Juan was Global and US Advisory Leader. Carter was US Advisory Managing Partner. Lets be honest, the titles dont matter. Carter did a great job with PwC’s healthcare and Federal Practice, stepped in to a pretty bad situation and couldnt do the normal “Carter Pare saves the world act”. PwC global got mad, replaced him, kept him on to do “special projects”. My guess would be that hes gone within the next 1-2 years to go start a new business or be a managing partner somewhere else.

What I disagree with, basically, is the linkage of Pate’s ascension and fall with the election of Obama. I don’t believe they are as related as you make them out to be. In my view, Mr. Pate was assigned the mission of turning around PwC’s Advisory LoS in the U.S., and couldn’t pull that off in a year (not sure if anybody could have). Now it’s Dana’s turn in the barrel.

Otherwise we seem to be in violent agreement regarding other members of the Advisory LT.

– Tenacious T.

You are wrong. It’s very easy to erase history. Just remove any trace of it from websites, etc and then pretend like it never happened. But it did. When Juan Pujadas was elevated to Global , Carter Pate got the job. And he only lasted a year in it. Check your facts. I know a lot more about the firm from this vantage than you will ever know inside as a junior spreadsheet jockey.

http://retheauditors.com/2008/10/16/pwc-advisory-leadership-the-bundler-ascends/

Francine

It sounds like you are just a disgruntled employee who was let go.

Not sure what you disagree with… If your point is you have a much less favorable impression of everyone but Mr. Pate than I do then we are close. All I can say is that my continuing interest in Mr. Pate’s career and my knowledge of his management skills and abilities is directly related to how I spent my time at PwC. I could say more but then I’d have to shoot you. Or myself. Or both of us. Whatever…

Francine

Not sure I can agree with you on all points in your post. Mr. Pate was put in to replace Mr. Pujadas, whose leadership left PwC’s Advisory practice in relative tatters when compared to the others’ practices. Mr. Pate was put in that position (so I’ve been told) because he had grown the Wash. Federal Practice and promised to grow the national Advisory practice based on his “proven” leadership skills. If his ties to the GOP played any role, I never heard anything to that effect. I’ve heard how ungood last year’s Advisory numbers were and how doubleplus ungood this year’s Advisory budget numbers are, so it is not especially surprising that Mr. Pate was reassigned to focus on special projects. Remember, at PwC it is all about the metrics.

In contrast, Deloitte’s leadership turned in acceptable budget numbers (based on fantasies such as 125% staff utilization) and kept their positions. Guess they know something that R. Carter does not, huh?

Dana is a young fast-tracker, lucky to get out of PwC Advisory’s SoCal practice and make a nice transition to NYC before the Pujadas reign came crashing down. Thus, he was unscathed and moved up when the vacancies occurred. Will he do any better than Juan or Carter? No reason to expect him to, but maybe he’ll surprise people.

Joe Duffy has been the subject of some of your other posts, nothing for me to add. I’ve heard quite a bit about Mr. Dave Pittman; he is a master of self-dealing, perfectly willing to screw over his other partners for personal advantage. On the other hand, I’m told he is aware of leadership problems and would actually like to improve things, if only Leadership would let him — which they haven’t, heretofore.

Your comments on Mike K. are, if anything, understated and overly refined. I’m told that he is completely out of touch with what’s happening in the practices, yet his edicts on headcount reductions and personnel matters come down from on high to the practice leaders and must be followed without question, even when they are nonsensical, which is often the case. Mike K. may be the poster child for ill-managed accounting firms. Why he survived when those around him were losing their positions is a mystery, maybe he has some dirt on somebody?

Dang I have so little respect for the PwC leadership team, you’d think I work there … and I do not. I have, however, many friends who still deposit PwC paychecks, at least until they find a better workplace.

– Tenacious T.

Looks like McIlwain gives PwC the opportunity to schmooze in any administration, though I imagine that’s an expensive hedge. I’d be curious to see how that works out on the gov’t contract front.