Im currently weighing up my options - at present i am a penultimate year economist at a top university. Therew are aspects of IB, asset management and equity research to be specific, which genuinely interest me. However i could say the same for management consultancy.For those of you who have already decided or are currently working in the consulting professiion, i am interested to know why you chose this over investment banking. Thanks

When I graduated in 2003, I had an offer for asset management (the scheme involved rotations in investment management and equity research so could have led down either path), as well as in management consultancy.I chose management consultancy because it offered broader opportunities to learn about the management as well as the analysis of resource allocations in business.I was not convinced that most of the asset managers I spoke to had as comprehensive or robust an understanding of the drivers behind, and implications of, their decisions and recommendations.I believe I made the right decision 5 years ago. I work regularly with asset managers and investment bankers as a consultant and, at the same age, the consultants I work with are operating at a more advanced level than counterparts in financial services.The two careers can offer quite different paths - in asset management, you spend longer developing as a technical specialist before having to make a hard break into management, business development, etc. In consulting you develop technical specialism for a short time before adding other skills to your portfolio - your technical specialism develops over a longer period.From my experience, I recommend understanding the range of difference even within the two industries. For example, equity research within a bank vs. in an independent outfit is quite different in terms of the working environment and intellectual stretch you experience. Similarly, working in management vs. IT consultancy is a different proposition. I was aware of the differences, but did not appreciate just how substantial the spread can be. However, taking these differences into account now, I am even more confident that I made the right choice for me.

O P T, would you mind telling me which consultancy you work for?

What an absolute bit of tosh! I’ve never heard of something so absurd, misleading and flagrantly untrue. Face it pal OPT, management consulting (apart from MBB roles and senior ones at that) is all about process mapping, project management, programme management, IT architecture, IT strategy (whatever that it is), business transformations, change management and whatever other-wordly nonsense you manage to come up with. The absolute alchemy of MC (and ACN in particular) is that they can manage to undertake basic admin work and wrap it up as ‘specialised advice’ to client. Mate, go for IB, irrespective of the downturn, you learn hard technical skills and knowledge which is transferable across a spectrum of functions and industry. All these nonsense MCs on this forum who delude themselves into thinking that they provide value to the client are simply ignorant to the palpable fact that they are nothing more advanced than a glorified admin assistant.ZB

It may be worth considering that investment banking per se is disappearing, with Goldman and Morgan Stanley both registering as 'traditional' commercial banks over the weekend. My take is this: Work in industry if you want to see the world from the inside of one business.Work in consulting if you want to see the world from the eyes of multiple businesses (depending of course on what type of consulting you do - ZB is right about Accenture) and I'd extend that vitriol to any process-mapping type consultancies, or those that put you on placement for longer than 6 months goes beyond consulting - you may as well work for them.If you want to see the business world from the outside, then go into IB (finance). You don't work with the shareholders / management - you become the shareholders and push / analyse management from an external position for your own benefit. It's a very different take on the world.

why do people say that apart from MBBB. all other MCs are involved in process management, IT consulting or whatever? This is clearly not true. OC&C, OW, ATK, LEK, Credo, Monitor (and goes on) are all involved in strategic projects that are important for companies. Although it may be true that when you first enter these strategy consultancies, your daily tasks as an analyst involves doing mostly research, filling spreadsheets and slides, but this is an essential part of any high level strategy projects. Without the right data, no genius can make the right decision. The key in these first few years is really to avoid just becoming a machine, but try to become proactive and try to understand the bigger issues in a project; even though these bigger issues are often the jobs of the project manager and partners involved, they make the boring jobs more worthwhile. So MC is not all process mapping at all; specifically strategy consulting is just about high level strategy, most of the projects would be on M&A and PE projects. NOT as ZB suggested.

98% of consulting work at ACN and the big 4 is just process mapping and IT. But it pays the bills so who cares.