There are other reasons for consulting firms to be suffering and deservedly so. People justifiably don't trust them. Many of them (e.g., McKinsey) don't work for their paying clients but feed the client advice that is advantageous to globalist controligarchs and likely damaging to the client. Also, the advice they give will inevitably include more lucrative contracts for the consulting firm. In short, the entire industry has been compromised and anyone who would hire them is a sucker.
You said the only difference between a junior and senior consultant is proficiency in Excel and PowerPoint with utmost seriousness. I appreciate the honesty, I guess
If you mean the section at 5:53, then we suggest you listen to it again. We mentioned PowerPoint, Excel, Project Management, and Client Interaction. This was just to give some flavor, we could have added to this list (e.g., comprehension skills ;)
Coming from academia i can tell you the folllowing: You are working the same hours, BUT you get 3X the money, 10X the contacts, 4x the benefits. It is absolutely a win for me.
Gen AI is a joke and could never take the job of a Consultant. News flash - if our clients could simply use Google, many consultants wouldn’t have jobs.
Business consultant usually just a bunch of scammer, most of the time they walk away from fire with pocket full of cash. They don't have any real business experience but gives consulting. Like Elon musk said they just good with PowerPoint but don't know how thing works. And Steve Jobs said consultants is like explaining fruits but never try what that fruit taste like
It's not quite that simple. Actually, we made a video about Steve Jobs' take on consulting: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-V-O2F7kXV2Y.html
you also have to consider how well connected these consulting companies are, eg. Sundar Pichai and Benjamin Netanyahu both worked at McKinsey at some point, so there will always be a connection that these consulting firms will be able to provide.
I agree that gen AI won't completely replace consultants, but I think, it is likely to replace some practices more than some other. Maybe you can make a video about this? for e.g. optimization projects vs CDD projects vs strategy projects - how each practices will be affected?
That's an interesting question. We would say the rule of thumb is: The more individualized and context-specific the project is, the less likely you'll see AI. That's why we would say in order of most to least affected: CDD > Strategy > Operations/Optimization. The reasoning is that a CDD (commercial due diligence) often follows a similar structure and a similar playbook. You need to gather a lot of information about an asset and about a market. And if your AI is plugged into the right, high-quality data sources, you could relatively easily create certain market overviews, with growth rates, price changes, or market share developments. DDs are usually some of the most stressful projects with a lot of material to be produced, but part of it could be semi-automated. So, it could be an interesting proposition (even though it still needs a lot of human intelligence, reasoning, and contextualization). A strategy project is extremely company-specific. You could establish some market overviews with AI. But to lead the discussions on where the company should be headed is way beyond the AI. Lastly, operations projects. There are some types of optimizations where AI could be very useful (e.g., e-commerce, or logistics). But in others, where you really need to get your hands dirty, observe processes, and interview employees, it's much more difficult. That's extremely hands-on, and extremely context-specific - and therefore, not really AI territory. But definitely a question to think about!
Usually they would go into additional information, or extracurriculars (e.g., Google certificate on machine learning) If they are absolutely essential to the role, or quite significant (a 12 week intensive online course from Harvard) then you could put it into the education section as well. A rule of thumb: The more important it is in your overall application story, the more prominently it should be positioned. And if you have done 20 courses on Udemy which are all not relevant, you don't need to mention them at all.
More and more people might face a tough time in retirement. Low-paying jobs, inflation, and high rents make it hard to save. Now, middle-class Americans find it tough to own a home too, leaving them without a place to retire.
The increasing prices have impacted my plan to retire at 62, work part-time, and save for the future. I'm concerned about whether those who navigated the 2008 financial crisis had an easier time than I am currently experiencing. The combination of stock market volatility and a decrease in income is causing anxiety about whether I'll have sufficient funds for retirement.
This is precisely why I like having a portfolio coach guide my day-to-day market decisions: with their extensive knowledge of going long and short at the same time, using risk for its asymmetrical upside and laying it off as a hedge against the inevitable downward turns, their skillset makes it nearly impossible for them to underperform. I've been utilizing a portfolio coach for more than two years, and I've made over $800,000.
Marisa Michelle Litwinsky’’ is her name. She is regarded as a genius in her area and works for Empower Financial Services. She’s quite known in her field, look-her up.
Consultants discovering these after a carreer being, lliterally, advisors for corporates made me burst in laugh. Your job's easy and overrated. Change my mind. I work for startups, selling to big corps, and know these intricacies since God's knows when. I understand now why all my friend having to deal with external consultants finds them useless. You just sit around, validating Execs strats that don't have an ounce of courage to carry, so they delegate, the responsibilities of their strategic decision.
That’s why you don’t chase money and when deciding on which job to take, try to choose the one that you’ll make the most impact with. The one that is a complete mess, so your experience and know how will have lasting impact. A lot of consultants get high positions as well without being true leaders and cannot manage a team.
Before this video I've worked over 5 years in similar consultancy software companies and I've never heard "on the beach" for people temporarily without a project, it's always "on the bench" (just like in sports, while other players are in a game, there's also a substitution bench), my US colleagues use "on the bench", my EU colleagues use "on the bench", and it's weird to hear "beach" in the same situation
Great video! Original content you don't find in other channels as per usual! Congrats. One comment tough. I work at Bain. Regarding their staffing model, I would say they are leaning more to the middle next to BCG. They do have a staffing survey where they ask you for your preferences (industry, capacity, lenght of project, team size, travel vs no travel, etc.) and they ask you to put a weight to each of this variables for them to consider even more. For example, you can put 100% points to not traveling because you have a new baby, or 70 points to avoid mining because you are very "ESG" consious. They usualy do a good job in keeping your preferences! Of course there are other variables in play and they are not always able to acomodate everybody due to pipeline restrictions, but it mostly works fine!
Yeah HUGE fundamental conflict of interest: this is literally a channel for consulting industry. How are you going to honesty assess a Parasite if your whole career depends on serving that Economic Parasite?
I bet the person making this video does have aome big conficts of interest. Or just ideology to serve the Donor/Corruption Class. More Perfect Union Channel (a channel that is firmly for working people & public interest, and against interests of Donor/Corrupting Class) did a video how destructive and dangerous Mckinsey is to us the public. That included giving advice that killed and seriously injured children on Disney rides (Mckinsey's advice was to cut maintenance); to screw & scam poor people and destroy their credit over medical bills they didnt legally need to pay, and more. If I can set up a debate with you & them - or Sam Sedar over this, would you commit to do it?
I'm not an expert but I've worked for about a year in one of the biggest consulting firms (it was not a big4) and I left not because it was very demanding, but because it was very "boring". Basically just a bunch of presentations representing future and ideal states. Coming from an industry related background, I've felt the contrary that you'te talked about (lack of impact and busy timelines to deliver stuff that was filled with wayyy to much useless info). Not to mention that if you do anything it needs to be checked by our superior, then by his/her superior, again, again and again. Then the big boss manager presents it to the costumer and you do the changes that they've requested.
"working on projects of highest priority and impact" - yeah sure Slow pace and not constantly "busy" - the usual trick for juniors. fast pace and bullshit work like "organizing office event" <> fulfillment Corporate politics not present in consulting - double lol
What will change in your opinion? If you are more interested in the topic, we have a dedicated video on what AI tools McKinsey uses: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-KoQ_siNMNck.htmlsi=tNhJ7AaPUb_eb8a6
Love the click-baity title :)) “harsh” reality of poor consultants from top school making tons of money, being still in top 5-10% of society by income and living standards - this soooooo harsh guys - hope you will survive it 😅
As you are probably aware, money is not everything. And if you come from an environment where you were working with highly motivated colleagues on high-impact projects for senior clients, the shift to a corporate can be frustrating. And even your great salary won't make up for spending 40-60 hrs per week on projects that don't really matter with colleagues who don't really care. And this is...the harsh reality ;)
We must be working in the same companies, I can fully relate, esp. to the slow pace and the many freeloaders 😂 But when it comes to the Big4, wages there are surprisingly low (unless you are a partner) and the exit to corporate gets you a significant increase. That is why people join the Big4, it is about increasing your own market value
You're 100% right. We are coming from the strategy consulting point of view and the salary there is just a lot higher than at the Big4. So the move to a corporate usually doesn't come with a hugh increase in salary (usually it's actually accepting a slightly lower salary as a trade off for a much better lifestyle)
I feel like this video mainly describes strategy consultants. When you look at Big 4 consultants (as well as similar companies such as Accenture), leaving consulting here typically leads to a pay rise or equivalent pay (but with much better working hours). Still a good video but I think you have overstated the benefits of consulting in this scenario. I work in consulting and I know plenty of people who have taken the consulting mindset of “getting things done” to their corporates and have seen huge increases in pay and progression without the internal consulting office politics of needing a Partner to back you for a promotion
You're right - we are more focusing on strategy consultants. As you are pointing out, for Big 4 consultants, the move to a corporate often comes with an increase in pay (for strategy consultants usually not so much given the already higher salary baseline). We also know of colleagues who really have shifted the mindset of the company they joined. But we know way more examples that made the move to a large, slowly moving, and highly political corporate. Nonetheless, to your point, there are many attractive positions at corporates where you can really progress and have an impact.
I exited CPA firm into private equity and then exited private equity to corporate. I can tell you guys it's completely true. CPA firm and private equities are kinda like consulting, whereas now pretty much all I do in corporate is play politics...
We 100% agree that in an ideal world, the picture would look different. The reality though is that >90% of assistants at the leading consluting firms are women and that the vast majority of IT Support is offshored/nearshored to Asia (with the exception of hubs in Central America/South America and Eastern Europe). We are not trying to feed the traditional stereotypes here but unfortunately, this is just the reality.
corporate truly sucks your soul though... I'm someone that exited from CPA firm into private equity and now corporate. I've never felt so dehumanizing before when I was in firm and private equity.
Hey you're right in all of this, just saying: As a former MBB consultant, you are ready for it! I mean after a couple of years in MBB, you have got to know and worked with maybe >20 different companies, so you have reached mastership in navigating corporate environments and politics 🙂 Hence, you know what to expect and can handle it 😉
I feel it paints an unfair picture of the impact you have in a corporate Vs for example strategy consulting. For example, working as a project engineer, you are the one (in a team of course) who are actually designing and creating new things, as well as following up the works if anything changes. Whether this is designing new software, hardware, generators or a wind farm... As a strategy consultant, yes you can come up with a big plan together with a C-level person, but they still have to implement it and odds are that, due to the politics in a company, not all the measures are implemented and the plan you've created for a few months looses all of it's impact because of half measures. Strategy consulting is often a lot of buzz-words put forward by people who don't understand the actual business they're talking about. Without any corporations, strategy consulting becomes meaningless, whereas without strategy consulting, some companies might indeed run less efficient or some might even go bankrupt, but they are the ones actually creating stuff in our society. This of course only counts for strategy consulting, engineering consultancy for example is super useful, as indeed sometimes corporations don't have the correct manpower for very fast, last minute calculations and designs, because the support is not always there. But you mostly show strategy consulting companies in your video, that's why this analysis is not totally fair.
Your point is totally valid. I think we’re just comparing different things here. An engineer and a strategy consultant have completely different roles - and both can have a big impact (in their own way). In the video we’re not talking about engineers but rather about strategy consultants and their typical experience when switching to a corporate. Those guys don’t switch over to a corporate to become engineers. They aren’t hired to develop software or design wind farm generators. They usually work in the strategy department, in business development, in project management, or something along those lines. And the work will simply feel different than consulting.
i noticed that a lot of consulting is just political cover for the c suite, to provide a veneer of legitimacy for the direction or course of action. that's why display is more important than substance.
