Opportunities: McKinsey vs Microsoft
So I'm graduating this year and got offers from Microsoft (Program Manager) and McKinsey (Fellow/BA).
My biggest concerns are:
- I love tech (Computer Science background) and know that most VPs/C-level guys in this field come from engineering roles because the companies are product-oriented (imho, edge: Microsoft)
- I want to build a strong resume and also move up fast and not get stuck waiting for a promotion (imho, edge: McKinsey)
Any thoughts on what the best choice may be?
Thanks for your input.
I would go for Microsoft. 40 hours/week, same pay, great opportunities.
However, as a non-developer, you will be a bit of a second class citizen at any tech company. Would you consider yourself a good programmer? Did you go for the developer role, or why was program manager your first choice?
you'd be surprised man, other than HR, everyone at msft puts in surprisngly long weeks.
Clearly weighing in after the fact on this thread -- But WSO has a tendency to underestimate industry roles. Sure you could put in 40 hours at Microsoft and perhaps not get fired, but all the young talent trying to rapidly climb the ladder will be doing at least 60 hours a week and often much more.
The fast track typically involves the same time commitment whether you are in a top industry role, MBB, or IB (excl. the first year of your analyst stint, were you truly do get crushed). The only difference is that the first two offer more control over your task planning and hence fewer late nights and fire drills.
It also depends on what you want to do later on. Microsoft will eventually hit a ceiling in terms of pay grade and what you end up doing, whereas McKinsey's exit opps would be more fruitful as well as (as you said) the promotions.
Something to do with the tech industry at McKinsey could be a very good opportunity, but that's the luck of the draw.
McKinsey
Echoing IlliniProgrammer you could play second fiddle to all developers at Microsoft. Personally I say McKinsey because of the wider net of future opportunities but if you're passionate about tech and would only choose McKinsey for the exit opps then take Microsoft. Even if the future is great, you'll hate yourself at McKinsey if you don't like what you're doing.
check your PM wizplum.
Microsoft 10 years ago. Mckinsey now
10 years down the road, people will say "Microsoft 10 years ago". Now is the time.
McKinsey--->HBS--->??(can be microsoft, except you now have lots of credentials)
McK
Why not do two years at McK then try to get a (similar) job at Microsoft? The opportunities for people coming out of an intro MBB stint are pretty damn awesome.
McK for two years ---> tech company for two years ---> MBA (if you want it), or just move on with your career
McK, as added bonus you won't have to deal with Ballmer's antics.
To play Devil's advocate, I know of several McKinsey BAs that end up nowhere after their two years are up.
You could say this about any BA/SA from any company. There are always going to be people who don't end up anywhere after their stints are over.
@OP: I'd go with McKinsey in a heartbeat. It's the better resume builder and will offer you a more diverse array of exit opportunities compared to Microsoft. The PM role is great, but it's more difficult to transfer that experience to a different role/industry compared to being a BA at McKinsey for a couple years.
McK, then move to Corporate Strategy or M&A group within MSFT pre/post MBA, if you still feel techie. Like this: http://mitsloanblog.typepad.com/inaki/2008/07/summer-at-micro.html
I can code but never went for the developer role because I felt like I preferred the partial business orientation of the PM role, while I still got to work as an engineer on products which I enjoy. I didn't know PM was looked down by development or less prestigious. Is this really the case? Some of you mentioned going to Microsoft after time at McK. I love tech but feel like non-engineers are seen as back-office in this world, which makes me think that either I get in the front-office while I'm still perceived as one, or I won't be able to in the future.
I would try to leverage the PM offer into a developer role at Microsoft. Hack it out there as a developer for a few years, try to land a gig as a software architect, and then do HBS. Come back to Microsoft with an HBS MBA and some street cred as a top 1% developer at the firm (if you really are good- we are talking top 5% of MIT or Berkeley or top 1% of Harvard or Princeton) and get serious consideration for the C-suite. Or do your own startup at that point.
To the OP, take McKinsey.
Google that Inaki dude. He worked at McK, then dealt w true front office people at MSFT, and now start up.
You're not going to be an effective leader at a tech firm without hands-on coding experience. Gates, Ballmer, all of the top guys started off as coders. They were amazing coders, and they promoted the most competent people behind them who had at least as good of a business sense as they did.
Now the conditional probability that you'll do well with any business is probably a bit higher given that you got an offer from McKinsey and got into HBS, but McHarvard doesn't really get you a lot of respect in the tech world. Technical competence and technical experience are the currency in tech.
That is what I personally would go for. Become a developer who really specializes on algorithms, move up to the role of architect, and THEN, if you MUST, go back to HBS. (a part-time MBA from UW Seattle, Stanford, or UC Berkeley would also work.)
It's not too late to apply at Google, Palantir, and Expedia, too. If you have a pending deadline, take the MSFT offer and try to transfer into a developer role after a year.
Ballmer was never a coder. He is widely known for being the first business guy hired by Gates. (Even says so in his bio here: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/exec/steve/default.aspx). He got his degree in math and economics, and worked for P&G in product management.
To your broader statement: I don't think you can make a blanket statement like "your'e not going to be an effective leader at a tech firm without hands-on coding experience." Depends on what kinds of people you have around you, how the company evolves, etc.
It depends on what you want. If you want to do product like a ton of ex-consultants / bankers or if you want to work in startups or found your own I would probably say Microsoft PM is better. If you want to just about anything else McKinsey would be better.
Disclosure I'm in corporate strategy at a large tech, not Microsoft and a ton of my friends whine about switching into product.
Best of luck
McKinsey defin' I'm sure they have IT division as well.
I want to bump this thread as I might be in a similar position come next Fall.
I recently accepted a finance manager internship at Microsoft for the summer. I was pleasantly surprised when I found out the specifics of the offer. The pay ended up being significantly higher than I expected ($8K/month), and I found out that I was being lumped in with all the MBA interns as far as housing/other benefits go (I am not an MBA; I am graduating with a Bachelor's in Engineering this May and returning to the same institution for a Master's in the same discipline).
I am planning on applying to MBB next Fall, as I have been leaning towards pursuing a management consulting career for some time. I would naturally be applying to positions at the post-undergrad level (ex. BA at McK), where my total compensation (~$80K) would be significantly less than what I'm getting at my internship, pro-rated over a full year (~$100K). Money's not everything, but at what point would it just be too much to turn down, even for MBB? I know different people will have different answers to this question based on different personal goals, but I'm curious to hear responses.
It's much easier said than done, but I'd say go with MBB. You'll learn much much more and grow personally much faster there. This probably matters more than your salary for the first 5-8 years of work. I don't know if I'm properly controling for confirmation bias and my consulting fundamentalism, but that's what I think.
The difference between starting salaries of $96k and $80k are basically negligible, especially since neither job has very structured progression-type raises (meaning ones where you're stuck getting 2% raises for the next ten years). The small salary difference really shouldn't even be a consideration.
That McK total comp # seems way off. Based on what I've seen, base salary alone is $85K ($80K Salary + $5K housing). I don't know the details of their bonus (which I have heard they started giving) and retirement, but I'd be surprised if all-in comp was less than $90-$95K. You also get a pretty nice expense account, miles, etc.
Also, you can worry about it once you get the offers...
Quos voluptatibus inventore quas qui. Et accusamus blanditiis odio quasi. Porro quis velit alias nisi mollitia consequatur est quia. Tempore repudiandae atque explicabo explicabo officia porro odio. Voluptatem nihil similique tempore optio sequi reprehenderit. Eum ut est reprehenderit dolor repudiandae.
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...
Porro aut ratione ducimus iste aspernatur. Blanditiis occaecati quasi molestiae quas et tempore.
Aliquam nulla ipsa eaque consequatur cupiditate magnam quos. Et atque laborum est eius eum id. Itaque exercitationem et et et incidunt itaque nulla.