Does anyone on here actually work at Kaiser, and if, so please could they give a view?cheers!

my lord almighty. i can not stress enough how FAR you need to stay from this firm. I mean you need to stay FAR FAR FAR FAR away. Rather go work as a prison attendant

The impression i got from dealing with their HR department (if it was their HR department/they have one at all) was not great.Care to elaborate oi?

Are they still around? They closed their office (at least in London) and shut down the website not long ago. If they've been bought then things might be different now.

I am currently employed by Kaiser and would be happy to answer any questions you have. Please contact me on kaiserassociates2007@yahoo.co.ukTy rite - not sure where you heard that Kaiser had closed. We are still here, and are fully booked out with work. Our web site is being re-designed.

cheers oi, for comedy value alone that response rocks!Why so bad? (apart from the poor recruitment experience that other people have reported)

I worked in Kaiser for 3 years (both in the US and London) as a Senior Manager. I have a MBA from a top school in the US and had previously worked for Booz Allen in NY.I simply can not fathom some of the negative comments about Kaiser. To me they sound like people that interviewed, did not get in and are angry because of that.Granted, Kaiser DOES NOT do your typical internal strategy work as a McK or Booz might do. But the work ("outside in" as its called) can be pretty strategic and most of the clients are really Fortune 500 firms.

Question for Kaiser / ex-Kaiser:I see from the adverts that one of the job requirements is to be "A native foreign language speaker (preference for French, German, Russian, Oriental languages)". Does that mean that there's no point applying if you're from UK/US/CA/AU/NZ or have been brought up there? I presume there's a reason for asking for "native" language speakers rather than just "fluent" ones.

Chiz, the main reason for asking for "native" languages is that a lot of the projects have a heavy primary research component across different countries. E.g. a project about entry strategy in EU5 means the consultants will probably make calls to people in France, Italy, Spain etc. Therefore having "native" language skills is really an asset. If "fluent" means you can really speak the language and have easily business conversations, then its OK.That said, Kaiser DOES have consultants that speak only English. So if you are a strong candidate you should probably apply anyway.

Thanks ex-Kaiser

thanks, that's very helpful.

When i went to Kaiser for an interview, their walls weren't painted. their walls werent painted! ( ie. there were blotches of about 3 meters on every wall were stuff was falling off). I still cant believe it. Oh and the coffee was cold and i had to poure it myself. Ill quickly compare this to 3i - where i was offered DATES and the receptionist spoke mandarin. You decide.

I am writing this answer because I take issue with some of Kaiser's recommendations. The points I plan to make in this letter will sound tediously familiar to everyone who wants to treat the disease, not the symptoms. Nevertheless, it pompously claims that it is a martyr for freedom and a victim of larrikinism. That sort of nonsense impresses many people, unfortunately. Kaiser is hooked on designer victimology but fails to notice the real victims: the entire next generation. Please note that when I finish writing this letter you might not hear from me again for a while. I simply don't have enough strength left to criticize Kaiser's tricks publically for their formalistic categories, their spurious claims of neutrality, and their blindness to the abuse of private power. Nevertheless, I can reword my point as follows. Kaiser is capable of going berserk without notice.Although Kaiser obviously hates my guts (and probably yours, as well), Kaiser has for a long time been arguing that university professors must conform their theses and conclusions to its muddleheaded prejudices if they want to publish papers and advance their careers. Had it instead been arguing that "prissy", "uneducated", and "impolitic" seem the most appropriate adjectives to describe its convictions, I might cede it its point. As it stands, the leap of faith required to bridge the logical gap in Kaiser's arguments is simply too terrifying for me to contemplate. What I do often contemplate, however, is how I normally prefer to listen than to speak. I would, however, like to remind Kaiser that there is a proper place in life for hatred. Hatred of that which is wrong is a powerful and valuable tool. But when Kaiser perverts hatred in order to depressurize the frail vessel of human hopes, it becomes clear that if it feels ridiculed by all the attention my letters are bringing it, then that's just too darn bad. Kaiser's arrogance has brought this upon itself. To say that the few of us who complain regularly about Kaiser's invectives are simply spoiling the party is two-faced nonsense and untrue to boot. The gloss that Kaiser's cheerleaders put on Kaiser's dissertations unfortunately does little to find the inner strength to celebrate knowledge and truth for the sake of knowledge and truth. Isn't it odd that reprehensible slackers, whose grumpy lifestyle will violate all the rules of decorum by the end of the decade, are immune from censure? Why is that? I apologize if this disappoints you but my intent was only to elucidate the question, not to answer it. I shall therefore state only that contrary to my personal preferences, I'm thinking about what's best for all of us. My conclusion is that what's best for all of us is for me to indicate in a rough and approximate way the two warped tendencies that I believe are the main driving force of modern racism. Did Kaiser cancel its plans to divert attention from its unprovoked aggression because it had a change of heart, or is it continuing the same battle on another front? It would appear to be the latter.Given this context, we need to return to the idea that motivated this letter: It's not the boogeyman that our children need to worry about. It's Kaiser. Not only is Kaiser more humorless and more anti-democratic than any envisaged boogeyman or bugbear, but Kaiser wants to trivialize certain events that are particularly special to us all. Personally, I don't want that. Personally, I prefer freedom. If you also prefer freedom, then you should be working with me to take steps toward creating an inclusive society free of attitudinal barriers. It may seem obvious, but Kaiser has done inestimable damage to everything around it. To cap that off, Kaiser unquestionably believes that granting it complete control over our lives is as important as breathing air. What kind of Humpty-Dumpty world is it living in? We must indubitably ask ourselves questions like that before it's too late, before Kaiser gets the opportunity to paralyze any serious or firm decision and thereby become responsible for the weak and half-hearted execution of even the most necessary measures. If Kaiser continues to pose a threat to personal autonomy and social development, I will be obliged to do something about it. And you know me: I never neglect my obligations. If we intend to defend democracy, we had best learn to recognize its primary enemy and not be afraid to stand up and call it by name. That name is Kaiser.

....

Wow, that was more than a little weird. Might I suggest you see someone, like a psychiatrist (not the people sitting on your shoulders, telling you what to do, whispering thoughts while your giggles turn into laughter and then into tears streaming down your cheeks as you contemplate the world hating you)....

I don’t know… Two people predicting the end of democracy in the same week? It can’t be coincidence. Maybe Mourinho and our esteemed Mr Aldrin are onto something?

There are a number of things I could have chosen to write about in this post. I could have chosen to write about how the idea of basing our entire society on brazen philistinism is so far from reality, it's laughable. Or I might have chosen to write something about the way that "concerned" has never inscribed his name on the Parthenon of human excellence, either mental or moral. But, instead, I've decided to devote this entire letter to explaining how "concerned"'s ultimata, though creative, are a yawning abyss of fanaticism. Instead of focusing on why "concerned"'s scurrilous deeds really raise my blood pressure, I would like to remind people that neurotic freaks of nature are more susceptible to "concerned"'s brainwashing tactics than are any other group. Like water, their minds take the form of whatever receptacle he puts them in. They then lose all recollection that ignorance is bliss. This may be why "concerned"'s pals, who are legion, are generally all smiles. I suspect I am not alone when I say that if he succeeds in his attempt to destroy the values, methods, and goals of traditional humanistic study, it'll have to be over my dead body."concerned"'s intimations are like a Hydra. They continually acquire new heads and new strength. The only way to stunt their growth is to weaken the critical links in his nexus of abominable, self-indulgent pessimism. The only way to destroy his Hydra entirely is to provide more people with the knowledge that "concerned" cannot tolerate the world as it is. He needs to live in a world of fantasies. To be more specific, "concerned" keeps telling us that there should be publicly financed centers of classism. Are we also supposed to believe that newspapers should report only on items he agrees with? I didn't think so. We were put on this planet to be active, to struggle, and to say "no" to "concerned"'s incoherent grievances. We were not put here to delegitimize our belief systems and replace them with a counter-hegemony that seeks to burn "concerned"'s opponents at the stake, as "concerned" might assert. With this letter, I hope I have made my views crystal-clear: "concerned" has no real regard for other people's rights, privacy, or sanity.

Satire is funny, but sometimes is too lonnnggggzzzzzzzzz

Steve, I'm writing this as somebody who is concerned about your situation.Reading between the lines, I'm convinced that you're a brilliant academic, and I'd go as far as to say probably an analytical powerhouse. However, you seem very frustrated about something (and obviously Kaiser is a part of this) - but I do not fully understand what it is that's bothering you.Could you summarise things in short sentences, split by bullet points, so that we can understand it more easily?Also, please don't take this the wrong way, but have you tried letting go of things that are having a negative influence in your life?I hope it all works out well for you.

are we talking about the same Kaiser?surely shome mishtake?

In all my posts, I try harder than anything else to make myself clear. I try to state things as simply and unambiguously as I can. As you read these posts, you may feel confused at points. If you do, keep reading. The rationale underlying Kaiser's tracts is confusing. Fortunately, as you read the superfluity of examples about how Kaiser has been trying to make communism socially acceptable, this post will slowly begin to make some sense. Let me begin by citing a range of examples from the public sphere. For starters, if you were to try to tell its factotums that it does not hold itself answerable to any code of honor, they'd close their eyes and put their hands over their ears. They are, as the psychologists say, in denial. They don't want to hear that I am not particularly fond of Kaiser, and everyone with half a brain understands that. Up to this point, we have explored some of the motivations and circumstances that make Kaiser want to make it nearly impossible to disturb its petty gravy train. However, we must look beyond both Kaiser's motivations and history if we are truly to understand its deeds.Kaiser never tires of trying to extinguish fires with gasoline. It presumably hopes that the magic formula will work some day. In the meantime, it seems to have resolved to learn nothing from experience, which tells us that it has no great love of democracy or egalitarianism. Yes, I could add that it wants a central organization for its international world swindle, endowed with its own sovereign rights and removed from the intervention of other countries -- a haven for insensate caitiffs and a university for budding callous layabouts -- but I wanted to keep my message simple and direct. I didn't want to distract you from the main thrust of my message, which is that Kaiser somehow manages to maintain a straight face when saying that it is as innocent as a newborn lamb. I am greatly grieved by this occurrence of falsehood and fantastic storytelling which is the resultant of layers of social dishevelment and disillusionment amongst the fine citizens of a once organized, motivated, and cognitively enlightened civilization. I am now in a position to define what I mean when I say that I myself must confess that Kaiser holds itself to low standards. What I mean is that harebrained drug lords like Kaiser are not born -- they are excreted. However unsavory that metaphor may be, I would really like to comment on Kaiser's attempt to associate obscurantism with separatism. There is no association. In the simplest of terms, Kaiser, who is astonishingly adroit at twisting words, has been able to convince scores of people that we should derive moral guidance from its glitzy, multi-culti, hip-hop, consumption-oriented artifices. I'll say that again, because I want it to sink in: The surest way for its coadjutors to succeed is for them to call evil good and good evil. I am not fooled by Kaiser's loquacious and eristic rhetoric. I therefore gladly accept the responsibility of notifying others that Kaiser simply spouts endless fine-sounding cliches along with unintelligible, primitive dialectic. Or, to express that sentiment without all of the emotionally charged lingo, Kaiser does not merely deploy enormous resources in a war of attrition against helpless citizens. It does so consciously, deliberately, willfully, and methodically. To understand why that affects everyone who has ever lived, you need to realize that one of the things I find quite interesting is listening to other people's takes on things. For instance, I recently overheard some folks remark that Kaiser is firmly convinced that all literature which opposes hedonism was forged by ostentatious incubi. Its belief is controverted, however, by the weight of the evidence indicating that I want to make this clear, so that those who do not understand deeper messages embedded within sarcastic irony -- and you know who I'm referring to -- can process my point. And that's what writing this sort of post is all about. It's a way to feed the starving, house the homeless, cure the sick, and still find wonder and awe in the sunrise and the moonlight.

Steve - Do you have any friends?

I reckon Steve writes all these {SPAM} emails, with passages verging on sense, but not quite. Usually from Russian pornographic sites.

Leave Steve alone. He's done nothing wrong - it's hardly his fault that he's semantically challenged.

Whatever you think about his posts, you've gotta admit - he has an amazing vocabulary.

amazing vocabulary? nah, thesaurus.com...bitter MBBB reject?

Steve,Some fair points, but you've got to admit their xmas do was a belter.

Steve,Now I get it!I have translated your reply online via the following route:english - german - english - portugese - french - englishand it now makes a lot more sense:The answer of this of I write, make of I of that of parce the examination of some of the recommendations of the emperor of of with of the expenditure. The letter of this of In pour points of factory of to form of with to give I, ardently wishes with noises all, disease would like to treat it which the EC, symptoms of of confidence of it of step. Of obstante that the martyrdom of It does not indicate the bombastisch pour the freedom of american national standard and a victim of larrikinism of one. Print many people of the type of Unsinnes of the EC, unhappyly. Tightened will of the emperor, to consider victims however the true ones of of step of can of originators of in the victimology of: entirety production of according to number. This of please of I observe, silicon pour to finish it, pour steps you of of ego if which of letter of this to write that it could of hour of other of one hear pour it where of one. Do not have enough force, awkward of worms, defrauds simply of I of emperor of pour the confidential one with the formalistic publically to criticize of with the abuse the energy of blindness of false, of in his conditions of neutrality and of SA of categories of wire. Of I of obstante of Step can I costume during that it of mine to make it reformulates the point of. Is of the able emperor pour the message of without furiously of going. Hates of the emperor of of Good mien the entrails of of obviously (and the son of probably, over there), the emperor the theses must hanging of its of an adaptor of the professors of the university of of hour of much of because of asserted and the preconceptions of its of synopses of the muddleheaded, papers of to publish liked silicon and careers of its to advance. It one that of place of argumentator because of With Have "zimperlich", "uncultivated", and of adjectives of of seemed more of suitable "the undiplomatically" pour him could of I of than of certainty of its to describe by wire point of left. Is of that it of Since, required of is of faith of jump of, sufficiency of with that it of arguments of the emperor of in logic of around the distance pour it to me estarrecer of with considered of too many simply. Frequently of I of the EC, considers it, is however, intends it to consider normally of prefers of that it as I pour the speech. Become of of I am, in correct of the emperor of recalling of may be of I of place however of one that fight It pour the hatred of that one of the hatred A. of, the unjustice of the fact one of is among that, the effective one of tool of the east one and valid. But, seat of In Hass of the silicon emperor perverted well in, the end pour to it normal weak container of atmospheric of pressure of in of hopes the human ones of beings as of the excess of freely of switch, it that, silicon pour to believe it pour letters of my of ridiculously of made the whole one of the attention that begin It, then, verflixtes with tournaments of which they are the bad ones. Arrogance of the emperor a silicon of then of this of started. Us of regularly of the little of wounds weights of the emperor of excess of started it from one simply of damage which pours finished of is to indicate pour to charge the nonsense and office-pour-on-connect-towards-With-top-posed of false of branch of. The lustrum, the emperor of Cheerleadern of that, the emperor of is adjusted in the newspaper of that it unhappyly, little, pours the end to commemorate pour the intern of force to find it, them in the knowledge of the order and the knowledge of exceeding truth of cause of and the truth of. The reprehensible slackers of evils, the model Of that of curiously of step is not the wire EC fight the decade of OF the directives around the end of decoration of all the grumpy one, of is immunized of criticism of with? Is this of of Why? Forgives of I, disappointed of have you of the silicon EC of I, high of in was of question of only of countermanding intention of my of but, ordered pour to answer it of him of step of. I indicate consequence of in, personal being opposed preferences of my of thinks of that of that of only the fact, that the EC of in I pay to better us sums of them of canvasser. Which of my synopsis is the fact, that pour is of it of better of is of of that, the rough one in manner of one of I state of that in manner and rejected us of tendencies of two of of approximate of AI, of I believe of, the modern main thing of are force of the movement of the racingism of they. The emperor that the factories of its of one countermanded do pour the son to redistribute around the attention of the unprovoked the attack, that it of parce one Have a change of the heart, or continue the former one of part of other of one of one of in of the same battle of? To be of would seem of It last. Given context of the EC, the idea us of with to turn over let us must of that us, who a letter of this of justified: Roughly must of worried to be of step is of It of only children boogeyman of numbers. Emperor of is of It. Of It of the emperor the croquemitaine of To only not is, mood and anti-but so much of without than of in is of it of that more of some the democratic ones, or boogeyman of serums of the EC, but the desires of the emperor trivialize of given of cases, all us the special ones of particularly of of are envisaged of that. That one of wishes of step of I of Personally. Freedom of prefers of I of Personally. Freedom you of prefer silicon of Exactly, me you of with working of must of then, by stages of order pour one company of the einschliessliche of Of the attitudinalen the cause of barriers freely pour it to undertake it. To seem of can of It obvious, of them did not have an excursion of in of the emperor of to fact of step of canvasser the appreciable ones of damage of of but. With a drain plug, that it of isolated of cover of to aileron of certainly of believes of the emperor whom the numbers of complete of ordered fight pour the important one during as of is of air of breathing of to grant. Lives from where the type of Humpty Dumpty the world? That one with as of questions of incontestably us of placing let us must of Us, be before is of it of too much from lent, chance receives from the emperor before that paralize the farm of or serious of decision of each and pour the weak execution and It responsible for mass in way of becoming of this of without enthusiasm of the uniform moreover the necessary one. The emperor of silicon pour to continue to raise that the threat of one pour autonomy and the social serums of I of development of personnel of him connected pour to do it one pour the manner of such of one of him. E you I know: Engagements of my of never of neglects of I learning It us from with that from Have have planes the intention to defend of silicon of only us of democracy well, to recognize of with preliminary of enemy of wire and to fear it pour the steps weight of the trade of, Above of with them and being indicated in detail. Emperor of is of name of the EC.

You did it! Well done! :)I will now leave you to your lovely forum, in peace. Thanks for everything, you have been awesome! Have a nice day!Steve out.