This queef comes from an anonymous source who previously had a personal experience working with BCG. Note: a queef is an irreverent, unfiltered commentary that expresses some sort of frustration and/or disillusionment with a particular topic or experience, often infused with humor and sharp insights.
Let me be clear: my experience with Boston Consulting Group (BCG) was a dumpster fire of epic proportions. If you want to talk about a company that exemplifies everything wrong with consulting today, look no further.
If you asked me to summarize my experience with Boston Consulting Group (BCG) in one word, it would be “terrible.” Working with them felt like navigating a labyrinth of non-collaboration, toxic culture, and what I can only describe as snake oil salesmanship. After my experience, I will never work with them, or for them.
If I could summarize their flaws based on my experience with them, they are:
- Non-collaborative
- Style over substance
- Profit over value
Non-Collaborative
In consulting, collaboration isn’t just a nice-to-have—it’s essential. Consulting should be collaborative, especially when the goal is to build innovative solutions. Well, BCG clearly missed that memo.
More Like Anti-Collaborative
As the lead developer on our project, I reached out repeatedly to BCG’s team, hoping to share insights and align our efforts. Instead of enthusiasm, I was met with silence. Rather than leveraging existing work and expertise, they chose to build their own model from scratch, completely isolating themselves from the team they were supposed to be supporting. Instead of working together, they decided to build their own model—without looping me in or sharing any updates.
Style over Substance
When BCG finally rolled out their “brilliant” model, it was a parade of buzzwords like “AI” and “statistically significant”—terms they wielded like magic spells in front of stakeholders who weren’t familiar with their technical meaning. I heard “statistically significant” so many times, it was like they’d discovered a secret weapon. Yet, I could tell most of the decision-makers they were talking to had no firm understanding of what these terms actually mean.
Snake Oil Salesmen
I asked questions about their model adequacy checks, only to be met with fast-talking, jargon-laden responses that never answered a single one of my questions. They were slick, skilled at talking circles around genuine concerns, and that’s all it took to charm their way to a several million dollar project. They called their linear regression model “AI,” and honestly, if you think that’s true, you might as well be handing out diplomas for magic tricks. This was a classic case of “AI snake oil salesmen”—hiding behind the shiny veneer of artificial intelligence to peddle half-baked solutions and line their pockets with your cash.
Profit Over Value-Quality? Nah.
What struck me most was BCG’s utter disregard for the value and quality of work. This wasn’t about providing the best solution; it was about milking every last dollar they could. If they cared about the quality of the deliverable, we could have collaborated, shared knowledge, and made something truly effective together. But no—this was a one-man show where they played the leading role while the rest of us were left in the audience, wondering how the hell we got here.
The potential for collaboration was there—we could have combined BCG’s resources with our deep understanding of the project to create something truly valuable.
Instead, they chose to:
- Ignore existing expertise and infrastructure
- Build redundant solutions
- Prioritize flashy presentations over substantive work
- Charge premium prices for basic statistical work
Disillusionment, Broader Implications, and Moving Forward
As a consultant at a smaller company, I’ve seen how fulfilling consulting can be when there’s genuine dedication to the work. For years, I’ve been part of this project without any additional cost to the client, working out of passion and commitment to the outcome. I know I could have deployed the exact same model they billed several million dollars for, only with higher quality and a fraction of the jargon.
Disillusionment
This experience disillusioned me with the consulting world. Seeing how companies like BCG operate makes me wonder about the industry as a whole. Do all large consulting firms sacrifice quality for profit? I hope not, but after this experience, I can’t say I’m optimistic.
Broader Implications
This experience has been eye-opening, not just about BCG, but about how some large consulting firms operate. They seem to have mastered the art of selling perceived value while delivering minimal actual value. It’s a reminder that bigger doesn’t always mean better, and that true consulting should be about creating lasting value, not just generating impressive invoices.
Moving Forward
While this experience hasn’t completely destroyed my faith in the consulting industry, it has reinforced my commitment to a different approach—one based on genuine collaboration, technical integrity, and actual value creation. There are still consulting firms that prioritize these values; they’re just not always the ones with the biggest names or the fanciest presentations.
My advice to any team considering BCG: look deeper. Behind the buzzwords and slick presentations lies a void of substance. Consulting can be impactful, but only if you partner with the right people. Don’t fall for the AI snake oil trap—demand transparency, genuine collaboration, and accountability.