The performance review process is byzantine and time-consuming. Your rating is determined by a bunch of partners sitting in a room; each practitioner has a couple minutes' worth of review. We have counselors to make our case, but some do better than others (they technically serve as neutral evaluators). This system encourages an extremely political culture where who you know matters as much or more than how you perform on many cases. This was one of the many "unwritten rules" of Deloitte that was never communicated during the recruiting or on-boarding process, at least for legacy BE employees.
Work/life balance is poor, mainly due to mandatory off-project activities. Project hours vary depending on the leadership and the client. Firm activities such as proposal work, internal projects and initiatives, and social events are important for career advancement (primarily due to the networking opportunities) and consume much of your spare time. The firms work/life balance initiatives are largely marketing.
The BearingPoint merger has not been easy. Our leadership seemed united, but there is still significant tension in the trenches. The two firms' cultures were very different and thus projects with legacy Deloitte and legacy BE staff can be tense and highly political.
As an analyst coming over from BE, I was not given the training and networking opportunities afforded to legacy Deloitte hires and have had a much harder time breaking into the network as a result. Performance expectations were not clearly communicated. The biggest sticking point has been the pay. Legacy BE pay was below market rate for analysts but did not come with the expectations required by Deloitte. These analysts are now expected to perform like their Deloitte peers for significantly less salary. Firm leadership has been horribly opague regarding salary normalization and I suspect there will be lots of turnover after year end reviews if these salaries are not adjusted.
