- Partnered with a local provider (Trillian) after minimal/token due diligence (despite ample reason to be extraordinarily suspicious, and in contravention of internal policy), to win an unprecedentedly lucrative contract;
- Even when the Gupta ownership connection to Trillian was revealed internally, refused to amend the terms of the engagement;
- Only dropped Trillian when forced by public scrutiny;
- And then tried to cover up the entire debacle, actively misleading investigators and journalists.
What part of this has "very little to do" with McKinsey, exactly? It's quite clear that ethical and/or legal scrutiny was lessened, no doubt given the size of the potential prize on the other side.
- Partnered with a local provider (Trillian) after minimal/token due diligence (despite ample reason to be extraordinarily suspicious, and in contravention of internal policy), to win an unprecedentedly lucrative contract;
- Even when the Gupta ownership connection to Trillian was revealed internally, refused to amend the terms of the engagement;
- Only dropped Trillian when forced by public scrutiny;
- And then tried to cover up the entire debacle, actively misleading investigators and journalists.
What part of this has "very little to do" with McKinsey, exactly? It's quite clear that ethical and/or legal scrutiny was lessened, no doubt given the size of the potential prize on the other side.