Agreed that any company is going to have it's share of idiots, but isn't it the principle job of a company like Accenture to hire competent people? Their business model is to lease out intellectual talent so their principle job is to create talent.

I, like most people commenting here, have worked with a lot of bad Accenture people and am shocked when I do actually meet a good one. Yes, they do exist, but most good people don't stay long (much like yourself) because they realize opportunities outside of Accenture are much more lucrative.

Also, their model is fairly obvious now (like other big 4) - huge margins on Jr Consultants that are lead by competent seniors. When the senior people are incompetent and the juniors are not fast learners then the whole model is broken and thus the assumption that "everyone is idiots".

No, theyre only interested in hiring billable people. They're not interested in creating talent or nurturing competencies, they provide numbers (or better, warm bodies to fill the client's chairs) and often subcontract to smaller consultancies when truly competent people are needed on some project.

The subcontracting thing alone should be enough to never have anything to do with a company that does it, but usually the clients don't even know/suspect.

Edit: What about the downvotes? is subcontracting a good thing for the client (or for the small consultancies, that could become completely dependent on the contracts from the big players) or something that should be encouraged?

I'd blame the person and not the company myself if it were not for

a) Witnessing the havoc Accenture consulting unleashed upon a couple of businesses personally b) Knowing, albeit superficially, a load of people who currently work or had worked at Accenture. With the exception of one they're the poster jerks nobody likes.

Perhaps the culture is different in other countries. This was in Accenture UK.

Edit: I hate to suggest it, but perhaps there's also a bit of a perceptive bias going on, in both directions. I look for the good in people, and I found plenty of awesome people in Accenture. If you expect Accenture people to be arrogant idiots, probably every Accenture person you meet will look like just that.

Individual people I judge on their merits, same as anyone, but Accenture's involvement with the UK govt has been a disaster for everyone but them. What did they charge the NHS, and what did they deliver? Ripping off a healthcare provider is pretty low.

Accenture's involvement with the NHS was a major disaster for Accenture too. I can see why they went for it - it was the kind of huge contract that a company like Accenture can't resist - but unlike the other providers, they pulled out when they realised the whole thing was doomed (and took a very hefty financial penalty to do so).

FYI, they cancelled one of the twice-yearly promotion points because of the NHS debacle (which resulted, iirc, in a $450m write-off by Accenture UK, and basically wiped out the profits for the year). That pissed off a lot of people and caused a lot of their best people to leave the company. So, yeah, they took a big hit!

> Accenture's involvement with the NHS was a major disaster for Accenture too.

It still amazes me how many major disasters these large firms can absorb. A 450mil write-off would cripple most businesses. Not picking at Accenture specifically but I've seen Cap, IBM, etc all get doused by law suits and/or write-offs that are absolutely massive.

I would very much like to see a windfall tax on all those companies, to claw back what the last government wasted on them.

I actually read the contracts whilst in a non-programming role. There was about 6 inches of paper, all of it utterly terrifying and mostly contradictory. The NHS deal had so many things wrong with it.

When Accenture finally caved and gave up, the share price increased significantly.

When, 9 out of 10 experiences with a company turn out to be negative, it could be argued that you build up a negative bias. I'm not saying that there are no decent people at ACN, there definitely are.

Either way, Accenture has an awful reputation within the technology sector imo.

They are still in business and still profitable so they must be doing something right.

On the other hand it took GM decades to burn through their reputation until they had none to salvage. Now they apologize profusely for being a shitty car manufacturer. I still won't buy one btw.

Perhaps this is also internal vs. external insight. It seems like from swombat's and other commenters who have worked there, the consensus is that there are many talented people who work at Accenture (and other big consultancy firms). However as an outsider, when looking at some of the work by these types of firms, you generally don't gain a sense of confidence in the people working there.