Hello!

Congrats on the offers! :) Not bad as a grad!

In order to offer a good answer, some key questions would need to be answered in your side:

• What are your mid and long term goals? to see which offer aligns better with that
• What passionates you, consulting or rather industry?

Without knowing those answers, and with the info you could only find in Google, I would go with SK due to their prestige vs. Deloitte. However, if strategy if what you want, perhaps the latter fits you better.

In any case, good news, there is not a bad answer here :)

Hope it helps!

Cheers,

Clara

Hi there,

I don't know the specifics of Denmark, but I can give you my perspective as I worked several years for EY-P and was responsible for the inception of the Lisbon office.

In my opinion, EY-P is a better brand and value proposition. The reason is that when EY bought Parthenon in 2013 it brought its founder Bill Achtmeyer with the deal (which remained leading the practice), and while it did a bit of integration, it respected its culture and practices.

As a side note, Bill led Bain's M&A practice in 1990 and it left when Bain had significant financial problems. So Parthenon's DNA is the same of an MBB.

The result was the value of the “boutique” remained intact. The key partners, consultants, clients, knowledge, systems, processes were there. 

Then EY invested in the brand. Investment meaning hiring key teams from MBB, acquiring OC&C and other boutiques in several countries, and using EY's strong foothold in the transaction arena to bring a lot new business. 

Only later on it started expanding to new countries and aggressively opening new offices, and did it with “strategy” people. Nowadays, EY is betting strong on EY-Parthenon, bringing in more competences, but usually respecting its DNA as a strategy firm.

I don't think I could tell the same story about Monitor Deloitte. Not about it's DNA, not about it's prestige when it was acquired, not about how succesful the integration was done, not about their hiring practices in a lot of places.

Last but not least, EY-P has a tremendous advantage in the transaction arena, which feeds a lot of strategy business. It is not clear to me what exactly is the advantage for Monitor in the strategy space.

So my guess is that even if EY-P is smaller, it will be more prestigious and grow much faster, which correlated to a steeper career curve.

Having said this, if you still want some details on EY-P practice in Denmark, reach out privately and I will use my network to find out more.

(edited)