[throwaway66920]

Former employee

Edit: I cannot reply to the below, but I will say, that’s a pretty contrived justification for your view.

Communication is hard. Few things done at a corporate scale are easy to implement. People like to point at big consulting firms and say “I could have done that” or “they could have just asked me” but that’s really just a fraction of it.

[tomrod]

Former employee of former McKinsey employees. Grandparent point stands: McKinsey seems to offer little to no value that isn't already known and easy to communicate.

I will say though that McKinsey alums I know seem to be better at playing corporate politics than the average, which can be a skill when married with technical acumen.

[op00to]

You call it playing politics, others call it effective communication.

[tomrod]

Effective communication is pushing people the alums dislike out of their jobs and building silos?

[throwaway66920]

“Playing politics” is is largely empathy and communication skills. Giving people what they want is actually not intuitive because, again, people are generally bad at communicating what they want. It’s common to hear people maligned for being “political players” but I’ll be honest; if you’re bad at office politics, it generally implies you don’t have people’s confidence, trust, and friendship- often because you’re fixated on the idea that work should stand for itself and not recognizing the massive importance that is working with others.

Being a dick with your influence is a different concept

[tomrod]

Being a dick in influence is what I observe more often from my (biased, certainly) sample of McKinsey alum. We both agree that salability of work product is an important and underutilized skill.