Any one have any idea what % of work is strategy in Second-Tier Consulting firms? Specifically Deloitte or Oliver Wyman?
Trending Content
| +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
Totally irrelevant but I never thought of OW as a second tier firm. Always consider it more of a "elite" (debatable?) boutique firm!
Yeah OW is absolutely top notch. Any their pay is well above MBB no?
Um, no. OW is a fine firm, but definitely not MBB. I think it's fair to call them second tier.
Oliver Wyman should rank well above Deloitte. But it doesn't match MBB.
Most of the people I know at Oliver Wyman (their general group) seem to be working on pretty high-level projects... many of which are strategy. Also, its worth noting that not every project at MBB is a pure strategy either.
i'll take a gig at OW over this Operations Analyst Role in the gov anyday!!!
Well I was more curious regarding Deloitte v Oliver Wyman if that's possible.
OW over Deloitte for sure.
agreed. was hoping for some numbers
ow has a similar % as mbb, deloitte mch lower (yes, even at s&o)
Finance I won't argue at all...but GM vs GM I disagree...and yes there is no point in comparing with non-S&O
what kind of numbers are you looking for? This is such a broad question...you need to clearly define within scope of what you coin a "strategy" project, otherwise it can easily turn into apple to orange comparison or uglier.
Roughly speaking, 80% of SCs align with Strategy when they become managers, and I would say about half of their projects are what I would define as strategy projects (growth, segmentation, etc)...but again, very rough numbers for sizing
A little off topic, but was surprised to see the comp numbers at OW. Can't vouch for the numbers in the post but has OW at 100k potential, with 75k base.
http://managementconsulted.com/consulting-jobs/2011-management-consulti…
Oliver is much better than deloitte. Deloitte is a second tier firm, but OW is almost on the same scale as MBB in terms of exit ops, career building, and compensation. much more exclusive of a firm. OW is much more of a strategy, high-end consulting
deloitte is more on operations/ IT side altho they call it 'strategy and operations'. it is a piece of shit second tier level of gig that most MBB consultants would laugh at.
my bro attended HBS and at HBS and other M7, for most mba students Deloitte or Accenture were more like 'practice companies' from which you can practice your case interviews before actually doing case interviews with real desirable, elite firms. (MBB, Booz, OW, elite boutiques, etc) Many of these people didn't take deloitte offers seriously at all
enrique, why bashing firms? you JUST posted this (below) the day after you posted your comment above and have been posting similar threads recently:
"Which field is better to go into for long-term career development, exit ops, job stability, compensation, job satisfaction, or placement into elite MBA programs?
For IT Consulting, think Accenture or IBM, and how would that compare to audit work at Big4 accounting? Share your thoughts."
To the OP, I know for Deloitte (S&O) it varies by office, as partners tend to group together based on their specializations. Rough estimate would be 70% strategy and 30% operations just based on personal observation. For Oliver Wyman, only experience I had with them was actually on a multi-month-long implementation project. Obviously that's just one instance but from what I hear they also have a mix, but slightly higher strategy work; probably closer to 80% and 20% ops. Once again, the OW is just based off of what I've heard. Hope it helps! Both are good firms!
Well, Deloitte consulting is a joke compared to MBB or other elite boutiques. Not saying it's a bad firm tho, it just is a piece of shit compared to MBB. many students at top MBA programs do think that Deloitte is a joke and won't take the job offer seriously at all. At M7 MBA programs, people take Deloitte interviews as 'practice rounds' in which they can practice their case interviewing skills even if they're not serious about taking the job offer.
If I come from a top 50 undergrad college or top 30-40 MBA, Deloitte would be a fine job. If I come from a top Ivy undergrad or M7 MBA, I would be pissed off if i end up with a Deloitte gig.
Sexy_Like_Enrique, quite a bit of entitlement you have there.
Deloitte is an absolutely AMAZING firm with a GREAT culture. Strategy or Operation engagements side, the people at Deloitte are some of the most down-to-earth people out there. Why do you think Deloitte ranks so high on so many employer surveys?
Stop being so elitist. Where do you work at? Or are you just a wannabee that's going to forever leave this forum once you don't get any of the offers that these talented kids have?
Oliver Wyman, along with most of the "2nd" tier firms, are also amazing places to work. Every firm offers something a little different.
As for Sexy_Like_Enrique:
He is a Econ-major senior with a 3.5 GPA at a "lower tier Ivy" (which, I'm sure he would agree is just "a piece of shit compared to" H/S/W) and expects that he'll graduate with a 3.3 - 3.4 GPA. He did a SA position this summer at an unnamed consulting firm and didn't receive an offer to return. He tried for IBD this year and got dinged by all IBD shops, less one on-campus interview (dinged before 2nd round). He then posted a thread saying that "his friend" put a "fake BB internship on his resume that he claimed that he completed in Singapore after 2nd year of college" and was worrying about the background check. Most recently, he's now been posting topics trying to figure out whether he should do IT consulting (Accenture or IBM) or audit work at a big4. Yes, the Big 4. But I'm suuuure Deloitte is a shit firm.
1) like I said, Deloitte is a fine firm to work for. It ain't near the same class as MBB or Booz or other strategy driven, high-end elite boutique consulting, tho. (Think First Manhattan Consulting Group, Pantheon, LEK Consulting, etc)
2) it is TRUE that kids at top Ivies or top MBA programs don't view Deloitte or Accenture as the most desirable of employers. You would be nuts to deny this.
3) I am not interested in going into audit at Big4, hell, I haven't even taken a single accounting course. I am just asking around random questions to gather people's thoughts or opinions.
4) my older bro went to HBS. He told me about how recruiting works at top MBA and from his descriptions, employers such as Deloitte is clearly a back-up plan if PE, HF, Investment Management, I-banking, FO BB, or 'elite' strategy consulting all fail.
I can't tell if Sexy_like_Enrique is a troll or not. Hard to imagine there are people out there who could be so extremely misinformed and still enjoy speaking on such topics.
To address your 4 "concerns":
1) Deloitte and OW compete with all of those firms for strategy work and guess what - they land a reasonable portion of those gigs. You'll find that as you mature you would much rather enjoy the people you work with than worry about what level of prestige you convey to people you meet on the street. Especially provided that if you're one of the best at what you do HBS, etc won't care if you work at "2nd tier" vs. "1st tier" - they'll care more about the experiences you've had / future plans.
2) For a person with no FT experience and not enrolled in an MBA program you sure do hold a lot of strong views about what "Ivies" and "MBAs" think.
3) How does Consulting at Deloitte translate into Audit?
4) I wouldn't doubt that in a prestige-whoring culture, prestige matters. Seems to me you have an extremely entitled viewpoint (i.e., noting that your brother went to HBS - how does this make you qualified to speak on behalf of all attendants at top 10 MBA programs?)
My understanding is that after completing an MBA you have a much better idea of what you want to do and it isn't like undergrad where you just apply to all the i-banks, consulting firms and AM firms that you think you're qualified to work at. Therefore, your 4th concern is completely off-base.
Maybe its just me being comfortable in my own skin but if I want to do consulting the rest of my life only two things matter: 1) I enjoy the culture of the firm/people and 2) they compensate at a level that is competitive with my skill level.
Last point, Do you even have a consulting offer? Why does any of this concern you?
1) fair enough
2) Deloitte isn't even the most desirable employer at my college, which is a low tier ivy. Imagine kids at HYP, Wharton, type of schools or kids at M7 MBA... I am sure they would be ticked off if their best offer is Deloitte. That doesn't mean Deloitte is bad, it is just that Deloitte is bad relative to other high end consulting gigs.
3) ?
4) No, no and no. Many people try to enter consulting with the SPECIFIC intent of getting good exit options. there is a reason why MBB are so sought-after. It is a combination of contacts you get to build while at MBB + skills you build + and chances of landing sexy executive, strategy type of work at high pay or maybe even land at a reputable PE shop. Such options wouldn't be available for many of Deloitte people.
"Why does any of this concern you?"
none of your business.
It seems to me that you are not confident in your abilities so you need an extremely prestigious position to mask your lack of competency and by doing so, it will allow you to land even more prestigious positions that will further mask your lack of competency. (For instance, at the end of the day you're either KKR material or you're not... they will recognize it no matter if you're at OW or MBB - it just might be less of an uphill battle to prove yourself if you're coming from MBB over OW)
I guess were just arguing different points, you want to use MBB as a leap frog to a career outside of consulting whereas I want to be in consulting and therefore, just need a firm that provides me with stimulating experiences and an enjoyable culture.
Regardless, it is not your place to call one firm or another "a joke" - it only shows lack of maturity, which is a big "No-no" at any consulting firm.
fair enough.
Although, you have to realize that Deloitte is not the most desired employer among students of top MBA or top colleges, and that is just the way it is.
and, that is so for pretty much everything out there. Would you choose to attend U of Texas MBA over Harvard or Wharton? Would you take the offer from Jefferies IBD over Goldman Sachs IBD? Would you choose to drive a BMW 3 series or Porsche Cayman? Look, certain brands and companies are just more desirable and at the whole different level from others, and there is no way around it
as to maturity - of course i don't express my inner views to others in a crude way. this is a anon message board and i can choose to talk without thinking twice and without barriers
I agree with you 100% that if a person was given a choice between MBB and Deloitte without knowing either of the cultures and having a misguided perception of the variation of work that the two firms do than they would undoubtedly go with MBB strictly on the basis of prestige. However, like the above posters said at Deloitte & OW you do about 70-80% Strategy work and if you are one of the better analysts you could even see 100% strategy work as you only get assigned to those projects. And just the opposite for MBB say you're the one stuck doing everything but strategy (unrealistic but just humor me, after all its not like 100% of the work they do is strategy)
Speaking as someone who had an offer from a 2nd tier firm, BCG and a number of MM IB shops I think I have a good understanding of what is "desirable" and not. And I'm here to tell you a lot of people, if given the choice, will say f*ck prestige and go with the firm that they think they will perform best at / enjoy the most (even if they do end up choosing the most prestigious one anyway, it won't be solely for the prestige).
What I guess I am saying is that prestige is first off subjective and second off not always the deciding factor (perhaps the only exception of this is an MBA, for obvious reasons).
In your other circumstances, if I liked the culture more at Jefferies and knew I had a greater chance of working near VPs and Directors than I WOULD probably take it over GS. Who wants to be a slave firing off pitchbooks for type A assholes when they could work as part of a team and get to see more than just their own models they built?
BMW 3 Series and the Cayenne are not the same price and it would depend entirely upon what I was looking to get out of the car. Not the fact that I would view owning a Porsche as more prestigious than owning a BMW.
Well, how would you know, given limited information and resources, what firms or what divisions provide you with that culture, exit ops, projects, opportunities, etc that would fit your goals/interests the most?
I do believe that there is a rationale behind branding and reputation. McKinsey and Goldman Sachs have monstrous reputations, and there are reasons behind that.
For example, for getting at exclusive PE shops like Blackstone, it can't be denied that Goldman IBD analysts have much of a leg up over someone from Nomura or UBS IBD. It is just the way it is, and you can't completely discount the effects of working for a more 'elite' employer.
A more exclusive or elite employer = better name on resume + better skill-sets built + better contacts and connections built + arguably more interesting or big-name projects + higher compensation + better exit ops, and the list goes on.
Let's face it, I would bet no one in the right mind would turn down a McKinsey offer for Deloitte, unless Deloitte agrees to pay significantly more than McK.
Now, re: your point: one is either KKR material or not: think about what you are saying. Would you not agree that there are FAR more people who would be qualified to get that KKR or Blackstone PE jobs, compared to the number of people who actually end up getting offers from those jobs??
Or, I believe you would agree that there are many people who are 'qualified' to get into Harvard, yet only very few of applicants end up getting in.
The point is, assuming you have what it takes to be successful, you want to stack layers of odds to work in your favor, and taking a MBB offer over Deloitte offer at analyst or associate level is an example of that.
I turned down an Ivy League to attend a state school because it saved me a shit ton of money, and 40% of my incoming class comes from Princeton/Columbia/Wharton/Carnegie Mellon. We're all making the same amount of money (compared offers).
So...at the end of the day, like what ProspectiveMonkey said, you're either KKR material or you're not. Just be epic. Doesn't matter where.
Kyle Bass, Jack Dorsey, etc. etc. all came from humble beginnings. Prestige is such a myopic thing to consider.
Libero laborum totam ipsam excepturi a. Cupiditate distinctio quidem quia. Ea dolores dolor est delectus sit non.
Tempora ut totam quo non quia illum dicta. Est possimus minus minus facere vel molestiae. Ut assumenda voluptas corrupti saepe suscipit porro. Ut saepe quis laborum minus officiis.
Quos voluptatum sunt rerum mollitia sit est unde consequatur. Quidem sequi harum sint nesciunt eveniet nostrum rerum. Delectus culpa non sit esse aliquid. Unde nam explicabo minus quos debitis quia vitae. Sit aut qui tempore distinctio molestiae et.
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...
Ipsa rerum laboriosam voluptatibus corrupti. Corporis quidem non est autem. Dolor magni cumque illo cumque.
Unde dignissimos rerum similique itaque dolorem vel. Sit sint quae repudiandae debitis magnam ipsam ipsum aliquid. Laborum repudiandae occaecati unde ullam. Laborum maxime qui unde nobis laborum.