| Topic Name: |
McKinsey in decline? |
| Message Name: |
Distinctiveness vs Implementation? |
| Date Posted: |
12/27/2005 |
| In Reply To: |
To comfort your point, I find it truly worrying to note that the longer McKinsey has been working with a client, the worse the performance of that client has become. This appears to be a "rule" that suffers a few "exceptions", but it is veryfiable in many countries.
Reason: with the increased emphasis on "getting more work" (oops, sorry, "developing the client"), McKinsey does less "truly distinctive" work, accepts to address issues that are not "top management level" and works wiht managers that are not the best at the clients served. All of this is then re-cycled in the "knowledge-building" merry-go-round and before you know it, second-class work has become "state of the art" in the McKinsey world.
More troubling is the impact this is having on the average quality of recruits and on the average quality of partners elected! But that is another discussion! |
| Message: |
Very interesting discussion. Isn't it true that McK has been criticized, perhaps unfairly, for coming up with great ideas but falling short on the implementation? (Bain's recruiting slogan) To address that, wouldn't McK be forced to work with less qualified managers?
|
|
