The US business employs about 45,000 people in 65 countries, a workforce which has ballooned 60pc from 28,000 people in 2018.
Recent efforts to trim its headcount include a voluntary notice period scheme targeting consultants across McKinsey’s UK and US offices.
Under the terms of the scheme, UK employees can spend nine months looking for new jobs while receiving full pay.
It follows sweeping job losses under one of the largest restructurings in McKinsey’s 98-year history, dubbed Project Magnolia.
The overhaul announced last year eliminated 1,400 jobs in back-office and support functions, including human resources, communications and IT.
The layoffs reportedly attracted criticism from among the company’s 750 senior partners who accused Bob Sternfels, global managing partner of the firm, of mishandling the process.
McKinsey, which recorded $16bn (£13bn) of revenue last year, is often called on by companies and governments needing help cracking their toughest problems.
However, the business has since warned 3,000 consultants that their performance is unsatisfactory and needs to improve.
Underperforming employees typically have three months to improve before being counselled to leave the business altogether.
The slowdown has also forced McKinsey to cut the number of new people promoted to its partnership and to defer partner bonuses.
After five weeks of working 20-hour days, one McKinsey consultant decided enough was enough.
He was overworked thanks to managers overpromising to clients in an effort to keep them happy during the downturn, meaning projects were under-resourced and delivered on the cheap – if for any fees at all.
Months after quitting in search of greener pastures, the former McKinsey analyst now wishes he’d hung on for just a little longer.
Hundreds of senior employees at the consulting giant’s UK offices have been offered the chance to step back from client projects and spend nine months searching for new jobs – all while being paid in full.
McKinsey departees will get access to career coaching and administrative support during this time, such as help with updating their CV. If they still haven’t found a new employer after nine months, they’re on their own, The Sunday Times first reported.
It’s in stark contrast to McKinsey’s well-established practice of pushing out underperforming employees in client-facing roles after being “counselled to leave”.
The exit route may appeal to the large swathes of consultants who have been languishing on what McKinsey insiders call “the beach”, where days are spent working on internal business development rather than billable client work.
Although initially giving employees the chance to relax from their usual 80-hour weeks, these metaphorical holidays can see consultants go for months without gaining any real experience.
“A lot of people were promised they would get development that they wanted and ended up on the beach,” says the former McKinsey analyst.
There’s a certain irony given McKinsey’s reputation as corporate merchants of death hired by companies to help slash headcounts and cut costs.
However, the scheme ultimately raises questions about whether the doyen of the consulting world has simply become too big.
McKinsey, which recorded $16bn (£13bn) of revenue last year, has long been the go-to fixer for companies and governments needing help cracking their toughest problems.
The mystique surrounding the enigmatic business has helped justify the firm’s premium fees, which are much higher than those charged by consultants in the Big Four.
“It’s like buying a suit from Next off the rack or going to Savile Row,” says James O’Dowd, founder and managing partner of professional services recruiter Patrick Morgan.
After years of rapid expansion amid fierce competition from rivals Bain and BCG, McKinsey now finds itself with an enormous workforce of 45,000 employees in 65 countries, up 60pc from the 28,000 people in 2018.
A British former executive at consulting giant Accenture has claimed he was “belittled and shamed” by colleagues because of mental health issues including depression.
Peter Lacy, who was formerly chief responsibility officer at the multinational, has filed an employment tribunal claim against the company as well as its US-based chief executive Julie Sweet, claiming he was “frozen out of meetings” and mistreated before losing his job in an “ambushing”.
Mr Lacy suffered from attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), post-traumatic stress and depression. He has accused Accenture, which had revenues of $64bn (£51bn) last year, of unfairly targeting him because of his conditions.
Accenture has denied all of the allegations and is contesting the case at trial.
Mr Lacy was one of the accounting giant’s top fee-earners before he was dismissed last year. His lawyers claim that he considered his ADHD a “superpower” that was “integral to his success and that of Accenture as his employer who reaped the benefits”.
However, in the 18 months before his dismissal, his symptoms were exacerbated and he needed extra help. Rather than be granted such support, Mr Lacy alleges that he faced “adverse treatment” and was belittled “sometimes publicly” by staff, including Ms Sweet.
Mr Lacy is claiming unfair dismissal and disability discrimination, according to legal documents made public on Thursday.
The documents claim: “Rather than provide [Mr Lacy] with the support he required during this time and live up to [Accenture’s] rhetoric around health, wellbeing and catering for the needs of their neurodiverse workforce, [Mr Lacy] was frozen out of meetings, belittled (sometimes publicly) by senior staff such as Ms Sweet and Ms [Ellyn] Shook [Accenture’s HR chief], and shamed.”
This allegedly culminated in an “ambushing” where Mr Lacy was dismissed.
“This decision was a fait accompli with no form of redundancy exercise at all.”