Company: KPMG
Date: 2010-04-13
Overall rating: 1/5
Employment status: former

KPMG should review the quality of partners, unhealthy culture and promote an avenue for fairer feedback.
Pros: - Good for the resume
- Good variety of clients
- Competitive salary compared to the other Big4
- Good branding and recognition
- Good experience in terms of getting professional certifications
- A place where you get good grounding in terms of juggling multiple assignments (time management), deadline driven assignments and balancing expectations from various stakeholders.
- You will really appreciate your next career move more after KPMG.
Cons: - Partners do not motivate and are not inspiring. Leadership skills severely lacking.
- Partners command of English is mediocre at best. It is embarrassing during conference calls. Shudder to think if they had spoken to the press or given a speech to an international audience.
- Partners think of themselves really highly; almost "god-like". They cannot take criticisms and think they are always right. Deluded in self importance and can't see the wood for the trees.
- Do not value staff and are selfish in nature. Always thinking that employees are replaceable.
- Partners do not coach, never give proper instructions on requirements but expect miracles. Not entirely sure if the partners themselves know what they actually want. Akin to the engagement team hoping to find land sailing through unchartered waters for months finally disembarking on shore on a land called Africa celebrating their success but was told the target was Australia after months at sea.
- Partners do not value clients and always requesting for unreasonable requests. Requests are always through the engagement teams and never on their own. When client's lodges a complaint, they show their hypocritical side and putting all the blame on the engagement team for such requests.
- Partners are very poor in soft skills. Communication skills are poor to the extent that staff cringe during audit meetings.
- Partners always preach audit methodology; which is on a risk-based approach but queries given are almost like a 100% audit which is ridiculous. Again can't see the wood for the trees. Deluded. There seem to be a huge expectation gap between what is required by the methodology and what is required by the partners. Hence the long working hours which is not due to the clients but mainly due to answering unreasonable partner queries.
- There is no avenue to complain about partners in the firm. Even if there is, almost nobody will for fearing of backlash. Anonymity cannot be guaranteed and there is little accountability when it comes to partner's actions.
- Partner's word is the law. Any rebutting would result in a poor performance ratings. Comments on performance are highly bias and very subjective with no avenues for staffs to defend themselves. Staffs are expected to "bend over" and any remote possibility of voicing your own opinion will be deemed insubordination.  
- The firm has overtime policy but with low fees and a high realisation rate in addition to the ridiculous queries (see above), overtime is almost never used. Budgets are the responsibility of the engagement manager and WIPs have to be constantly monitored. This is like akin to rewarding staff with an empty gift box. Why have a policy when the targets of reaching it is almost zero?
- HR policies are the minimum expected. Do not expect anything more. The firm will abuse every loophole available to give staff the absolute minimum. 
- The firm do not reimburse selective professional membership fees when the sole reason for recruitment is based on professional qualification. Another absurd loophole abused.
- The rank and file hierarchy which is entrenched in the culture. A negative impact on creativity and positive thinking. Will breed a new breed of followers and no leaders (see all points about Partners above). 
- Criticisms are not constructive and have little basis. Can be perceived as emotionally bias. 
- Petty in reviews and with administrative matters. Requests can be as petty as "dotting the 'i's" or "crossing the 't's". Was informed it is culture. Again no avenues for complains which will breed followers ("executioners") and no leaders.
- Accepting low fee paying clients even though budgets says the contrary. Leads to significant time spent in the office without overtime (read: slave driving). 
- Budgets never reflect actual hours on assignments despite pleas from management to charge actual hours to clients. They fail to acknowledge that it is not the engagement team who accepts the jobs and decides the fees. Low fees make it impossible to reflect actual hours. Hourly rates used are ridiculous.
- Work papers are in paper form and file gets thicker and thicker every year even though risks do not necessarily increase for any particular client. Inefficient, ineffective and disorganised. Result of a warped mindset that all clients are untrustworthy (and hell-bent on fraud) without first considering the risks (read: methodology) of the client. Can you imagine having one adjustment and the amount of working papers which has to be amended and reprinted for review (yet again)? 
- Partners have no respect for deadlines when it comes to internal reporting. It is a known fact that the HK office is acknowledged to be a difficult office to work with among KPMG offices worldwide.
- Do not feel like there is sufficient support from the various divisions of the Company with each divisions acting independently as though we are different firms.