EY Advisory: Great for Risk & Compliance, growth continues to be a challenge
of 5 stars
If you're interested in a career in finance or in any sort of regulation-driven, compliance-oriented work, run to EY and beat down the door until they let you in; incredible brand and network in that space. Tough to beat our Risk practice and our Transaction practice has a solid niche in the market, even if their work and sub-culture are a bit cold/task oriented that feels, well, transactional.
If you're skilled in one of EY's prioritized growth areas (Purpose, Digital/Innovation, Strategy, SAP) - give EY serious consideration. You'll likely need to tolerate a few bumps in the road early on, and an anti-intellectual culture that's off-the-charts on any risk aversion scale (from CEO to Manager levels at least). HOWEVER - if you actually know your stuff and are capable of delivering on what you promise, you will make it through the other side and find a sea of opportunity with a remarkable amount of support and limited (real) competition for resources. Also true to a lesser extent for the Supply Chain and Customer competencies, and prioritized sectors (Life Sci, Healthcare, CPG, etc.)
If you are an opportunity oriented person looking to focus on driving top-line growth for clients, run from EY as though it was on fire. This type of mindset is new and viewed as risky across most of EY. The only thing EY hates more than risk is new. Our partnership continues to demonstrate they will only change when things become so painful that the market has left no other option; and, usually, any option the market leaves behind is pretty cruddy.
The Assurance Service Line spent the first 6 years of Advisory's rebirth finding ways to exert dominance over the up-start business. Though expectations have been set that roles need to reverse, it seems they're having a hard time letting go and allowing control of the firm to fall into some sort of balance.
Evaluate and digest any stories of "change" carefully. Even almost 8 years in the consulting game, leadership continues to support decisions that run counter to the best interests of the firm as a whole. E.g. Why do we continue to audit Oracle when we could make 1000x more (and likely add more value to Oracle) by building a proper global technology advisory practice? Why do we continue to audit Salesforce.com when we could make 100x more by building a proper salesforce implementation practice?