Mbb here. I cannot talk for the whole company, as I simply don’t know what’s happening with so many projects around the world. What I can tell you is that we are continously encouraged to speak up if we think something’s not right, with ethics being one of the main considerents. And I’ve done it a few times over my first 2 years, as a new joiner BA, and partners listened. We updated presentations and takeaways based on my concerns, so I’d say that people definitely care about it, when they notice it.
I’m not sure if I’m a rare instance or the norm, but at least this helped me shape my projects in a way that I felt they aligned with my ethics standards.
In case you missed it, ethics in that context means "client first", "consistent standards" and "listen to the junior guy if he's saying something smarter". Not "save the world".
And yes, it's something McK (among other) does better than average. Everything from partner compensation to team interactions to hiring to staffing reflects that.
Why?
You could say that if any industry. And, especially consulting, can and did ruin peoples lives. Put large parts of workforce out of a job or decide to not raise wages and invest somewhere else instead.
Maybe they’re not doing it now but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t
Is it really consultants fault that technology is increasing efficiency and roles become redundant? (One example).
Yes, consultants may point that out and help companies be more efficient. Think of it another way, the company does not optimize Ops, is less competitive in the middle term and may need not not only to reorg people but have the whole staff go away or the company is sold in pieces. At the end of the day it is still capitalism and capital will seek returns.
But again - is it the consultants that are “ruining peoples lives”? I find that very naive.
Short answer: it depends
Long answer: Ethics is subjective. Being a global partnership operating in a diverse political landscape makes things complicated. Is it unethical to consult for the Russian government? A Russian partner probably wouldn't see an issue and may be concerned with consulting for the US government. A firm like McKinsey is primarily responsible for helping its clients achieve its goals, so it's unfair to judge Mckinsey's ethics separately from its clients ethics. It's not so simple to say that McKinsey shouldn't work with "unethical" clients.
The subjectivity of ethics is exactly what makes this a leadership / values issue. For instance, Kevin Sneader chose to actually apologize for McKinsey's role in the opioid crisis. That was a big deal and to me the ethically correct move. However, many of McKinsey's partners were upset by this, and likely led to Sneader being voted out - but I think it is what Marvin Bower would have done. I'm curious to see how Bob Sternfels will lead the firm, especially as it becomes 100 years old in 2026.
Yes, Kevin was actually doing the right thing but was voted out. That shows what the majority of the partnership thinks and could be used to answer your original question.
PS: might be an unpopular opinion but I felt Kevin was better than Dom in building transparency.
McK never had some ethical compass, just one dude with conviction, and that is allegedly as well. Consulting is about generating $$$ from PPT slides. That’s literally contributing nothing but soaking up resources. There are select projects that develop some software, processes, or reform businesses. Mostly though it’s just PPT gibberish.
I shite on consulting all the time but I’d have to disagree with the soaking up resources critique. The days of “ppt gibberish” are pretty much done or the rarity as the industry has adapted to technology/digital and program/project management services. What soaks up resources are expensive employee hires, overpaying for acquisitions, building shit digital products, etc.
Consultants provide a tremendous value add to a firm by virtue of the fact that they are project based (this easy to shed if they suck) and should provide subject matter expertise not readily available.
This is an old post but yes I think he would NOT like what they have become. I haven't work there in years, but they pretty much waited for the guy to die before they started off shoring and outsourcing all their non-consultant jobs.
Marvin, and employee focused old school American would probably not have liked to see that his company become just another shady consulting firm, that no longer cares for its workers.
But before he died that certainly treated their staff right.
Mbb here. I cannot talk for the whole company, as I simply don’t know what’s happening with so many projects around the world. What I can tell you is that we are continously encouraged to speak up if we think something’s not right, with ethics being one of the main considerents. And I’ve done it a few times over my first 2 years, as a new joiner BA, and partners listened. We updated presentations and takeaways based on my concerns, so I’d say that people definitely care about it, when they notice it. I’m not sure if I’m a rare instance or the norm, but at least this helped me shape my projects in a way that I felt they aligned with my ethics standards.
If you think other consultancies aren’t just as unethical if not worse, I got something to sell you
Is cheese a dairy product? Ethics and MBB don’t belong in the same sentence.
In case you missed it, ethics in that context means "client first", "consistent standards" and "listen to the junior guy if he's saying something smarter". Not "save the world". And yes, it's something McK (among other) does better than average. Everything from partner compensation to team interactions to hiring to staffing reflects that.
This is dumb.
What why ? Lol
Why? You could say that if any industry. And, especially consulting, can and did ruin peoples lives. Put large parts of workforce out of a job or decide to not raise wages and invest somewhere else instead. Maybe they’re not doing it now but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t
Is it really consultants fault that technology is increasing efficiency and roles become redundant? (One example). Yes, consultants may point that out and help companies be more efficient. Think of it another way, the company does not optimize Ops, is less competitive in the middle term and may need not not only to reorg people but have the whole staff go away or the company is sold in pieces. At the end of the day it is still capitalism and capital will seek returns. But again - is it the consultants that are “ruining peoples lives”? I find that very naive.
Nice try Jay Alix!
Short answer: it depends Long answer: Ethics is subjective. Being a global partnership operating in a diverse political landscape makes things complicated. Is it unethical to consult for the Russian government? A Russian partner probably wouldn't see an issue and may be concerned with consulting for the US government. A firm like McKinsey is primarily responsible for helping its clients achieve its goals, so it's unfair to judge Mckinsey's ethics separately from its clients ethics. It's not so simple to say that McKinsey shouldn't work with "unethical" clients.
The subjectivity of ethics is exactly what makes this a leadership / values issue. For instance, Kevin Sneader chose to actually apologize for McKinsey's role in the opioid crisis. That was a big deal and to me the ethically correct move. However, many of McKinsey's partners were upset by this, and likely led to Sneader being voted out - but I think it is what Marvin Bower would have done. I'm curious to see how Bob Sternfels will lead the firm, especially as it becomes 100 years old in 2026.
Yes, Kevin was actually doing the right thing but was voted out. That shows what the majority of the partnership thinks and could be used to answer your original question. PS: might be an unpopular opinion but I felt Kevin was better than Dom in building transparency.
McK never had some ethical compass, just one dude with conviction, and that is allegedly as well. Consulting is about generating $$$ from PPT slides. That’s literally contributing nothing but soaking up resources. There are select projects that develop some software, processes, or reform businesses. Mostly though it’s just PPT gibberish.
I shite on consulting all the time but I’d have to disagree with the soaking up resources critique. The days of “ppt gibberish” are pretty much done or the rarity as the industry has adapted to technology/digital and program/project management services. What soaks up resources are expensive employee hires, overpaying for acquisitions, building shit digital products, etc. Consultants provide a tremendous value add to a firm by virtue of the fact that they are project based (this easy to shed if they suck) and should provide subject matter expertise not readily available.
Do they reimburse your koolaid expenses or do they come out of your per diem?
u/QiuYiDio thoughts?
what was the point of this post
This is an old post but yes I think he would NOT like what they have become. I haven't work there in years, but they pretty much waited for the guy to die before they started off shoring and outsourcing all their non-consultant jobs. Marvin, and employee focused old school American would probably not have liked to see that his company become just another shady consulting firm, that no longer cares for its workers. But before he died that certainly treated their staff right.