Live data from Hacker News

Why Taxpayers Pay McKinsey $3M a Year for a Recent College Graduate Contractor

mattstoller.substack.com

301–310 of 328 posts

Re: Why Taxpayers Pay McKinsey $3M a Year for a Recent College Graduate Contractor

#301
post #21

I was a technical project management consultant for a long time. The value that most orgs get from a consultant isn't really in the advice the consultant gives them, it's the political cover to make changes they knew they should make all along, but didn't have the social capital or the focus to make those changes until they had a person in a chair across from them.

That's not always the case. Sometimes they bring a consultant in with no intention of doing anything that gets suggested, so they can point to how much serious effort and money they spend on the topic.

Re: Why Taxpayers Pay McKinsey $3M a Year for a Recent College Graduate Contractor

#302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This entirely misses the forest for the trees. And granted the author's bias gets in the way of his attempt to point out that forest. Their bias aligns with mine, but with less editorialization IMO the following would be more clear: It's not that the work is or isn't valuable, or where that value is. It's that McKinsey charges 72% more than a competitor for the same consulting, and that there's a massive perverse inc…

I've seen this trend get worse on HN were top voted comment is just a response to the title and not the actual heart of the article.

HN in the last 3-4 years has had the discussion quality of a mediocre subreddit (there are plenty of subreddits which are better than HN), but with an extreme air of self-importance.

I sometimes wonder what the demographic looks like, since most replies betray 1) lack of actual domain expertise and 2) the humility required to recognize (1)

Re: Why Taxpayers Pay McKinsey $3M a Year for a Recent College Graduate Contractor

#303

Have been on the receiving end of several McKinsey engagements. The work itself was generally not all that good. The knowledge of “experts” brought into meetings rarely contributed more than what a reasonably intelligent person could dig up on Google search results in an hour. They were also often farmed out on random staff augmentation functions that just annoyed the hell out of people. “Hi I need you to fill out th…

CYA = Cover Your Arse

(I just found about that one, sharing if it can help others)

Re: Why Taxpayers Pay McKinsey $3M a Year for a Recent College Graduate Contractor

#304
post #20

Had a lot of experience with McKinsey doing projects at my company at different levels I’ve been in throughout it the years. When it’s highly technical things like implementing a new technology you know nothing about or a new manufacturing footprint that is tangible to perform, they do good work. Anything “Strategic” or fluffy I find a waste of time. They are excellent salespeople and do a lot to calm the C-suite but…

Doesn't seem surprising. If it's implementing a specific technical process, there are measurable outcomes that must be met, and your client will know whether or not you met them. Senior leadership contracting an outsider to tell them how their own industry works and explain their place in it, though, is right up there with asking the Psychic Friends Network for career advice. They're just begging to be taken for a ri…

The old phrase about consultants is that they borrow your watch to tell you the time.

Re: Why Taxpayers Pay McKinsey $3M a Year for a Recent College Graduate Contractor

#305
post #95

Former McKinseyite here (and one reasonably skeptical of the firm as a whole)... nobody hires McKinsey for fresh college grads. That’s just something they tell fresh top of class Ivy League college grads to make them feel important. Clients hire Directors to give them peer level strategic counsel. How they technically allocate payment for time across consultants is just backfillling to get to a number already agreed…

I've worked with various from McKinsey. The work is not that impressive. It's like having an MS Office expert, especially Excel and Powerpoint. The person is able to work long days, so after a workshop they spend a huge time to make it look nice again. Though one told me they have a separate department for quickly making presentations look "nice". Meaning, the consultant just sends it off to that other department.

Reading how expensive they are I'm glad McKinsey isn't used anymore.

The major reason they're hired is because of the McKinsey name (convincing others in your company). Not so much for anything else IMO. Maybe you we're doing great work but that's not the ones we saw (I saw various).

Re: Why Taxpayers Pay McKinsey $3M a Year for a Recent College Graduate Contractor

#306
post #289
post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Also, this lets the CEO appear unbiased to all the people who "lost". So they can get on board with the new policy but not feel like the CEO shot them down personally, which is bad for morale, can lead them to quit, etc. The flip side is that it is also bad for morale for someone to be recommending a solution for some time, the recommendation is ignored, a consultant is hired, the consultant recommends the same solu…

When you are a junior staff you don't understand why decisions are made rather inefficiently. You only come to understand as you move up the ladder in the organization. There is nothing stupid or evil about how "organization" behaves. It's exactly same as the society we all live in, just at a smaller scale. When you are in the position to make the call, you see that someone's idea may be as good as someone else's ide…

> Junior staff often don't understand this

As people move up they either still know the business or they don't. Not trusting the people whom are running the actual business is IMO terrible.

The COO at the company I work for (recently left) could describe the daily work in detail. He could have conversations with any recently hired staff, various level of management, but also with the board, investors and customers. Lastly, he (amazingly) knew all the people he worked with before. No matter if that person 10+ years later is still in the same position (or not).

IMO having a good network, being able to communicate with various levels is highly beneficial. Your post seems to suggest some staff should not be taken seriously. That's utterly weird to me.

> How do you decide which idea is right?

From your post it seems one of the options is not to listen to staff. Further, junior staff won't gain experience if you do not let them develop.

> They have responsibility to make sure that the organization survives no matter which scenario pans out.

For one, why isn't this explained? Secondly, some decisions are bad without actually going into it any further. Then multiple years are wasted while everyone involved knew this from the start; they were just not listened to.

IMO regarding "scenario pans out": for some cases it's entirely true. But also sometimes it's not the case at all... just nobody listened to the people running the business and too much disconnect.

Re: Why Taxpayers Pay McKinsey $3M a Year for a Recent College Graduate Contractor

#307
post #23

From the linked article[1]: I find it absolutely INSANE that highly specialized organizations like the NSA rely on McKinsey to direct their future operations. These people have intimate knowledge of their organization and culture, shaped and hardened by years of challenges and learned experiences. What can they possibly think bringing an outsider in to do a complete overhaul will solve!? Why can they not apply their…

>It seems like you’re just paying people for critical thinking. That's exactly what it is. Unfortunately most organizations, probably even ones like the NSA, really struggle with doing any kind of critical thinking on their own. This is especially true when trying to decide on a future direction for the org: the org itself is most likely biased to just doing things the way it's always been done. In that regard, havin…

I completely disagree with this. McKinsey is often used to sell an existing idea. Plus for really boring MS office work. They don't bring in any new ideas.

The company I worked for had various McKinsey consultants; this is pretty much what they were hired for unfortunately. Various consultants (not all) were also way too young (+lack of work experience) to suggest they had that magical knowledge.

They basically just sell what some people in the organization already intend to do. McKinsey has the name, plus the people are usually better focussed on the political game that's in a big organization. There's not much magic going on though.

Re: Why Taxpayers Pay McKinsey $3M a Year for a Recent College Graduate Contractor

#308
post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the underlying assumption is that you can mainly attract top talent through high salaries / compensation. I think we need to acknowledge that "top talent" is going to go other places, driven by other incentives. The academic world is filled with "top talent" that work for a measly salary, compared to the industry, because they have more freedom - and can work on what they want. Or you have the military, which oper…

Something is clearly going wrong if the NSA thinks it's worth it to pay for $700/hr consultants from McKinsey. All the three-letter-agencies think Palantir is cutting edge, yet anecdotally, I hear that they're charging millions of dollars for some fancy charts and rudimentary data science. Of course, there will always be some hyper-dedicated public servant types who are top of the line, and I'm sure that the director…

I can only say, based on my own short experience as purchase manager, that the process looks something like this:

1. The company needs to expand / upgrade / whatever, and there's a meeting on how this should be tackled. More often than not, in large companies, this part is also delegated to some consulting firm.

2. Report from said firm comes in, you have a meeting, and either go with their recommendations, or something else which has come up internally.

3. Upper management is convinced that using outside consultants / contractors is the way to go, because it's lighter on the company (no hiring, etc.)

4. Upper management gets wined and dined by the largest players, and are convinced its better to go with the most establishes firms.

Often times they have good relationships with these firms from beforehand, and don't even bother checking out their competition.

I've been myself in the situation where we spent months on coming up with the best deal possible, only to get steamrolled by executives, because they wanted to go with someone they knew - and pay many multiples extra.

In the end, it's the tax-payers or shareholders that are paying for this kind of stuff.

Re: Why Taxpayers Pay McKinsey $3M a Year for a Recent College Graduate Contractor

#309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't unpaid overtime illegal?

Not if the position is overtime exempt.

I'm not sure if this exists in EU. Does anybody know of a similar situation in EU?

Re: Why Taxpayers Pay McKinsey $3M a Year for a Recent College Graduate Contractor

#310
post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not only a US pattern, go to every major European capital and the consultancies will be located right next to the ministries.

I'm sure they are, but do the European governments equivalent of the GSA also have incentives to actually drive up the price of consulting contracts they source for their governments? It's not just the coziness that is concerning, but the particularly perverse incentive structure that essentially makes the GSA an inside agent of the consulting industry.

Here in the UK we usually go for the traditional things: Consultants provide free assistants to ministers. Assistants advise that X is a superb idea. Government pays consultants for help implementing X, which they happen to be experts in. Then everyone impacted by X also hires the consultants to figure out what's going on. Later the minister leaves government and is hired for a £x00,000 salary for one day a week of 'advice'.
Post reply on HN