I wholeheartedly disagree. I have never heard of a single instance where they provided actual, useful, cutting edge actionable advise. I however have seen them

I wholeheartedly disagree. I have never heard of a single instance where they provided actual, useful, cutting edge actionable advise. I however have seen them payroll dozens of unremarkable yet politically connected people. You are repeating the narrative they pitch out loud, but whenever they make this pitch, they also make sure you hear the extortion angle as well. In the instance of this very article, what makes more sense? McK offered competitive advise that sold more product. Or, given that at all the companies they advised, employees knowingly murdered hundreds of thousands of people and escaped any legal culpability, that the fees went to paying off politicians to protect them from investigation/prosecution?