Is strategic consulting more fun than economic consulting?

Question

I'm mainly referring to the consulting industry in the U.S.

I'd like an opinion of somebody who's been in the field. Is strategic consulting (as in the works performed by Bain, McKinsey, BCG, etc.) more fun the economic consulting (NERA, Cornerstone Research, Analysis Group)? I do realize that I've put the best firms in the first category and the sort of second-tier in the latter, but don't let that bias you. The question is this:

Popularity of the firm aside, what is more challenging, or fun, or interesting, to you, between economic and strategic consulting? Personal stories would be very much appreciated.

Thanks.

Answer 1

The Strategic Consulting, is certainly more fun oriented, as well as remunerative, than Economic Consulting. However, it all depends, on the personality of a person, who is steering the consultancy firm, and attitude of the key persons.

Answer 2

This would depend solely on the personality type of the person doing said consulting. There are people (and brain types) that would enjoy one and not the other. Risk management, strategy, distribution techniques are much more open ended than economic structuring. It has been my experience that Economic consultants are a different character by nature than strategic consultants. Your question is a lot like "Which would be more fun, being the manager of Human Resources, or being a CFO". They are two totally different functions, each of which require different skill sets. In my mind, strategic consulting is much more interesting - but I am a problem solver and I enjoy the human component of the problem. An economic consultant would probably find this signficantly less enjoyable than making financial scenarios work. One is much less tangible than the other...