When McKinsey Comes to Town: The Hidden Influence of the World's Most Powerful Consulting Firm
- Downloads：7481
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2022-10-12 08:17:36
- Update Date：2025-09-24
- Status：finish
- Author：Walt Bogdanich
- ISBN：B09VYR44NS
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Reviews
Felix Morara
，
Disclaimer: The opinions presented here are my own， and do not， in part or wholesale， represent the views of my employer。Tough one to review for。。。 ahem。。。 personal reasons。 I'll try to remain impartial， but that's sometimes an exercise in futility。 I'll try still。Starting with the not-so-good。 I have a couple of gripes with the book:A lot of it reads like a compendium of NYT articles（which the authors write for）-There isn't much in the way of new information， and pretty much all of the misdeeds Disclaimer: The opinions presented here are my own， and do not， in part or wholesale， represent the views of my employer。Tough one to review for。。。 ahem。。。 personal reasons。 I'll try to remain impartial， but that's sometimes an exercise in futility。 I'll try still。Starting with the not-so-good。 I have a couple of gripes with the book:A lot of it reads like a compendium of NYT articles（which the authors write for）-There isn't much in the way of new information， and pretty much all of the misdeeds described have been presented in one form or the other in American media。 This doesn't， and isn't meant to， excuse any of the missteps described but it's hard to find the book's thesis in this context。 We know McKinsey is influential， and we know that there's been a demonstrated involvement in some questionable and damaging decisions， some of which the firm has acknowledged （à la Opioid crisis）。 Bogdanich and Forsythe do themselves no favors in presenting all these and more with no new information， no claim to some other desired outcome--regulatory or internal。 What then？ The authors would probably say we must all realize the firm is 'bad'， and I will ask again， what then？There's no analysis of the root causes of the set of facts they describe， and one is left wondering what indeed is hidden about the tale they tell。 They work to tie a history of seemingly disparate outcomes to argue that the negative effects they find are what always happens when McKinsey comes to town， while in the same breath describing a pattern of cost-cutting and responsibility avoidance some think of as being inseparable from the American corporation。 They do little to explain how the business actions described arise from any particular culture that McKinsey（instead of the firms that hire them） vaunts and this leaves one wondering which is to blame for what is described。 Some might say none--that capital seeks to preserve itself only， and some might say all--that capital corrupts。 Some will blame one or the other， and Bogdanich and Forsythe blame。。。 who？ It is unclear。 They describe business contexts that result in measurably poor outcomes（e。g。， safety violations at a famed theme park）， and somehow let us decide for ourselves why it is that the way they tell the story assigns blame to one or the other。 Compendium of poor outcomes yes， no analysis at all。The authors ignore important issues that would add heft to their writing。 The obvious ones would involve an analysis of （what I think is） the reproduction of a particular and peculiar elite culture that is not only American but Global; tied to wealth and its colorallies （'western-ness' and whiteness are left unexplored in the South African example， American 'coastal elite' dynamics in the oft-cited Steel example， the general shared conservatism of American government and corporations in the decision-making and relationships described， all these fail to gain a single mention）--at a point， I found myself thinking that Bogdanich and Forsythe had bone to pick with someone， and they had a publisher willing to let them do it（poorly）。In the same vein， the authors fail to trace history all the way to the contemporary responses coming from within McKinsey regarding the firm's values。 Again， this isn't on its own meant to say that those responses are valid， but they would have done well to share some perspective--any--about their perception of the structures and checks McKinsey has established in response to the criticisms of the last decade。 This failure has the book reading slightly aged for those familiar with the firm and its work solely because it appears to describe a firm of days （slightly） gone。 Things move fast in the world of high consulting， and the conversation now is about client selection policies and governance。 Bogdanich and Co are stuck telling the story of singular partners who made very bad decisions--there's a sordid tale about an insurance client and kickbacks that （alas！） is described as a pair of greedy employees when it in actuality reveals fundamental truths about 'merit' and 'performance' in McKinsey's partnership that could， again， have been part of a sharp criticism about how the firm incentivises its people。 Nope， the authors blow past any opportunity at analysis and instead narrate narrate narrate。 McKinsey is in a time of talking about how its partnership as a whole is undergoing a long-coming（and argued in firm circles to be historically present） reckoning with the outcomes the firm enables， and the authors shockingly have no criticism or opinions about this。 None at all！The good？ There's no spelling mistakes， and the language is accessible。 But unfortunately， you might gain more from reading a couple of old newspapers。 At least those had a scoop！ 。。。more
Christian Chonardo
，
Honestly feels like the authors are cherry picking data points and trying to misrepresent the company。 Seems like any reader who can think critically will see through the cognitive distortions and logical fallacies they make in their arguments。
Tarpley
，
need more intel on the secret client list
Carla Bayha
，
McKinsey consulting tells Ivy League recruits that working for them will allow them to do good in the world。 But as detailed in When McKinsey Comes to Town， a McKinsey consultant's true deliverables--whether in industries， health care， or governments-- are to flatter the executives who hire them， suggest higher executive compensation for them at the expense of other employees or clients， achieve short term gains through efficiencies that usually involve layoffs， and sustain a powerful global net McKinsey consulting tells Ivy League recruits that working for them will allow them to do good in the world。 But as detailed in When McKinsey Comes to Town， a McKinsey consultant's true deliverables--whether in industries， health care， or governments-- are to flatter the executives who hire them， suggest higher executive compensation for them at the expense of other employees or clients， achieve short term gains through efficiencies that usually involve layoffs， and sustain a powerful global network of former McKinsey workers， politicians， lobbyists， and bureaucrats that allows their influence， compensation， and McKinsey Partners offshore funds to grow。 Whether advising our government on regulations （while working the other side for oil and coal companies， investment banks， and opioid manufacturers）， teaching insurance companies how to avoid payouts to victims， or helping China grow its sphere of influence， the ultimate excuse is always， "if we don't do it， someone else will。" There are a suspicious number of online one star reviews of this book already。 For fans of The Big Short and Empire of Pain。 。。。more
mahnaz
，
The audible version on book came out 2 days ago and I just finished it。It’s an amazing book， specially if you have experience working for MBB or similar ones。
Polina
，
According to the author McKinsey is responsible for all the known world problems。 There are things one criticize the Firm for but lack the values probably not the right one。 Having spent almost a decade in McK don’t think this book is fairHave we always been right？ Of course notHave we made mistakes？ Of course yesHave we been wrong and should never repeat some mistakes again？ Definitely！Impossible to avoid mistakes if you are solving difficult problems
Joseph
，
Hopefully more people will review this book so the partisans at McKinsey will not artificially lower the book rating。 Although their disingenuous criticism of the book will paradoxically highlight what is wrong with McKinsey-- their inability to recognize that efficiency is not the sine qua non of business excellence。Although the book will not win any literary awards-- it is written in pedestrian， investigative journalism that would be found in The NY Times-- it is still riveting and infuriating Hopefully more people will review this book so the partisans at McKinsey will not artificially lower the book rating。 Although their disingenuous criticism of the book will paradoxically highlight what is wrong with McKinsey-- their inability to recognize that efficiency is not the sine qua non of business excellence。Although the book will not win any literary awards-- it is written in pedestrian， investigative journalism that would be found in The NY Times-- it is still riveting and infuriating。 The authors recount the history of McKinsey's founding and the business relationships it has cultivated over the past century。 It depicts the recycling of McKinsey analysts into government and business and thoroughly documents how McKinsey has been at the forefront of advising businesses who have brought us the 2007 financial crisis， the opioid crisis and the climate crisis among others。 The conflict of interests that the authors highlight-- where McKinsey will advise the government along with the companies who fall under government regulation-- highlights the duplicity of the company。 McKinsey states that there are company safeguards in place that mitigate these profound conflicts of interest。 This is balderdash。 St。 McKinsey， however， requires strict confidentiality， making it impossible to understand the clients whom they serve on different sides of an issue ， and more infuriating， purports to be a values-driven organization。 One of the most powerful aspects of the book is when employees call-out McKinsey for their hypocrisy and duplicity and are met by company bromides of "we care，" "we have to be better，" etc。， while secrecy continues。 For a company that boasts of "scientific management，" shouldn't these purportedly intelligent employees recognize that in scientific publication， authors are required to list ANY potential conflict-of-interest because of the potential bias that arises when money is involved because it potentially influences the findings。 McKinsey is a for-profit entity。 A lot of scientific research is non-profit that might get translated into commercial use。 Therefore， "science" gets filtered through a specific ideology and becomes less rigorous。Science is a search， a quest for answers that isn't motivated （at its best） by money。 Bastardizing science in the name of management in the quest for profits that enriches shareholders and executives while cities， employees and the environment suffer is insulting。 Also， if economics is the "dismal science" because there are so many variables that aren't included in modeling because of complexity， then shouldn't scientific management be the "abysmal science，" because to truly use a scientific lens， one has to factor individual， community， national， international variables that are complex so it essentially becomes a pseudo-science。 How many times do we have to hear that " our models" said this is "once and a lifetime occurrence？" Remember McKinseyites， if you use "science" based on published data to develop "best practices，" you are always one step behind the innovators who come first so that you have to incorporate them into future models。 Sorry McKinsey employees， it must be a shock to be told you are the best and the brightest when you are the equivalent of those you get a participation trophy for playing-- unfortunately your participation often leads to disaster。 。。。more
Hugh
，
This was excellent but somewhere I imagine a room of lawyers and McKinsey execs were somewhat relieved to read it。 It lacked a real knockout blow， and some of the content was almost discrediting to the authors。There's a fair amount of late-capitalism， bad corporation stuff。 Companies hire McKinsey to help them deliver more value to shareholders， and often the workers are the victims。 This isn't at all revelatory， even if it's frustrating。 This is covered quickly and effectively early in the book This was excellent but somewhere I imagine a room of lawyers and McKinsey execs were somewhat relieved to read it。 It lacked a real knockout blow， and some of the content was almost discrediting to the authors。There's a fair amount of late-capitalism， bad corporation stuff。 Companies hire McKinsey to help them deliver more value to shareholders， and often the workers are the victims。 This isn't at all revelatory， even if it's frustrating。 This is covered quickly and effectively early in the book。 There are several chapters in the middle that reveal ways that McKinsey's actions contradict their values - working against the Affordable Care act， working with ICE during the Trump border detainment debacles， etc。 This caused a lot of internal strife among the McKinsey rank and file， which is interesting to read about。There are several examples of governments enlisting McKinsey to deliver terrible policy advice for exorbitant fees， while also working for the companies which benefit from these policies。 Governments are not businesses and should not be run by the same principles， but we're still learning that the hard way。 The meat of the book， in my opinion， documents McKinsey's involvement with objectively unethical， and sometimes illegal mandates for big tobacco， Purdue Pharma， Allstate and Enron， among others。 The stories here are shocking but not surprising， and all end on some variation of "McKinsey apologised/paid a fine/fired a couple people and promised never to do it again"。There are several pages devoted to the Houston Astros cheating， which I liked reading but found irrelevant and somewhat damaging to the thesis of the book。Overall the book is a good read -- if you don't know McKinsey or the world in which they operate， much of this will be eye-opening and enraging。 At this point in America's history though， it all feels depressingly unsurprising， part-and-parcel of How America Does Business。 There is some hope in the form of moral， idealistic younger employees who abhor the 'growth at all costs' mantra and are vocal about it。 Maybe this will incite more revealing and damning exposes， in the way that Dopesick: Dealers， Doctors， and the Drug Company that Addicted America and Pain Killer: A "Wonder" Drug's Trail of Addiction and Death opened the door for books like Empire of Pain: The Secret History of the Sackler Dynasty。 。。。more
Facosow
，
Terrible hack job。 Clearly partisan pov
Shishene
，