McKinsey Wraps Up At Condé Nast

4timessquare.jpgToday we have another dispatch about McKinsey’s work at Condé Nast from The New York Observer‘s John Koblin.

Koblin, who has been reporting on McKinsey’s work throughout the summer, reports that the consulting company is ready to wrap up its investigation of the state of Condé’s business and will present their findings to the company’s executives soon:

The Observer has learned that McKinsey consultants are winding down their tour of Condé Nast, and will be ready to submit their final recommendations to chairman Si Newhouse and CEO Chuck Townsend in the coming weeks. One source said that recommendations could begin as early as Sept. 16, but another well-placed source said that the ‘totality of their recommendations’ will be given at all once, and that they would come down in the next two to three weeks.”

Although the consultants have taken a close look at Vogue and Condé Nast Traveler Koblin suggests that the magazines most in danger of being designated by McKinsey as “frequency reductions” are epicurean titles Gourmet and Bon Appetit and men’s mags GQ and Details.

But perhaps the most enjoyable tidbits collected by Koblin about McKinsey’s time at Condé is the description of the young, cute consultants that has emerged:

“Through conversations with several staffers who have endured the McKinsey interviews, we’ve assembled a portrait of the typical consultant. First, they’re quite young! Despite the early perception that they’d look like pasty lawyers wielding big-wheeled suitcases, they’re apparently a plucky, charming bunch.

‘They’re kind of hot,’ said one source.

Crisp shirts, no jackets, freshly pressed pants — not unlike the fresh-faced boys who posed for the Harvard fashion shoot in the Styles pages of The Times this past weekend.”

Condé Nast-ers may be worrying over the safety of their jobs, but at least they’ve had some cute man candy to distract them over the last few months.

At Condé Nast, the Last Days of McKinseyThe New York Observer

Earlier: Mourning The Loss of Condé Nast’s Gilded Age