if it does, commit to learning and preparing for applications. If I discover that the work does not suit my interests, I should be willing to recognise that and focus my efforts elsewhere. That advice sounds straightforward, but it was an important perspective for me at this stage.
The conversation made me realise that I should not rush into applying for commercial banking roles simply because I have found programmes that look interesting. Before the session, I was at risk of moving too quickly from curiosity to applications without having a strong enough understanding of the career itself. André helped me see the value of being more deliberate. I would rather make a considered application based on a genuine interest in the work than spend time applying to positions I cannot yet explain my motivation for pursuing.
Another important takeaway was recognising how substantial the differences between banking and consulting can be. Because consulting has been my main focus, it had become my reference point when thinking about other careers. The session helped me realise that I cannot assume banking will involve similar work, suit the same preferences, or require exactly the same preparation. I need to understand banking on its own terms rather than view it mainly as another option alongside consulting.
I also appreciated that the session was useful even though I did not finish it with a final career decision. At this exploratory stage, greater clarity about what I do not yet know is meaningful progress. I now feel better equipped to evaluate my interest, identify what I need to learn, and decide whether commercial banking deserves a more focused place in my career plans.
Overall, André was very helpful, and the session met an important need for me as someone starting with limited knowledge of the field. Its greatest value was giving me direction and encouraging a more thoughtful approach to my next steps. I left with a clearer understanding of my knowledge gaps, a more realistic perspective on the difference between banking and consulting, and a better sense of how to move forward before committing to applications.”
Kpmg is not T2
Congrats on Bain
KPMG is considered Big 4, not Tier 2.
That being said, it can be group/project dependent. Had two coworkers who were there at the samee time in the same group. Completely different experiences, one was great with signficant career growth and the other one felt slighted while being there.
Honestly, the "T2" label can be pretty subjective depending on who you talk to, but the consensus usually puts firms like LEK, Oliver Wyman, or even the strategy arms of the Big 4 (like Strategy&) in a different bucket than KPMG. If you're looking for exit opps or specific high-level strategy work, you'll find that people often view those other firms as having a stronger brand cachet for that kind of transition. That said, I'd focus more on what kind of projects you'd actually be touching—the day-to-day experience and the specific industry vertical you want to specialize in will matter way more for your long-term growth than the internal ranking debates you'll find on forums.
That's a fair point—and I think it's easy to get caught up in the tiering discourse—but I'd encourage looking at it from a more holistic perspective. It's not about optimizing for a label—it's about optimizing for the combination of experience, network, skill acquisition, and long-term optionality. At the end of the day—prestige is a signal—but sustained career growth is a function of execution, adaptability, and how effectively you leverage the opportunities available to you.
Will say strategy exits from consulting are far less nowadays than in the past. Extremely competitive. Having specific industry focus in consulting helps nowadays more than it has in the past when it comes to exits, IMO.
Unlike the other B4, KPMG never acquired a Strategy brand; I believe they were a finalist for Booz way back in 2012-ish but lost to PwC while EY acquired Parthenon and Deloitte acquired Monitor. KPMG then tried to build a Strategy capability organically but, even 10+ years later, have yet to achieve the brand permission that other B4 Strategy arms have (and that even Deloitte has somewhat lost).
From a CDD perspective, they're probably most similar to a boutique that spikes in particular sectors, often due to poaching a rainmaker or two. From a corporate strategy perspective, they have good brand permission from the KPMG name but lack the pedigree of much smaller logos (e.g., Altman Solon, Pointe Advisory...) so sit in a pretty weird territory. I rarely come up against them but my guess is they primarily compete on prices that are a considerable discount to the traditional "T2 Firms." Selling at a discount = less revenue = less pay = can't attract talent = can't execute at par = sell at a discount... and that's why you acquire your way into the space!
I’ve looked into this before and KPMG actually acquired SECOR, Canada’s largest independent strategy consulting firm in 2012 (leading the era that Monitor, Booz, and Parthenon were acquired by its competitors). Where it diverged from the other Big 4 was on integration strategy. Where Deloitte, EY, and PwC built out a dedicated strategy brand with their acquired firms, KPMG rolled SECOR up into its existing advisory practice. This was a deliberate choice at the time but it likely diluted the strategy brand of KPMG all together. Today, most of the strategy-type work at KPMG falls under the “Customer and Operations” team under broader “management consulting” without a clear, standalone identity but it’s left opaque intentionally
KPMG is not a T2. But neither is PwC MC, Deloitte S&O, or EY Business Consulting. Or Accenture Strategy. All of which are in the same bucket as KPMG.
The T2s have traditionally been, in no particular order: LEK, ATK, Monitor, Booz & Co (NOT Booz Allen Hamilton, mind you), OW, ZS. Plus Roland Berger if you're in Europe.
So S& is considered a T2 because it used to be Booz. Monitor Deloitte is considered a T2 for the same reason. Not actually sure how EY-P managed to semi-organically make its way into the T2 bucket since Parthenon was way too small at time of acquisition to be considered a T2.
Never heard of Booz being considered a T2, what's the logic behind that? Now wondering if I made a mistake not networking with them when I was given the chance a few years ago through a contact.
Booz hasn't been in business for 14 years so maybe that's why you haven't heard of them.... but way back in the day, Booz was widely considered the #4 firm in the space after MBB.
Qui culpa adipisci similique possimus omnis. Rerum et perferendis nulla enim repellat odit nobis. Vero iusto tenetur aut beatae pariatur sed.
Natus sed eum mollitia similique et quo. Aut voluptatum autem aut dolore. Consectetur adipisci enim libero in. Pariatur id repudiandae accusamus commodi occaecati ducimus.
Iste eum aliquam rem repellendus voluptatem quod illum et. Necessitatibus dolores quis alias tempora omnis. Commodi mollitia qui expedita reprehenderit magnam. Neque aut eos et quo consequuntur veniam vitae.
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...