<p>So I just got internship offers from one of the big 4 firms and another from a midtier firm just below the big 4. I’m trying to decide which one of them I want to accept. I liked the people in both about the same, and I know I’m probably going to end up working horrendous hours at both. Whereas most people tend to get in, get their big 4 experience, and then jump ship to an industry job, I really think I want to make a long term career out of public accounting, at least right now anyways. Are my chances for advancement any better with the midtier, or should I take the name of the big 4 instead? BTW, the internships would both be for audit in the Chicago office if that makes any difference.</p>
<p>bumpy bump.</p>
<p>A MUST read in the “Business Major” section on CC:</p>
<p>“Everything you wanted to know or should know about accounting”, by taxguy</p>
<p>Read it already. it helped, but still not quite what i’m looking for. and what im looking for is just opinions and input specific to this scenario. it seems like that thread was good info pertaining to the big 4, but i don’t recall much info for the midtiers. Maybe I just don’t remember it tho.</p>
<p>Big 4 is more competitive and political in terms of career progress simply because its bigger.</p>
<p>Since this is only an internship, just go Big 4 since you can always apply for full-time at the mid-tier if you don’t like your internship experience.</p>
<p>It’s hard to say which one would be better for you. If you were a larger contribution to the midtier firm (such as contributing to a large part of audits), then it would most likely give you a much better experience, more than Big 4 (because they would most likely have much more professional audits). The point of an internship is for experience, and I feel that you are more likely to gain said experience at the midtier firm, because they are more likely to allow an intern to contribute more to audits/whatever you want to do there.</p>
<p>Big 4 DOES have a pretty good look on your resume, however. It is a fairly attractive name to have on your resume, but if you didn’t do much at Big 4, then it’s pretty much pointless. So, there are many things you really need to consider, whether you’re really looking for experience (then I’d say midtier), or if you’re looking for something to polish up your resume (then I’d say Big 4). But still, if you are very active in the midtier firm, then it wouldn’t be much less glossy than not contributing much in the Big 4 firm.</p>
<p>^^Since when do interns not “contribute” at big 4? This forum seems to have a lot of people who speak up about things they clearly have no direct experience with. </p>
<p>Take big 4, no question. I was doing everything an associate does day 1. In fact, it was the mid-tiers that had friends making coffee runs and photocopying for 8 hours.</p>
<p>partner: why did we blow the budget on XYZ engagement?</p>
<p>senior: oh, because we had joe associate spend 8 hours making copies of the workpapers that the client requested.</p>
<p>partner: why the hell didn’t you have jack intern do it? his billing rate is 1/2 as much as joe associate! why did we promote you? you will see this in your performance evaluation. good luck finding another job.</p>
<p>senior: FFUUUUUUUUUU!!!</p>
<p>big4bound, sorry to prove you wrong, but I HAVE done an internship at Ernst & Young. What I’m saying is that midtier firms are more likely to give you a lot more input into audits.</p>
<p>I’m not very sure what you’re talking about. It’s hard enough to perform an audit under the assigned deadline, much less teaching an intern to perform the audit (and that intern will probably make mistakes that will have to be remedied anyways).</p>