Aller au contenu principal

Un consultant de McKinsey responsable des rémunérations excessives des PCD (CEO) !

18 août 2013

C’est le constat que fait Max Nisen dans Business Insider le 14 août 2013.

Je vous invite à lire l’article ci-dessous.

How One Employee And One Consulting Firm May Be Singlehandedly Responsible For The Staggering Gap Between CEO And Worker Pay

McKinsey is the world’s largest and most profitable management consulting firm,  as well one of the most difficult places to get hired. Over its 87-year existence it’s had a  massive impact on the U.S. economy according to « The Firm, » a forthcoming book by Duff McDonald.

mckinsey & company

In a New York Observer column, pointed out by Mike Dang at The Billfold, McDonald argues that the massive modern-day  gap between executive and worker pay has its origin with the consulting  firm.

It’s a fascinating story that all started  with General Motors commissioning a study on executive pay from McKinsey  consultant Arch Patton. He found that from 1939 to 1950, hourly employee pay  more than doubled, but top management pay went up only 35%.

The study, published in the Harvard Business Review, became a  series and turned national attention toward executive compensation,  promoting the idea that higher pay and bonuses were the lever to attract and  retain top executives.

Patton became a superstar,  hired by managers who were not surprisingly interested in hearing they were  underpaid. McKinsey’s CEO apparently thought this type of consulting was beneath  the firm, but wasn’t about to turn down the money.

« For several years, Mr. Patton personally  accounted for almost 10 percent of the firm’s billings, » McDonald writes. « At the end of the war, only 18 percent of  companies in the country had bonus plans. By 1960, about 60 percent of them  did. »

In 1961 came the books « Men, Money  and Motivation: Executive Compensation as an Instrument of  Leadership » and « What Is an  Executive Worth?« 

One McKinsey consultant told McDonald that Patton wrote « the same article  [26] times for the Harvard Business Review. »

Because of its popularity  and McKinsey’s influence, the idea became an entrenched philosophy, as did the  concept that as a company grows, so should CEO pay.

While Patton’s  compensation philosophy started with rigorous analysis of performance, soon it  took on a life of its own, with executive pay spiraling higher and higher, while  worker pay was left to languish.

Here’s where we are today, according to a  report by The State Of Working America,  a project of the Economic Policy Institute:

The AFL-CIO puts the number even higher, saying that the average Fortune 500  CEO makes 354 times the average wage of their employees. Some executives make 1,000 times more.

Of course, McKinsey and  Patton weren’t the only factor. Bull markets and economic expansion help push  pay upwards and encourage investors to look the other way — and once it moves  up, pay is slow to move back down. Meanwhile, slack labor markets and  weak growth prospects help to explain stagnant wages.

Regardless, McKinsey and Patton may have been a major driver in the  gap between CEO and employee wages exploding by a factor of 10 since the middle of the  century.

Read more:

Is McKinsey to Blame for Skyrocketing CEO Pay? (

Jobs multiplier – The making of a boardroom hero | The Times (

Qu'en pensez-vous ?

Entrer les renseignements ci-dessous ou cliquer sur une icône pour ouvrir une session :


Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Déconnexion /  Changer )

Photo Google

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Google. Déconnexion /  Changer )

Image Twitter

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Twitter. Déconnexion /  Changer )

Photo Facebook

Vous commentez à l’aide de votre compte Facebook. Déconnexion /  Changer )

Connexion à %s

%d blogueurs aiment ce contenu :