Hi guys.
Does anyone here know if McKinsey and Bain ever promote their junior team up to the post-MBA level (Associate at McKinsey and Consultant at Bain) without an MBA? Let's say if someone joined the company out of college and wants to work for 4 years before getting an MBA instead of 2 or 3... Or if someone laterals over with 2-3 years of experience without an MBA at the pre-MBA level.
Thanks in advance!
Yes, both do direct to associate promotions aka analyst to associate (A2A) for their top bucket analysts. I've seen some analysts get promoted to associate and then work for 1-2 years and then go to get their MBA, sponsored by their firms. You definitely have to be a top analyst to get this though.
At at least one MBB, it's actually possible to go from Pre-MBA to Post-MBA to Team Leader (EM, PL, CTM) in 4 years... for EXTREMELY high performers.
In my system, one person has done it in the last 5 years. She's now on track to make Partner at age ~32.
A quick linkedin search should give you the answer you are looking for. Just some food for thought, but I would perhaps be a little more specific than, "has anyone ever...". Really, nothing is impossible if you have the right attitude and relationships. There may be a preference but exceptions can and have been made in all walks of life.
It's possible, and not nearly as difficult as people are making it out to be. In my experience, most of the analysts will either join the industry/buyside after their 2 years (if not MBA) rather than take the 24/27 month promotion. There are actually quite a few "average" analysts that are offered the promotion.
Not quite sure what you mean by "average" but at least at one of the MBB firms you have to be in the top 25% of your analyst class to even be considered for a promotion from pre-MBA to post-MBA. Even if you are in the top 25%, promotion is not guaranteed. To me, that is definitely not "average".
I agree with you that many people do not want to stay in consulting beyond 2-3 years or prefer to do an MBA even if they are considering coming back to the same firm after the MBA. That being said, I know at least a few people who were asked (forced) to do an MBA before they could come back as post-MBA.
Guess I should've clarified a bit more. I would say getting into that top 25% isn't as difficult as it's made out to be. This is all anecdotal/observations from my firm and my SO's firm, but I see the following breakdown amongst a standard starting class.
40% to 50% - Are at the "fuck this" phase and are trying to escape by any means necessary. There's probably some combination of high performers and people that actually suck in here, but that sub-breakdown has more variability
20% - People that genuinely suck at the role. They're either oblivious to a lot of things, sloppy in analysis, or have some other structural issues. Pretty evident that they will not make it.
30-40% - Folks that are actually trying to get direct promoted or are complacent enough to stick around for a 3rd year. While the majority of this group will make it, a combination of this is dumb luck, politics, project experience/performance, and ability to "play the game" (this is client services after all).
Yes, not everyone in that last bucket will actually make it, but those that really want to can and will. By and large this isn't a tremendously difficult job for someone at the lower ranks, so while it may not be guaranteed per se, it's better odds than trying out for varsity.
I think shit gets really tough during your first year at M/EM/PL when that "up or out" really starts to kick in and you see some very talented people start to get asked to leave.
EDIT
For the very few who are actually trying to stay 4 years and get promoted to a manager level, I personally have not seen that done without the MBA. The managers that started as analysts were pushed out between the 3-3.5 year mark at the latest to get their MBA. The time they spent at the Post-MBA Consultant level counts towards their tenure though. So if you were at the Associate/Consultant level (whatever the Post-MBA term is at the different firms) for 1.5 years before leaving to get your MBA you would only have to be in that role for 1/2 year to get promoted to the manager level.
I know a few BCG guys who made PL (manager) with no MBA.
I believe it is quite common for European offices.
What IBTeaching says is mostly accurate in describing a starting class after a few years, but I have few clarifications to add from my experience of being in one of these classes and now having managed a few of them
For the first group he described (the ~40-50% that has decided to go) a small portion are, without qualification, very very good and could indeed be successful in MBB consulting if they wanted to be, but they'd rather do something else and generally go on to be stars in whatever that is too, I have a few friends like this and they are very impressive people
Another similar sized portion is a lot like the hapless '20%' group described, in that they are generally hopeless at the job and are not going to make it, no matter what -- but the difference is that they know it and are actively looking to leave, they also will pretend they did so because they didn't like the job, not that it didn't like them (at the junior ranks, roughly a third of people are clearly never going to make it because of skills in total, so call it another 10-15% in here)
The last group, which makes up the majority of 'self selecting' leavers (and is the most interesting) are those who are generally 'pretty good' (ie are very smart, can talk well, and have a good dose of eq), but are lacking a certain 'drive' or 'thickness of skin' that is needed to put in the hard work and sacrifice required for months and years on end
These folks are an interesting case to think about because you see streaks of great things from them, and often will like them a lot, but over time they under deliver to your expectations
They themselves know they theoretically 'could' do more, but when faced with the prospect of following through on perceived potential they rarely actually do it ... they can convincingly tell themselves that they could've done it, but in the end they don't
It reminds me a bit of a kid who says he could've gone to Harvard if he just studied harder, or could've been a professional athlete if he just focused on practicing more seriously
This theoretical 'could' is great, especially for the ego of the person in question, but it doesn't generally amount to much
Sometimes when these folks move on to something else and they really get fired up about it they do amazing, but more often they go on to respectable but unremarkable careers in corporate America (or non-profits as another surprisingly common soft LZ) where they do fine given that few people there work too hard or are terribly smart in comparison to folks from BCG or McKinsey, but they typically don't rise all the way up because they are incapable of pushing themselves through the incredibly long slog that working your way up the many career greasy rungs entails
Also, fwiw, this general principle (though probably not the exact percentage breakdown) of needing both the raw capability ingredients coupled with a very heavy dose of drive over the long term applies to most hyper competitive professions from what I've been able to see
And, lastly, to answer the original question: yes, it is indeed possible to get promoted to manager coming from undergrad after 4 or 5 years if you've got both of those things in abundance, but it's an incredibly hard job to do at age 26 or 27 ... you will have to directly manage smart and entitled people 3 or 4 years older than you that just came out of HBS or Wharton or the like, and they will usually be annoyed by having to work for you, you will also have to actively manage perceptions of C-suite clients that are your parents age who think you look more like a babysitter than a 'Trusted Advisor' they are paying millions of dollars for, and (most challenging of all) you will need to manage the often conflicting and at times absurd demands of partners that are diving in every now and then to tell you what they 'know' the answer is (i.e., something they just made up on the flight in)
Like IBTeaching, I've seen a few genuinely capable and hard working young promotes get flamed out by this combo, although I've also seen a few thrive under the pressure
MBA in MBB obligatory to promote in all offices? (Originally Posted: 05/02/2016)
Hi,
I would like to know whether it is compulsory or not to do an MBA in MBB to promote after 2/3 years in the firms and whether this is the same in all offices.
Also, how easy it is to change office due to personal reasons?
Thanks!
No it's not obligatory, and changing offices depends on performance and the offices involved.
Thanks, I'm trying to decide between Bain, BCG and McKinsey and this MBA issue is a factor because I don't want to go to school again. I thought in McKinsey after 2 years almost all need to leave for an MBA or leave the firm?
Why do people leave for an MBA then? Do you know about European offices/Singapore transfers?
Used to be that way at BCG as well, and that has been changing. You still see many people go get an MBA because it's useful to network, a chance to learn/is interesting, is a good career break and chance to recharge, and opens up opportunities outside of consulting. If you leave consulting at the PL/EM level with an MBA, life is different than if you leave at the same level without the MBA.
Why life would be different leaving with an MBA at PL/EM level?
You're a potential employer choosing between two MBB PL/EMs. One has an MBA from a Top 5 school, one has no MBA. Who wins?
And this is assuming that the role doesn't explicitly require an MBA
Well but what if you have a degree from top uni plus master in finance from HEC for example vs just top MBA? Plus you dont get salary for 2 years?
There are enough employers out there who don't have the time for "what if". That's what MBA's do for them - they let the b-school be a screening tool for them. Recruiters are lazy. Many aren't going to go through every resume to find the non-MBA diamonds in the rough. They will set up some basic search to filter out HBS, Wharton, etc. and then give those a read. That's why MBB alums get good exit opps. Because recruiters know what it takes to get in there and that at least gives them enough confidence to bring you in for a chat.
But isn't the MBB a good filter already better than an MBA? Is an MBA that important? Are you talking about PE/HF recruiters or CEO position? Which is the best MBA HBS or Insead? Insead is one year only
Yes, MBB is an excellent filter. The only thing I see holding back a non-grad-school MBB alum is perceived experience. If you are a BA at McK that leaves the Firm at 26 or so as an EM, you'll be looking for Director-level roles. Many traditional companies might balk at hiring a person so young for a senior role. Not scientific, but just my perspective.
"Best" MBA is super subjective. That's a big can of worms.
In my office (western Europe), BCG is triying to encourage associates to stay and direct promote to consultant without an MBA, since this is no longer a gamechanger if your plans are to stay
Are you in the Spanish office by any chance? What are the options for changing offices, sabbaticals etc?
Echo the comments above.
At BCG, it is quite common for people to stay through from Associate to Consultant level without MBA. The more uncommon step is to go from C to PL without an MBA, but that is starting to flex a little bit as well.
To the commentary on exit opps as a non-MBA, young PL/EM, I agree with everything that has been said. I'm on the cusp of that transition right now, and all recruiters I respect have basically said it takes 1-2 years before you can compete for the same level roles as your MBA-carrying peers (e.g., a 26-27 year old PL2/EM2 starts to have a similar option set, still at a disadvantage).
Makes a lot of sense to be honest. If you're super young and only have experience in one job, they better be sure you have succeeded managing someone before putting you in a director level role. As much as success in MBB is a good screening mechanism, being a successful Associate / Consultant does not require the full range of talents that would make you an effective Director.
But why leaving MBB for a Director role somewhere else? Why not stay in BCG, promote fast and don't do MBA?
Just because you can get to Consultant without and MBA more commonly, doesn't make it common to get to PL. And just because a few people make PL without an MBA, doesn't mean they'll make Principal or Partner. It's quite possible that your career will stall out, and even MORE possible that you burn out and want to leave. MOST people leave consulting; it's expected and some would say encouraged.
Hi Mike,
Just a word of advice: at this point in time, you really have no idea how you will feel in 2/3 years. Today, the idea of going back to school might sound tedious, but after grinding for 2 or 3 years with the consulting lifestyle, I'd say there's a good chance you'd welcome going to school.
The life of a sponsored MBA student is pretty sweet: easy-ish acceptance into top programs, paid tuition, no stress of recruiting, and the opportunity to learn what interests you. For a lot of people, that sounds pretty good.
I'd really advise you not to consider the MBA promoting prerequisites at the various firms. As others have mentioned, an MBA isn't necessarily necessary anymore...but more importantly, you really don't know what your future self will want in that respect. There are way more important things to consider when making the decision (people, practice areas, style, location).
Also, changing offices is pretty easy...but, as always, it's better to request things as a high-performer.
Hope that helps.
Thank you, do they give you some money apart from the tuition fees while you are doing the MBA?
In terms of people/practice areas/style do the MBB firms differ clearly in any aspect apart from Bain more PE for example?
Also I heard that people work much more in some offices than others and that salaries can differ quite a bit due to income tax rates, etc, is it true?
Any feedback to my last comment?
In Europe there are significant salary changes across countries; I don't think it is 100% tied to taxes (as the differences between f.i. MBB Spain and MBB Zurich pay-wise is too large to be down to purely tax). Hours also vary across Euro offices, as well as the usual differences across groups/sectors (PE tends to involve longer hours than govt work).
Sources tell me Amsterdam is the illest and chillest.. But idk lol
Nihil non molestiae voluptas est et accusantium quam quod. Quam ea in nulla voluptas ea dolore qui. Nisi voluptas non optio ut ut est iste. Consequuntur officiis nobis dignissimos sapiente.
Animi quam eaque soluta. Saepe qui et et vitae. Est dolorum nulla quia voluptatem. Assumenda unde deleniti dolorem repellendus eos et quia.
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...
Quae aliquid laborum voluptatem velit ipsam amet sint. Velit animi sit dolorem voluptatem voluptas error. Nemo quaerat sequi est ut sit. A aut voluptates odit architecto culpa. Sequi qui eaque ex dolore voluptas. Reiciendis molestiae sunt nihil perspiciatis.
Quod veritatis tenetur quis nemo nihil omnis et. Laboriosam veniam ad recusandae est consequatur. Dolorem et nihil vitae. Aut blanditiis est rerum suscipit.