| Topic Name: |
established firm or "e-firm"? |
| Message Name: |
Consider the scope of solutions |
| Date Posted: |
12/01/2000 |
| In Reply To: |
I think it depends on several factors. At what stage in your career are you? If you can absorb a risk, then the dot.com firms can probably provide the most cutting edge experience. Of course, working for McKinsey or even Big 5 can give you the name brand recognition for future endeavors (i.e. independent work). Culture is another factor. Young internet companies tend to be less conservative, while the more traditional firms can give you the structure you may or may not need. While mainstream consulting firms do lay off folks (E&Y and Kearney are the most recent and guilty culprits), you can probably count on a bit more stability with them. Also, the successful internet firms are likely to grow via acqusition, so you can expect some major changes with them and they may not be good ones. So, you have think about how long you envision yourself in your next position. |
| Message: |
When looking at traditional vs e-consulting firms, also consider the scope of work and scope of solutions from the client perspective and what that will mean to you. The "eConsultancies" have a built in myopia -- if the solution isn't going to have an e in front of it, it isn't "cool" and they don't want any real part of it. This is self limiting and can be frustrating for both client and consultant. Also take into account the depth of resources of the more traditional firms. Taken another way -- how much longer do you think that "e" prefix will be around as a special view on the world? Eventually, probably sooner rather than later, it will be just another standard facet of business. Where will the eConsultancies be then?
|
|
