McKinsey 7S Framework Puns

I'm doing an internal analysis of a 1000 person organization to develop a SWOT to inform their strategic plan. I'm structuring it around the McKinsey 7S framework. Is there a better framework to use for internal analysis?

Hey everyone,

I thought I'd go through the practice questions in Valuation by McKinsey & Co on here because I'm not sure if I'm doing this right, there isn't an answer key in this book, and I feel like I could really benefit from any insights on these questions that more experienced people have.

Plus, I think this might give people who are just starting out a way to practice and make sure they're doing things properly.

If you could share some insight, or even just mark my answers (they seem like really simple questions), I'd really appreciate it.

I linked these review questions to a pdf that you can download here

Au delà de la polémique sur leur PowerPoint bidons ou trop chers.

J'ai voulu me renseigner sur cette fameuse boite de consulting qui recrute les meilleurs ingénieurs français, centraliens ou polytechniciens. Et je suis tombé sur le cul.

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/McKinsey_%26_Company

Ya pas un truc qui vous choque en lisant leur page Wikipedia ?

I'm relatively young and I'm getting towards the end of my Apprenticeship. I believe my trade in particular is on the older side compared to carpenters and electricians. So this seems like it would suggest a solid decade of strong wage growth. On the other hand, the study suggests that modular construction would eliminate the need for many skilled trades.

I've been doing mostly tilt ups and commercial remodels through my plumbing apprenticeship. Mid rise housing seems to be the only field where modular really seems capable of really eliminating the need for skilled labor at this point in time. I'm only seven years in construction and my trade and the industry I'm in are very narrow, but it just doesn't seem like the industry is really ready to have a 41% reduction in the work force.

I figure people on here might have a better sense of things.

I have some personal reasons for choosing mck, but am concerned about being in implementation instead of being a generalist. My bcg and Bain offers are both for generalist consulting positions.

How different is implementation from generalist consulting at mck? The partners are trying to sell me that ill have the exact same ability to be staffed on short term strategy projects and that it’s actually an advantage to be aligned to a practice this early.

My response was that if it’s not that different, then just change me to a generalist. They originally agreed to change my offer, but now they are backtracking and saying it’s impossible to switch to generalist at this time.

So all in all, should I even still be considering mck? Is implementation truly the same as a generalist (this seems far fetched)

All offers are for us cities.

I work as a new construction commercial plumber, so I'm assuming that I'll see a solid decade in wage growth. However, as a housing and transit advocate who understands that this increased demand for skilled labor means that residential construction contractors will likely increase wages to compete with commercial & service wages. This increase in labor costs will in turn increase overall costs for new housing, which will push housing even further outside the reach of working class Americans.

Wonder what y'all think. Thanks.

Hi folks - I was recently offered MBA summer internships at both McK and Bain (both in San Francisco). Here's where I'm at so far:

1. My long-term career goal is to become a high-level leader in digital health, ideally a mental health tech startup/unicorn (think Spring Health, Brightline, MindMed, Cerebral, etc). This is a hypothesis though, which is why I am using consulting to test it while building a generalist toolkit and possibly stumbling upon other areas I might want to pursue too.

2. So far from what I understand, McKinsey seems to be the favorite among large traditional healthcare players, and generally puts out more research on healthcare in the US and globally. However, Bain SF also has strong general US healthcare presence, and a rapidly expanding growth equity practice that invests often in health-tech unicorns. I'm unsure if I stand to benefit more from McKinsey's breadth of opportunity/resources (especially if I end up liking something else better than mental health tech/digital health), or from Bain's direct access to my interests.

3. I am attracted to Bain's people, culture, and focus on work-life balance - I worry that at McKinsey SF I'm unlikely to have strong social life with my coworkers, or might get run ragged by travel/hours.

4. That said, I'm impressed by McKinsey's stronger global influence and prestige advantage but slightly intimidated by their people and culture - I think with McKinsey I would be "rising to the challenge" whereas at Bain I'd likely feel more comfortable and authentic.

Really hoping some of you can share words of wisdom - thank you!

https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/automotive%20and%20assembly/our%20insights/mapping%20the%20automotive%20software%20and%20electronics%20landscape%20through%202030/automotive-software-and-electronics-2030-final.pdf

Very good document to read to get the full picture of ADAS market.

As the complexity and costs of new SW-driven functions, e.g., for AD or connected cars, are huge, we see increased cooperation to share costs or speed up development. Even close competitors, such as BMW and Daimler or GM and Honda, are now working together, especially in the field of AD, to share the high development costs. For EVs, Volkswagen announced their openness to share their EV platform with other OEMs. Also, tier-1 suppliers and OEMs are intensifying their cooperation and are building strategic partnerships. For example, engineers from Daimler and Bosch are working together, colocated in two locations to develop HW and SW for AD.

OEMs are also moving closer to strategically important tier-2 suppliers and tech companies and are using directed-buy or “direct buy” (by OEM) mechanisms for the sourcing of key components, and to gain access to IP, shape IP development, or secure critical supply. We see this, for example, for high-performance computing chips and other potential breakthrough technologies like LiDAR. These partnerships sometimes include financial investments by the OEMs. For example, for reasons stated above, Ford invested in the LiDAR company Velodyne. Also, tech companies are becoming a growing focus of OEMs. Volkswagen and Microsoft, for example, are building an automotive cloud platform together, a partnership that also signifies the move by players currently focused on consumer (electronics) into the automotive space. Besides Microsoft, Google has launched Google Automotive Services, including a partnership with and first deployment at Volvo1 , while Samsung has shown interest in entering the automotive space with the acquisition of Harman. Not surprisingly, those companies primarily aim at infotainment and connected services with a direct link to the customer, yet they might move further down into other domains over time.

We also see the formation of ecosystem

https://www.garmin.com/en-US/p/735520

Update: 7S is out too.

Marvin Bower made McKinsey into the preeminent consultancy that it is today. Part of that was based on holding McKinsey to extremely high ethical standards, And he led by example. Bower sold his own shares back to the firm at book value so it could remain private. He could easily have sold at some huge multiple of earnings had he not done that.

My question to my fellow consulting redditors -- espeically those who actually have experience working at The Firm -- has present day McKinsey lost its ethical way (e.g. Gupta, "tubo-charged" opioid sales, and so on), or have there just been a few bad actors?

For those that went through recruiting, seems like practice-aligned generalist is a huge advantage to those who are interested in a specific function but also want to try other areas? From what I understand, you do around 50% of your work in that practice (and get first dibs on the best studies in that practice) and then free to do whatever else. For example, if your goal is to be a CMO, going in as a M&S aligned generalist seems like a perfect fit? Curious why the two Bs don't offer this, or is there any downside that I'm not thinking about?