Hi Tom,

So I try to stay away from telling people what they should do (all I can do is help them see what they truly want).

What I can say is if it were me I would pick BCG. 9 out of 10 people would pick BCG. If you are doing something different, that's fine (we shouldn't just blindly follow the crowd). But know why you are.

1) While BCG presumably has the best exits, how strong is that effect on me as an individual, rather than simply reflecting the perhaps slightly higher drive of the average person recruited by BCG? 

They are a tier above. The brand/network/exit ops are huge. I routinely get reached out to via LinkedIn with people looking for MBB consultants only. (explicitly stated)

2) How much more would I work at BCG, and how much more intense and pressurised is the environment than at OW or S& (very much only interested in London specific info).

Honestly depends on the office, your practice, time period, your specific projects/bosses, etc. OW and S& can be more hours. They can also be less.

3) Which of Oliver Wyman and Strategy& Deals has the better brand name in London. Is there any significant difference? I have heard Strategy& is rather on the up after a few difficult years. Is this true?

I'm not positive, but I *think* S& is stronger.

4) I don’t have any interest in FS: is this a deal breaker for OW?

You need to check with them the work they're doing and how that will affect your career. If it's in x, and then in 5-10 years that means you'll be doing x, and you don't like x, then, you tell me…sounds like a dealbreaker for any job!

5) My offer is for the S& Deals team. I get the sense that people in that team do a significant amount of strategy projects too though. Is this right, and are there any types of work/potential exits that S& Deals blocks me from.

If S& is deals then you will do deals. That includes “strategy” projects like Due Diligence. S& Deals is going to take you down a DD/VC/PE/FS future.

Congrats on your offers.

• BCG has the best brand name recognition out of the 3 - around the globe and also amongst people not particularly familiar with the consulting industry. You will likely also get the chance to work on a variety of different projects at BCG if you are interested in that
• You can assume to be working the same amount of long hours at all 3 - especially when you focus on deal advisory. It is btw not true that Tier 2 companies only employ people that have inferior intellect, skills or work ethics compared to MBB employees - but partners want to sell everywhere and therefore clients need to be made happy

I don't have any other insights to your London specific questions unfortunately.

I wish you the best of luck

Hi there,

1. It's not just the type of exit but also the type of work, the colleagues, the support system, etc. Imho its a no-brainer to join BCG out of those 3.

2. That is a common myth. Tier 2 often works the same or even more due to the lack of proper support systems (e.g., slide creation) and the need to prove something.

3. For FS, I'd go with OW.

4. No.

5. I have no insights on that.

Cheers,

Florian

BCG.  Consulting is a bit like doing an MBA, the best brand names have better options for most people. The work across all firms is similar with the difference being industry or culture etc. That does matter but if your goal is to find a good exit in a few years then the best brand is the way to go. 

I would honestly have zero doubt: BCG is far superior.

That said, OW focuses on FS projects, although it is on a trajectory of diversification.

Strategy& Deal team is almost never invited to the most interesting and complex strategy projects. 

Your personal brand at BCG will be much stronger and your exit chances will be much better.