Do Big 4 Accounting Firms Over Work Employees?

[jvauerbach]

Not sure if similar debates have come up in the past but this article is raging through email forwards within the Big 4:

<BLOG LINK REMOVED>

The article is humorous in nature, and many of this guy's articles are very funny in my opinion for anyone that has worked in a similar atmosphere. But this particular article brings up an interesting point.

Are those firms taking advantage of young workers who are neither married or have kids so they can pay them normal salaries and force them to work 12-14 hours a day during busy seasons?

[smiling bandit]

I'm sure thye do work people pretty hard, but from their employees I've known, it's one of the Holy Grails for young accounting grads, just to get an entry-level job. They get paid pretty well, and the job is very flexible, so it seems reasonable to me.

[ultrafilter]

Big four employees, and employees at any prestigious firm, have the option to quit, and if their jobs really were that bad, they'd leave. The fact that they're staying on suggests that they're satisfied with what they're getting (which is more than just salary).

[Stink Fish Pot]

it's an up or out philosophy at these places. Up, meaning one day becoming a partner and making the big bucks, or out meaning you can't take it and quit.

I've employed IBM, Deloitte, PWC, and KPMG over my career and they are all pretty much the same. Entry-level employees are trained on the job at the client's expense (causing a constant stream of arguing in a PMO-type environment and budgetary meetings), a few seasoned SME's that do the brunt of the work because they are "oh so close" to making partner, and the partners, who basically don't bring much to the table. They are window dressing, and they are expensive window dressing.

I've known many who have dropped out, and a few who have climbed the mountain top. I've never known anyone to turn down a partnership (or whatever they are calling them these days - principals?), so it has to be a pretty good buck to become one. But the ones I've seen make it earn it.

I've known people who are on airplanes twice a week for 2-3 years (including vacations), so it's not much of a life. But out of school, you can make a lot of money, pocket the per diem, and generally have a good time. The problem comes when/if you want to settle down, have kids, etc. It can be done, but it takes its toll.

I like the ones that are "oh so close" to partnership. They can taste it, they work hard, and they are worth the money. Unfortunately, on a team of 40 consultants, you are lucky to get 4 of these SME's, and the rest are generally garbage. College grads who don't have a clue about the project you are working on and fumbling their way through on the client's dime. Not necessarily their fault.... they go where they are sent. But as a client, it's a pain in the ass to manage them and put up with the on the job training.

I've been offered positions with the big 6 (I guess now the big 4), but it's not for me. The travel alone would kill me.

[mazinger_z]

Personally, I would say yes (now that I'm in-house). Similarly, lawyers at large law firms work 80 hr weeks, too, but we get paid more. Knowing the career track for these guys at Big 4, I would've just stuck around 3 more years at school to get my JD. Though, the turnover rate at Large Law Firms are much higher, so I guess it evens out (but Big 4 have to travel way more...hmmm, I think the lawyers have it better).

[Tom Tildrum]

I think any profession where even the lowest echelon are salaried (as opposed to hourly) does this. Accountants, lawyers, doctors, etc.

[Evil Economist]

Are those firms taking advantage of young workers who are neither married or have kids so they can pay them normal salaries and force them to work 12-14 hours a day during busy seasons?

The salary is pretty good, and there's a clear career path once you're in the Big 4. you work like crazy for a few years, then it's off to industry to become a director (or VP for the lucky few) and lead a more normal life. And if you do stick it out and make partner life is pretty good. Average pay for a partner in the Big 4 is over $900k.

it's an up or out philosophy at these places. Up, meaning one day becoming a partner and making the big bucks, or out meaning you can't take it and quit.

Actually, for the majority the goal isn't up and out, the goal is just out. The Big 4 model is based on high turnover--they get recent grads in, work them hard and pay them well, then get them out the door.

Once they're out they're probably decision makers at whichever firm they end up at, so they will hire people from their old employer. The model only works if you have high turnover and maintain good relations with your former employees.

Basically, Big 4 employees are future clients, so the higher the turnover is, the larger the client base you have.

[mazinger_z]

The salary is pretty good, and there's a clear career path once you're in the Big 4. you work like crazy for a few years, then it's off to industry to become a director (or VP for the lucky few) and lead a more normal life. And if you do stick it out and make partner life is pretty good. Average pay for a partner in the Big 4 is over $900k. Average, from my friends is around $500-600k, more if you can land some big project (like UA bankruptcy). Even for large law firms, $900k is pretty high. $900k is high finance money.

[jvauerbach]

The salary is pretty good, and there's a clear career path once you're in the Big 4. you work like crazy for a few years, then it's off to industry to become a director (or VP for the lucky few) and lead a more normal life. And if you do stick it out and make partner life is pretty good. Average pay for a partner in the Big 4 is over $900k.

Unfortunately, most of the people working there are 22-30 years old and make between 35-70k working 60-80 hours per week with no chance at becoming a partner. Sad really.

[Algher]

This is the model for law, management consulting and accounting firms. You come in junior, work your ass off, and if you can survive (i.e. have the personality for it), you can make a lot of money.

I was in management consulting in the early 90s. I was hired out of undergrad at $28k. I was making $30k in 6 months. After 12 months I was making $40k, and got a promotion. By the end of 4 years I was a project manager pulling in close to $90k. I regularly billed out over 120% of my requirements.

I left with the birth of my son, after taking one too many phone calls on a Friday of "Algher, I need you to come into the office this weekend."

[Dinsdale]

Yeah - sounds pretty similar to what I know of private law firms. And while it has always been similar, I believe it has changed somewhat for the worse in recent years.

My BIL recently quit as a senior partner after 30 or so years at E&Y. Hit a certain vesting level and decided the $ wasn't worth it anymore. Worst to him was the never-ending pressure to sell - even as a long-time partner. I forget whether he took a 40 or 60% paycut for his current job, but he is still quite wealthy and is far happier. (Still doesn't get to golf with me as much as I'd like, tho!)

Also, back when he started he worked his ass off, but it was understod that that went with the territory. As I recall, it was mainly insane during the busy periods - I believe Feb-May, and to a lesser extent Aug-Oct. It was also understood that after 7 or so years you made partner. And partner back then came with certain luxuries such as the fancy office and country club membership. Now, such progress is no longer ensured, and there are different grades of partnership. At accounting and law firms, you now have a huge underclass of wage slaves who have no hopes of ever making partner.

I worked for a while at a private firm. The money was nice, but on an hourly basis I was doing better with the gov't. Not to mention I enjoyed having the occasional meal with my family.

[Evil Economist]

Average, from my friends is around $500-600k, more if you can land some big project (like UA bankruptcy). Even for large law firms, $900k is pretty high. $900k is high finance money.

It's possible I was told a high number--the person telling me had a vested interest in making me think partners made a lot. Plus it was for a specialty high-demand tax field, which might have higher averages, but if your numbers are reliable I'll believe them.

[msmith537]

Depends on what you mean by "take advantage of" or "overworked". I worked for the Big-4 right out of business school in 2001 as a management consultant. Mostly strategy / performance improvement stuff. And I worked at a smaller firm for about 4 years ultimately leaving last year due to..economic uncertainty.

You have to understand the mentality of a lot of Big-4 CPAs and management consultants, lawyers, investment bankers and other "high value professional services" workers. The best way to describe it is a sort of "work hard/play hard" mentality. We don't think like "shit I have to work 14 hours today". We think in terms of "this has to get done so we need to do whatever it takes to get the job done." And then we'll go out for some drinks or a steak dinner with the client.

Big-4 and other firms are very fraternity like. There is a certain "type" of people they hire and they tend to hire them from certain schools. You generally start together in "classes". For my new hire orientation, they flew the entire North America start group (several hundred mostly recent college and B-school grads) to Dallas where activities included a Matchbox Twenty concert, your standard speeches by partners and practice leaders, instruction on corporate policy by HR, a lot of drinking, even some dining etiquette lessons.

The starting salary is generally unimpressive. People work in those firms for the experience or ultimately the chance to become partner. Although middle management doesn't do too bad.

Even if you don't make partner, having Deloitte or Accenture (technically not Big-4) or KPMG on your resume opens a lot of doors for you. It's relatively hard to get into management consulting (sort of like I-banking), but once you are in, it's easy to jump around. A lot of people seem to change jobs every couple of years - start at Deloitte or E&Y, then go to PWC then maybe a smaller firm like BDO or Huron.

Or you can go into industry as a manager or director.

I like it because it's interesting and challenging and the people tend to be smart. Go look up the thread on "stupid coworkers". Sure we have boneheads like every company, but you generally don't have people who are so stupid they request an extra mouse pad because the mouse is at the edge of the pad and they can't reach an icon. We generally tend to be the type of people who you can put into any situation and we will figure out a solution.

It is easy to get burned out though. Quite often there is no work life balance and partners (or even worse managers) tend to not have respect for your personal life. For the past 4 years, I pretty much always had to have my laptop and Blackberry on me wherever I went so I could respond to an "emergency". And even though I was laid off last year (due to a practice-wide util rate of about 15%, my experience led me to a management job in a Fortune 500 company for more money in less than 2 months. Apparently they have been trying to fill my position for the better part of a year before hiring me. It's boring as shit but at least it pays well and is 9-5.

I may go back to a small consultig firm when things pick up or do something else entirely in a year or so. Haven't decided yet.







it's an up or out philosophy at these places. Up, meaning one day becoming a partner and making the big bucks, or out meaning you can't take it and quit.

Technically "up or out" means that they decide you aren't going to advance any further in your career and rather than let you hang out as a Sr Associate or Manager for 15 years, you are "counselled out" of the company.




Personally, I would say yes (now that I'm in-house). Similarly, lawyers at large law firms work 80 hr weeks, too, but we get paid more. Knowing the career track for these guys at Big 4, I would've just stuck around 3 more years at school to get my JD. Though, the turnover rate at Large Law Firms are much higher, so I guess it evens out (but Big 4 have to travel way more...hmmm, I think the lawyers have it better).

Except then you are stuck being a lawyer.;)



This video pretty much sums up the management consultant / I-banker rivalry. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROlDmux7Tk4)

[Freddy the Pig]

Are those firms taking advantage of young workers who are neither married or have kids so they can pay them normal salaries and force them to work 12-14 hours a day during busy seasons?Of course. Every relationship in a free society is based on mutual advantage. My employer is taking advantage of me, and I'm taking advantage of my employer. Long may it continue.

[msmith537]

Unfortunately, most of the people working there are 22-30 years old and make between 35-70k working 60-80 hours per week with no chance at becoming a partner. Sad really.

They have the same chance to make partner in 10-15 years as everyone else. Of course it isn't automatic. A lot of it depends on attitude, performance, and how well the business itself doing. It is a specific career track though. Usually some variation of Analyst->Associate->Sr Associate->Manager->Sr Manager->Partner or Principal (depending on whether you have equity or not). Usually about 1-4 years between each level. It's not just based on billing hours and doing a good job either. As you rise in the organization, you have to sell work as well.


The author of the blog seems to be disparaging these 24 year old associates as he works his job that he never leaves past 6:30. The question I have for him, or anyone else in your typical office cubicle farm, is where do you realistically see yourself in your company in 5 to 10 years? By what mechanism do you think you will have a chance to command a $150,000, $200,000, or $500,000 salary?

I'll bet you in 5 years, the blog author will still be in his job but one of those consultants will probably be his boss.

[zamboniracer]

I've employed IBM, Deloitte, PWC, and KPMG over my career and they are all pretty much the same. Entry-level employees are trained on the job at the client's expense (causing a constant stream of arguing in a PMO-type environment and budgetary meetings), a few seasoned SME's that do the brunt of the work because they are "oh so close" to making partner, and the partners, who basically don't bring much to the table.



What's a "SME"?

[bump]

I worked for a mid-size management consulting company (Alvarez & Marsal, for anyone who cares) in the electronic evidence practice of the Dispute Analysis and Forensics (generally forensic accounting) division.

What's been said is generally true. We were expected to subordinate our lives outside of work to work always, and at a moment's notice.

I actually caught a lot of flak once because I was called into my MD(managing director)'s office and asked "We need you to be in New Orleans tomorrow morning. Can you do that?" My answer was "No, it's my wife's 30th birthday, and I'm taking her out to dinner. I've already got reservations and everything." He was dumbfounded. Then, when I got to New Orleans, they were bitchy because I was a day later than they wanted me.

I used to get calls at 11 on Saturday morning to work on projects that afternoon. I'd get calls at 6:30 at night to work until 9. I'd have to stay to 1 am at the office. Working less than a 9 hour day was pretty rare, unless we were in the occasional lull.

Pay sucked too- because of our particular type of work, we weren't well suited to hourly billing or bonus structures, so what ended up happening is that we had a crew of about 5-6 out of about 9 people who were associates or senior associates, but were between 30 and 40, and shouldn't have been lumped in with the 23-30 year olds.

What sucked worst though, was that with the exception of those 5-6 guys I mentioned, everyone else was super-driven, and acted like they didn't have time to stop and chat about things. I've never worked in such a "work work work" type environment. People weren't as chatty because they were worried about billing enough hours.

I ended up getting laid off/fired a little over a year ago, and promptly found a job at a major healthcare provider in their corporate IT department, and it's like heaven- generally 8 hour days, very little OT, NO calls on weekends, people who will actually stop and chat for 15 minutes about things like BSG, sports, food, etc... And there's a casual dress code, 9-80 work schedule, and a few other perks that make it head and shoulders better. On top of that, I'm a high performer there!

[joemama24_98]

What's a "SME"?

SME = Subject Matter Expert The guy/gal on the team who has the real industry/technical/functional expertice. And contrary to what the article suggests, SMEs rarely become partners. You have to generate business to become a partner, and most SMEs (at least in my firm) are the "doers", not the sellers. But its still not a bad career path.

[msmith537]

I worked for a mid-size management consulting company (Alvarez & Marsal, for anyone who cares) in the electronic evidence practice of the Dispute Analysis and Forensics (generally forensic accounting) division.


I know them. My last job was with one of their competetors in the same exact practice area.

Forensics/dispute analysis/litigation consulting/electronic discovery is the consulting service line de jure. Sort of how "ecommerce strategy" was big a decade ago. Most likey you were laid off a year ago for the same reason I was. That this particular industry has peaked and now companies are internalizing these services instead of outsourcing them to 20-somethings for $350 an hour.

[dropzone]

Y'know, were they on a careerpath heading toward MDs and were working twice the hours, as young MDs do, I'd disagree more. As they are working hours that aren't that far from thr Salaried/Non-Exempt hours I usually work, and they are looking for MY screwups, I have less sympathy.

[vdvagabond]

It's an interesting argument on whether or not people are being brainwashed by these companies. They typically hire droves of new college graduates every year, most of these people have no real experience on what it's like to work in the corporate world.

They seem to give them a feeling of importance which is why they agree to work the hours they do. Most of these young workers for the Big 4 make anywhere between 35-50k depending on the market which is absolute beans for the amount of hours they are working. If they stick it out 4-5 years they might start making 70-90k but their lives are probably miserable.

I do agree that it is an excellent place to start but that is merely because people like it on your resume. Your length of stay isn't important. This is where the brainwashing comes into play. They brainwash all of them to think that they need to remain working for the Big 4 until they've reached some false "professional" status that they all so richly desire.

In the end, I make absolutely no sense. I neither agree nor disagree that they are being treated unfairly nor do I think it is the fault of the company or the employer.

All I know is it would absolutely suck to work for the Big 4. The end.

[Maeglin]

This (http://www.examiner.com/x-3040-Minneapolis-Life-in-the-Cubicle-Examiner~y2009m3d25-Accenture-IBM-CSC-Big-consulting-firms-focus-on-deliverables) humorous but sadly true article is very timely for this discussion.

[msmith537]

It's an interesting argument on whether or not people are being brainwashed by these companies. They typically hire droves of new college graduates every year, most of these people have no real experience on what it's like to work in the corporate world.

They seem to give them a feeling of importance which is why they agree to work the hours they do. Most of these young workers for the Big 4 make anywhere between 35-50k depending on the market which is absolute beans for the amount of hours they are working. If they stick it out 4-5 years they might start making 70-90k but their lives are probably miserable.

I do agree that it is an excellent place to start but that is merely because people like it on your resume. Your length of stay isn't important. This is where the brainwashing comes into play. They brainwash all of them to think that they need to remain working for the Big 4 until they've reached some false "professional" status that they all so richly desire.

In the end, I make absolutely no sense. I neither agree nor disagree that they are being treated unfairly nor do I think it is the fault of the company or the employer.

All I know is it would absolutely suck to work for the Big 4. The end.


You are correct. They do hire droves of college grads, most of them with little to no experience in the corporate world. But where do you think you should start out your career at 22 years old? Working your ass off (and thus learning) in a leading firm that's instantly recognizable to most people or at an unknown company where you will sit there doing jack shit all day for years with no advancement?

Starting salary for a college grad was closer to $45,000 when I worked there in 2001. Not I-banker money or anything, but about what you would expect for recent college grads.

People stay at the Big-4 (or competitors like BDO, Accenture, CSC, etc) because after 4-5 years you can make manager and make over $100,000. A few years after that, you can be senior management making over $200,000. Hopefully after 10+ years you can eventually make partner or principal making $400,000+.

Or you just take the experience and go someplace else.

The "brainwashing" of these sort of firms (and I include Accenture and other firms that follow a similar model) is that they create a sort of "fraternity" environment with happy hours and other activities designed to make the associates feel like they are still living college style. What I found over the years was that your Work Life Ballance (or WBL) consists of not just long hours, but so many happy hours, dinners, social functions, weekend work and other bullshit that you don't even have time to have a life outside of the firm. Everything is "team" this and "relationships" that.

What is the alternative? If you want to be an accountant, those are the best firms to work for.

I'm still not sure about this whole consulting thing. I'm still not convinced that they aren't just high-priced temps who convince companies to hire them when they actually need something done because 90% of their employees are lazy pikers like that Dudley B. Dawson guy. I've always wondered why people start their career in "consulting" right out of college when they know jack shit instead of 15 years down the line when they have actual industry experience?




This (http://www.examiner.com/x-3040-Minneapolis-Life-in-the-Cubicle-Examiner~y2009m3d25-Accenture-IBM-CSC-Big-consulting-firms-focus-on-deliverables) humorous but sadly true article is very timely for this discussion.

I would like to see him do an entire article about our stupid jargon. A business school classmate of mine who works at A.T. Kearny sent me this (http://dack.com/web/bullshit.html).

One of my team leaders (people who report to me) actually got made at me. She's like "you never give me a straight answer! All you do is talk in that stupid consulting bullshit!" I'm like "clearly we need to revisit the parameters of our relationship paradigm."

[vdvagabond]

I would like to see him do an entire article about our stupid jargon. A business school classmate of mine who works at A.T. Kearny sent me this (http://dack.com/web/bullshit.html).

One of my team leaders (people who report to me) actually got made at me. She's like "you never give me a straight answer! All you do is talk in that stupid consulting bullshit!" I'm like "clearly we need to revisit the parameters of our relationship paradigm."

Wow. After reading your comment...I was LIKE, where do you work?

[Maeglin]

I'm still not sure about this whole consulting thing. I'm still not convinced that they aren't just high-priced temps who convince companies to hire them when they actually need something done because 90% of their employees are lazy pikers like that Dudley B. Dawson guy. I've always wondered why people start their career in "consulting" right out of college when they know jack shit instead of 15 years down the line when they have actual industry experience?

So true. We hire people from BCG, McKinsey, whoever when something needs to be done and accountability needs to be deferred. It is much handier to pay someone to produce an analysis with an unfavorable conclusion than to do it yourself and take the shit for it.

It is also somewhat obvious what the consultants think of the relationship they have with you. Once upon a time we hired Accenture because we had relationships with people there who had serious expertise in an area we were deficient in. The team they gave us was not exactly their A team, it was as you said, a bunch of post-college kids looking to get some job training at our expense. This arrangement did not last long.

I would like to see him do an entire article about our stupid jargon. A business school classmate of mine who works at A.T. Kearny sent me this (http://dack.com/web/bullshit.html).

One of my team leaders (people who report to me) actually got made at me. She's like "you never give me a straight answer! All you do is talk in that stupid consulting bullshit!" I'm like "clearly we need to revisit the parameters of our relationship paradigm."

Great stuff. The next time someone pisses me off around here, I am going to have to implement some user-centric convergence.

[msmith537]

Wow. After reading your comment...I was LIKE, where do you work?

Did you mean to say the "where" part loud and the "like" part soft?

I work in an insurance company now. A big one. It really isn't any different from my job as a management consultant. Just better hours and the people are dumber.

The best was working in consulting during the dot-com bubble. Especially one of those firms like Accenture, Sapient, Scient, Razorfish, Viant, MarchFirst or any of the other firms characterized by a) a nonsensical name, b) one of the dot-com vowels in the name ( @, e, i, .com, > and X ) c) a CEO with no experience other than founding other failed consulting firms and d) no longer existing. Basically it had all the work of a Big-4 but with the added benefit of being run like a religeous cult. I remember the first time my "Project Team Coach" (a 27 year old Indian girl widely regarded by clients, staff, peers and superiors as an imbecile) asked me to "Capture any critical issues on the whiteboard". I'm like "what the shit did you say? Are you trying to tell me you want me to write down whatever they say on the dry-erase walls. Why not just say that?" Another time a couple of my teamates are like "Well I don't think that is subsumed under the rubrick of.." and I'm like "dude. What the fuck?" "It's means t.." "I KNOW what it means! I want to know why you are talking like that and for that matter why are you wearing a bowtie?!!"

Ahhh...good time. I remember the good old days when people had dilusions of grandeur. I'm not sure what's more depressing. Reading MBA Jungle articles about "How many millions is enough?" or "How to find a job in the secret job market when every company is in a hiring freeze."

[Jas09]

I think any profession where even the lowest echelon are salaried (as opposed to hourly) does this. Accountants, lawyers, doctors, etc.Not really true of Engineers, IME. My hours have gone up as I've become more experienced and had more responsibility. The first few years it was hard to find 40 hrs of work to do in a week. Salaried from day one.