Dude - you're kidding posting this.

Go McKinsey for sure. Deloitte doesn't do technology - they do INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY. It's just boring systems crap which will give you zero exit opportunities outside of MBA and the Deloitte name isn't bad for MBA but McK is way better. Average MBA from McK is Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, Columbia. Average for Deloitte is Michigan, Stern, Anderson.

Also, Deloitte will send you to more middle of nowhere places. Deloitte's cash cow is A&D not so much cooler industries. They'll do some life sciences or CPG but not really.

Unless you care about packaged crap like SAP, Oracle, which would mean that your aspirations are low - do McKinsey for sure.

Put it this way - half of the technology folks at Deloitte are Indian parents making a good living for their kids. They make an honest salary from 120 - 240k a year depending on year and position. None of them want their kids to get into IT. They send their kids to business school, law school or med school - the former of which will work at strategy firms or IBanks.

You will never work for a McKinsey if you start at Deloitte. Well - its unlikely. You can always go to Deloitte if you start at McKinsey. You don't turn down harvard undeclared for Harvey Mudd engineering.

 

seriously man how do u get these facts? The rankings dont lie, after all they are taken from consultants across the board. You cant compare Harvard/Harvey Mudd to McK/Deloitte, thats a joke... its like apples vs oranges!

Both are great firms, although McK def has a higher prestige, but Deloitte has caught up on that aspect a lot also recently

 

Deloitte is a great company and it's not as bad as a lot of people on this board make it out to be. It is one of the largest and best consultancies, and their employees tend to be very happy. But if you have a choice between Deloitte and McKinsey, McK definitely takes the cake. You will learn more at McK, and the exit opportunities will be better.

 
Best Response

It's not apples and oranges because at the end of the day - everyone wants the best exit opportunities.

If you're a Deloitte BTA, you'll be doing packaged solution stuff. Like I said, half of the Deloitte Technology folks are Indian parents that would NEVER want their kids to do the same thing. TRUST me on this.

The culture is something entirely different. I really enjoyed being a Deloitte BTA. It was a lot of fun, learned a lot and honestly, I probably liked the people at Deloitte more than I would like the people at McK. Deloitte is a fratty culture, people eat, drink and are merry. But McK has a much better name. I don't know what your'e talking about Harvard people going to Deloitte because I never met one Harvard person while there. I met Wharton's and Stanfords - but also those people are on the strategy side and not the IT side. (most of them) The OP wants to be a Deloitte BTA. The rankings most of you are talking about are strategy consulting. Deloitte for IT consulting is a much different animal and much more boring work. The little strategy work I did at Deloitte was fun but short. Deloitte is actually top 3 in IT consulting so if its rankings you're concerned with, then Deloitte IT consulting is actually ranked better than Deloitte strategy consulting.

You won't be able to jump from IT to strategy unless you've got big Partners / Directors backing you up. It will probably hurt your promotion track and you'll get people asking questions about you - questions that will be uncomfortable to answer. If you're really into technology, go do Google, Microsoft, Apple or a firm in the valley. Deloitte IT stuff is pretty boring.

Everyone here is talking about rankings and stuff but you're going as a BTA not a BA. Even at Deloitte, BA's will give you crap for being a BTA because they feel superior.

Deloitte is split up into Strategy and Ops, Technology and Human Capital.

Strategy and Ops - these are Deloitte BA's. work is comparable to MBB. Honestly, most people here are really smart and most people here are from Business school. You'll see a lot of Berkeley, Anderson, Michigan, McCombs etc type school people here. The work is more exciting - really big into Fridays in the office. No project will be more than 3 months if you're a BA. I think people here are taken care of a little more. The focus for BA's here is business school. The firm grooms you for Business school and if that's your hope, then I think Deloitte does a good job of it. When you're about to apply for Business school and apply for something known as GSAP, you give a presentation to a partner about why MBA, why now and why it will help you. It's pretty impressive the amount of support that the BA program provides. People in this group are comp'ed more too. Starting out as BA's its the same - but when you compare a senior consultant in Strategy vs. senior consulting in Technology - it's a big difference.

Human Capital is HR consulting. These are Deloitte HCA's. Depending THey will do change mgmt, learning, training, they'll do work leading up to becoming an actuary. I've heard mixed reviews. But, this group bills what they work meaning, if they work 10 hours, they'll bill 10 hours.

Technology - These are Deloitte BTA's divided into different groups. They used to differentiate package solution people with IT architecture people and custom solutions people but now they're all lumped into one group. Let me generalize this group.

SAP = Boring - no exit opportunities besides MBA or continuing SAP stuff. Oracle = Boring - no exit opportunities besides MBA or continuing SAP stuff. Emerging Solutions = OK - if you're lucky enough to be here, you might get some interesting work and you'll have more exit opportunities. Just don't get stuck on the packaged solutions stuff here. Technology Architecture / all the other Technology Integration stuff - could be better depending on which sub group you're in.

I'm telling you, honestly that you won't have a say into which group you're in. If you're put into SAP and I really don't know what people do outside of SAP or leave for Bschool. Furthermore, because its an IT route, the firm doesn't really support this as much as the BA's going to bschool. Meaning, the firm intentionally designs BA's to only work on projects for 3 months max so then they have a wide array of experience for business school. BTA's -- if you're unlucky, you can be pigeonholed into one project for a LONG time. I know BTA's that have been on the same project for 2 years. It's a little rarer, but it happens a lot esp if you're near a big implementation site.

See, there's a real disparity between BA's and BTA's. I really didn't like this because my aspiration was Business school and I didn't get half the support that my BA business school hopefuls received. There isn't a presentation you give and very very few people on the technology side have MBA's. In fact, many people from the technology side frown upon it. The technology leadership has a limited amount of MBA's. More on the emerging solutions side because that involves more strategy work. There are a few big name partners / directors with MBA's from top schools, but again, very few. The few I know are on the Emerging solutions side and only one on the SAP side.

That's the no bs reality of it.

I think Deloitte is a great place and have nothing but great experiences from it. But, I'm telling you if what you want to do is not packaged solutions consulting, I say you go with the McKinsey offer.

 

Oh now I agree with you.. I thought you were comparing their strategy groups.. my bad! Ya BTA can be a bit boring according to some of my friends, but some other people in S&O say that their work is comparable to MBB...

 

Cool, thanks for all the advice. I've decided to dive head-first into the world of high-stakes IT consulting with a stint as a BTA at Big D. I'm really passionate about SAP and working with their wonderful array of products has never before seemed so possible.

 

If your question is in regards to strategy people - S&O will be like Kellogg, Booth, Tuck, Ross, Anderson, Haas these type of schools. The top people will do Harvard, Stanford or Wharton, but its rarer. Stanford is significantly lower for some reason or another. The firm puts out a PPT on % yield at each schol with every school being admission significantly higher than the natioanl average with the exception of Stanford.

If you're talking about technology people. It'll be a rung lower - Darden, McCombs, Stern, Fuqua.

Please know that if you're technology, the firm isn't really a huge fan of you going to MBA. They won't really work with you that much so you can go to MBA. On the other hand, if you're strategy you will be groomed to get into a top MBA. GMAT is up to you, but the firm gives discounts and has GMAT classes in the firm office.

Deloitte Strategy is really growing. While no MBB, its pretty good.

HCAP people will fit in the middle there below S&O but higher than technology.

At Deloitte typically the thought is

Manager = Director at Fortune 500 firm Senior MAnager = Low level VP at Fortune 500 firm P/D = High level VP at Fortune 500 firm.

 

Well, besides the fact that this is a troll,

Deloitte is certainly not an awful firm. Compared to MBB, it is shit, without a doubt. But it is still better than being a burger flipper (though maybe not in terms of pay per hour).

Everyone I know at Deloitte hate their job, though.

 

Seriously, what a joke! How can you say a firm is shit when its ranked so highly? (I know compared to MBB it is second tier, but look at its progression recently). I think you carry a grudge against Deloitte (prob. they didnt offer you an interview?) The statement "Everyone I know at Deloitte hate their job, though." gives evidence of that...

 

Dear ibanker88,

I never applied to Deloitte as I could aim for something better. I did not say that it is shit in itself, only compared to MBB, which it definitely is.

As mentioned, tech consulting is seldom a very fulfilling job, and I wouldn't personally do audit. As for "strategy" consulting, the truth is that Deloitte/PwC/... compete with MBB on assignments by offering a huge discount on their billing. If a junior consultant costs, say, 3000 per day at MBB, it'll cost 2000 at Deloitte.

 
maxc:
Dear ibanker88,

I never applied to Deloitte as I could aim for something better. I did not say that it is shit in itself, only compared to MBB, which it definitely is.

As mentioned, tech consulting is seldom a very fulfilling job, and I wouldn't personally do audit. As for "strategy" consulting, the truth is that Deloitte/PwC/... compete with MBB on assignments by offering a huge discount on their billing. If a junior consultant costs, say, 3000 per day at MBB, it'll cost 2000 at Deloitte.

In reality of course, it's the different billing rates that mean they don't compete. Deloitte get used for more routine, mediocre projects because they're cheap, whilst the high-end, challenging projects go to MBB. Even though they're both supposedly "strategy" consulting, the type of projects they work on are really quite different.

 

The rates might be slightly lower, but that means that you are doing the same work (If MBB bids and loses, it means they wanted the project but were charging too high, implying the work is the same). And since when is billing lower a sign of being shit? It just means having business sense to take market share in a very competitive market...pure Economics

 
ibanker88:
The rates might be slightly lower, but that means that you are doing the same work (If MBB bids and loses, it means they wanted the project but were charging too high, implying the work is the same). And since when is billing lower a sign of being shit? It just means having business sense to take market share in a very competitive market...pure Economics

Pure economics? Please, maybe refresh your 101.

Demand for MBB is greater than demand for Deloitte, therefore MBB can charge higher prices than Deloitte. Demand for MBB is greater because MBB are better.

And this supports my argument about project differentiation. The difference in quality between MBB and Deloitte is less apparent on easier projects; Deloitte can do them to a similar standard to MBB. On hard projects the difference in quality is more apparent. Therefore, demand for MBB is not significantly greater on easy projects, but is significantly greater on hard projects. Therefore, assuming prices are constant regardless of project difficulty, MBB tend to do hard projects, and Deloitte tend to do easy projects.

Pure economics.

 

if you really don't think billing lower doesn't suggest inferior quality - then what's your take of Indian IT firms taking work from Deloitte, ACN and IBM at $90 / hr per head and putting their people in at motel 6?

There's a reason they can bill lower ...

 

oh, god. the implementation argument. Look, Deloitte's a good firm and I think you get some hands-on experience there that you wouldn't at MBB. But implementation projects are some of the worst known to mankind. They're largely big corporate snarls that require minimal strategy work, and a lot of tedious benchmarking and readouts. There's a reason that MBB avoid those sorts of engagements and focus on strategic recommendations rather than "OK, keep this mill open, close that mill, layoff those workers..."

 

Agree with mmonkey.

Monitor, OW, etc. are a league ahead of Deloitte. For the same reason as the "pure economics" post I made further up. They do proper high-end strategy work.

As for hard evidence...

The Vault rankings are messed up because size of firm is correlated with highness of rank. The ranking methodology is systematically biased against the smaller strategy houses.

The demographics of graduate intake show M, OW etc. to be better too. They have almost identical demographics to MBB, recruiting almost exclusively at the top few Ivys. Deloitte doesn't, they recruit from lesser schools.

Personal experience. I have found the people at Deloitte to be more mediocre, their cases bland, the whole place is just frankly average.

 

What type of schools does Monitor recruit from?

I know OW recruits from Stanford and people go. Deloitte will take some misinformed BTA's that were majoring in like symbolic systems or some type of engineering from Stanford but I don't know of that many strategy people going to Deloitte out of stanford - I know MBAs.

For strategy - Deloitte takes people from Berkeley, Duke, Michigan, Virginia, these type of schools are the target schools.

For the BTA program - its Penn State, Berkeley, UCLA, UIUC, USC, Purdue, Georgia Tech, etc. I've met Upenn in engineering as well. One girl I know at Deloitte went to Cal Tech undergrad then Stanford grad. I told her she would be better off saving the world, than at Deloitte doing IT consulting and getting passed over for promotion despite her 2 ratings.

 
kennethlchen:
What type of schools does Monitor recruit from?

I know OW recruits from Stanford and people go. Deloitte will take some misinformed BTA's that were majoring in like symbolic systems or some type of engineering from Stanford but I don't know of that many strategy people going to Deloitte out of stanford - I know MBAs.

Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, the like. OW the same. The 2009 class was mostly made up of the people from these.

I'm London based, and here it's all Oxford, Cambridge, a couple from LSE and Imperial.

 

I completely believe the overall talent level and project quality at McKinsey is better than Deloitte S&O, but the gap is getting continually smaller. Anecdotally, Deloitte just won a multi-million dollar global strat. contract over both McKinsey and BCG. Additionally, I apologize and I won't post on this topic anymore though, as it has been pointed out that this is a BTA thread, not S&O (unless the original poster is interested in crossing over at some point).

 
kennethlchen:
wow - I didn't know that Monitor was that competitive and could pull that type of talent.

That's pretty impressive - so monitor fights for candidates with MBB?

I wouldn't say "fights". If people get offers from both, you know which way it's going. But many Monitor grads will have had interview rounds at one or more of MBB.

After all, there's not enough places for everyone out of the top schools to go to MBB. But Booz, OW, Monitor, etc. will aim just as high as MBB when targetting.

(my experience is all EMEA, where this is even more true)

 
PorcineAviation:
kennethlchen:
wow - I didn't know that Monitor was that competitive and could pull that type of talent.

That's pretty impressive - so monitor fights for candidates with MBB?

I wouldn't say "fights". If people get offers from both, you know which way it's going. But many Monitor grads will have had interview rounds at one or more of MBB.

After all, there's not enough places for everyone out of the top schools to go to MBB. But Booz, OW, Monitor, etc. will aim just as high as MBB when targetting.

(my experience is all EMEA, where this is even more true)

I've met Booz people and frankly, the Booz people I've met come from lower tier schools. I met San Diego State type schools. (no offense to SDSU) Are you sure this holds true with Booz? Deloitte doesn't drop that low in any department.

 

Culpa rerum cupiditate quasi et aperiam velit. Aut optio omnis et quo nesciunt consequatur. Omnis expedita non necessitatibus dicta.

Eos laboriosam nobis assumenda reiciendis a nihil consequatur. Autem officia numquam aut deserunt omnis quod dolorem. Quasi minima dolorem adipisci ab blanditiis sequi et optio. Quibusdam ut eos dicta magni eius velit.

Necessitatibus omnis cum velit. Eligendi reprehenderit ea sed ipsa. Laudantium id vero illum animi non.

Asperiores officiis optio aut fuga adipisci est sint. Amet exercitationem quos inventore exercitationem amet animi sit ipsam. Doloribus dolor facere enim rerum. Cumque iusto quisquam voluptatem dolor ex cumque. Placeat sint dolorum alias et tempora.

 

Ab reiciendis ea aut in. Nesciunt accusantium voluptate hic qui autem porro nisi. Qui dolorum sapiente quasi amet dolore placeat ab. Eum fugiat sunt praesentium autem quo. Mollitia tenetur quis sint doloremque.

Vel alias est quaerat neque. Repellat nemo repellat praesentium excepturi. Magnam a repudiandae non eius. Et nisi omnis voluptatem eveniet occaecati et.

Aspernatur sapiente nihil eos placeat ullam illo. Excepturi et adipisci ut repellendus animi dolorem tenetur. Cumque soluta occaecati ex et amet ducimus ipsum. Ea provident iste eos amet illo et quaerat rerum. Perferendis vel laboriosam culpa quam assumenda debitis. Eos repellendus magnam saepe facilis.

Career Advancement Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

March 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (86) $261
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (13) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (202) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (144) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
5
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
6
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
7
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
8
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
9
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
10
numi's picture
numi
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”