Hey there!

This is really weird! What is the official communication from HR?

Let's start with the “normal” part. Internships are a way to get full time offers, given that you perform well. It's true that you have to apply again, but obviously you can't compare that with a “normal” application. There's no guarantee that you will perform well, so there can't be a guarantee for a FT offer. So far so good.

Now for the weird part. A 6-12 months internship at McKinsey is not normal to begin with but also incompatible for a 2nd year MSc who has to finish their studies. You also mentioned that this was raised during the PEI part of the interview, so it was not the HR person but a consultant who brought it up. It's no business of the interviewer consultant how long the internship is designed for (unless he/she was firm leadership). This is entirely for HR to figure out. 

Would be interesting to learn a bit more about what happened there! Somehow doesn't add up for me.

I have not heard of a 1 year internship at McK before. What role is this for and which country are you in?

Based on the description provided, it sounds like they need extra help for a year from an intern. There is always a good chance of converting an internship to a full time offer but what bothers me about this is that you have to re-apply. I have never heard of an intern having to re-apply for a role, they have already interviewed so why the need to interview again especially after working for a year? It doesn't quite add up…

Udayan

Hi there,

Such a long internship is unusual. Are you based in Southern Europe? I heard something similar happening in Italy for BCG. 

Regardless of the length, it is also strange that you would have to apply again. My guess is that if you perform well they may convert your internship to full time, as that’s usually what happens with internships. Possibly the reason why they mentioned the new application is that you would have a 2-year gap between internship and full time due to the Master.

Whether you should accept the offer depends on the opportunity cost (ie what could you do otherwise). In general, having McKinsey on your CV will help even if you don’t convert the internship to full time (although I read the role is research, which is going to be less effective than “standard” consulting if you want to apply later for strategy).

Best,

Francesco

Hi there,

This is definitely odd and unconventional. I haven't come across a situation like this before.

That said, everything in life is unpredictable. Even if you're a full time hire you can get fired, pushed out, etc.

Ultimately, getting McK on your resume and getting that experience is completely worth it, whether it's for 6 months, 12 months, or years.

I would jump in, perform at your best and hope for a full time offer. While hoping, plan your exit as well and continue networking + applying to other firms as your time approaches.

Good luck!

Hello!

What you are sayings sounds to be extremly odd as well. 

I was an intern myself in McKinsey, some of us did only summer and some stayed some months after. However, at the end of the internship there was always an invitation (or not) to join full time. 

Common sense tells that you would have a great advantage vs. others when it came to full time recruiting, but that common sense also tells me that you shouldn´t need to interview. 

I would follow up with the people who interviewed you tbh, to have another opinion on top of HRs. 

Hope it helps!

Cheers, 

Clara

A couple of thoughts:

• While it's strange that they say you'll need to reaply, I would have some doubts that they would make you go through that if you have a great performance. It just wouldn't make sense.
• Be pragmatic about this. Having Mckinsey on your resume opens many doors. Unless you have an offer from a better firm/better role, this decision may actually be a no-brainer if you look into the big picture.