I know this businessweek article is a couple weeks old and has generated a good amount of news already. But I didn't really skim through its rankings until recently. I really don't get these rankings. The big 4 are ranked as the top 4 best places to launch a career. You're telling me GE, Goldman Sachs, Google, Mckinsey, Apple and Microsoft are worse places to start than the Big 4? You have got to be kidding. Going down the list of things they looked at -
a) pay: The avg. starting pay is nowhere near the starting pay of most of the companies I mentioned.
b) bonuses: "Signing bonuses: 90% of entry-level hires received them in 2009". These signing bonuses go upto $5k. Add that to the starting salaries and that's still nowhere near a google, apple, goldman or mckinsey employee.
c) 401k match: sourced from a commenter on this post -"Deloitte will match 25% of the first 6% you put in. So, you make 80,000, put in 6% (4,800), you get $1,200 matched. But...no more than that. You put in 8%, that last 2% won't get matched. And, you can't even get it until you have three FULL years of service."
d) Mentorship program participation: 100%. First off, they give everybody a mentor. Most of the mentors rarely ever take their mentees out to lunch, sit with them and help them out. Especially if the mentors are managers and above, then it's almost like the associates have to send out multiple emails to get their attention.
e) Promoting from within: 25.7% of top execs have been with the organization 20+ years.
That's just the way the firms are structured. They're not like normal companies where you can hire people from other companies and expect them to take over as a partner. It is a specialized industry. Businessweek should have looked into the % of people who "launched" their careers at the big 4 and are still with the firm after 4-5 years.
Look, I agree that these firms are great places to launch careers, don't get me wrong. But top 4? That's just ridiculous.
a) pay: The avg. starting pay is nowhere near the starting pay of most of the companies I mentioned.
b) bonuses: "Signing bonuses: 90% of entry-level hires received them in 2009". These signing bonuses go upto $5k. Add that to the starting salaries and that's still nowhere near a google, apple, goldman or mckinsey employee.
c) 401k match: sourced from a commenter on this post -"Deloitte will match 25% of the first 6% you put in. So, you make 80,000, put in 6% (4,800), you get $1,200 matched. But...no more than that. You put in 8%, that last 2% won't get matched. And, you can't even get it until you have three FULL years of service."
d) Mentorship program participation: 100%. First off, they give everybody a mentor. Most of the mentors rarely ever take their mentees out to lunch, sit with them and help them out. Especially if the mentors are managers and above, then it's almost like the associates have to send out multiple emails to get their attention.
e) Promoting from within: 25.7% of top execs have been with the organization 20+ years.
That's just the way the firms are structured. They're not like normal companies where you can hire people from other companies and expect them to take over as a partner. It is a specialized industry. Businessweek should have looked into the % of people who "launched" their careers at the big 4 and are still with the firm after 4-5 years.
Look, I agree that these firms are great places to launch careers, don't get me wrong. But top 4? That's just ridiculous.
Comments
what have i learnt in 4 mths? nothing much except to follow last year's file because that is the main guidance i get. everyday i spend most of my time talking to clients NOT to understand stuff but to chase them for documents only. i feel like a pest.