JohnJohnJ
Omg! Tier 1, 2, 3 - Another bias without any rationale?!
When Lehman was about to declare bankruptcy and the fed chair and president of USA wanted consultants to solve the issue, they called Alvarez & Marsal - despite MBBs and other firms having experts.
They made the strategy, M&As and turnaround. So that says that some of the other (their 3+) and no tier firms are also doing incredible work and there is no rationale for tiers. Imagine the exit opportunities for a kid who works at Alvarez and Marshall now. Bahaha
Posted from my mobile device
n=1 = anecdotal. McK also is known to do sketchy work in Saudi Arabia and China. EY M&A did MSFT + LinkedIn - those are all great projects and I am sure those consultants had incredible exits. We are not talking about edge cases here. I do agree with the exception of large megafunds and PE, exit ops could be largely similar.
Again, I would remind you that we are not devaluing what the Big 4 does - we are talking purely out of what a final year MBA student is likely to pick. My point is that they will likely pick tier 1 over tier 2 and tier 2 over tier 3. Barring a few exceptions, in the long term things will be pretty similar anyway.
Except comp - anything higher than manager, MBB outpay big 4 fast and by incredible margins. But then again, MBB tends to be up or out so not many people end up making it there.
I'd also let other consultants on the forum
ENGRTOMBA2018 and
jumsumtak to chime in.
Again, I would remind you that we are not devaluing what the Big 4 does - we are talking purely out of what a final year MBA student is likely to pick. My point is that they will likely pick tier 1 over tier 2 and tier 2 over tier 3. Barring a few exception, in the long term things will be pretty similar anyway.