upvote
Those comments are spot on.

McKinsey was on a spree to become the best tech consulting company and brought a lot of great tech talent but the 2023 crisis made leadership turn 180 and simply ditch/ignore all the tech experts they brought to the firm.

All the expertise has left the firm and now they are more and more becoming another BS tech consulting firm, with strategy folks that don't even know that ML is AI advising clients on Enterprise AI transformation.

The tech initiative was a failure and Lilli's problem is just a symptom of it.

I wonder what was the experience at Bain and BCG

reply
I'm far from being an expert, but it sounds like this company needs some consultancy.
reply
Can McKinsey fund McKinsey by consulting for McKinsey? Could we oroborus corporate consulting so that those consultants could be trapped in a loop and those of us doing useful work wouldn't need to interact with them anymore?
reply
Why would anyone work there, then, unless that's the only place they could get hired as a dev?

And if the latter is the case, then that sort of stamps the case closed from the get-go...

reply
Great money?
reply
Not really relative to broader options in tech. The big money goes to the consulting leaders, but most of these folks look like glorified grifters more and more as time goes on.

Ultimately AI may be a big threat to the sort of “advisory” work McKinsey historically focused on.

reply
According to levels the pay band caps out around $250k and a principal title. It's good but probably not enough for most to put up with the culture long term.
reply
>[...] the pay band caps out around $250k [...] probably not enough for most [...]

an absolutely wild statement to 99.9+% of the world

reply
When you get to partner level, you also get profit sharing on top of you salary.

Partners get 300-400k and senior partners get closer to 600-800

reply
> McKinsey is trying to do software like they do their other engagements. It doesn't work.

I mean, it doesn't work for their consulting gigs either. There's a reason McKinsey has such a bad reputation.

reply
But it does work for them? They make tons of money.
reply
Well, fair point. It doesn't work for their clients.
reply
As an ex-consultant: consulting at that level is kind of a grift. They over-promise and under-deliver as SOP. It's ripe for AI disruption, whatever that looks like.
reply
Ideally, executives will get replaced by AI soon. Which should actually be easier than engineers. That will kind of solve the consulting problem automatically.
reply
Their model works great.

It’s really about bypassing the existing power structure of the company. Competence of the work itself is a secondary objective. Most in-house initiatives can be slow rolled by management.

The fresh faced consultant with 2-3 steps to access the CEO neutralizes that. It seems grifty but is really exploiting bugs in corporate governance.

The current fad of firing the managers is a riff on this. Every jackass C-level is coming up with the novel idea of flattening.

reply
This somehow implies that initiatives or strategies from consultants are somewhat successful. This is not the case in my experience.
reply
No, you misunderstood. It is not about their output, it almost never is.

Most of the times, the business decision has already been made long before McK is hired. It’s all about legitimizing that decision and making it happen.

You can also wield them as a weapon against internal competitors or opponents. Look up how they were used to kill off Cariad for example.

reply