McKinsey — the fine folks behind some of the worst financial ideas of the past 1/2 century — ask the question:
Normally, I prefer to give the author the benefit of the doubt, and let the idea stand or fall on its own merit. But McKinsey has demonstrated such a wanton incompetance as to so many financial matters, that I simply cannot. Enron has been called "the house that McKinsey rebuilt." I’m not sure which was worse, the financial advice, or the egregious ethics.
Regardless, they are a tainted source to me. I cannot overlook their lack of broad vision, the reckless lawlessness of their advice, and the stench of general hubris that envelopes the firm.
I can read their late-to-the-party take on Behavioral Economics, but I cannot forget that these are the financial engineers of the nation’s largest corporate collapse.
So why bother?
Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.