It Appears As Though Deloitte’s Recent Gen Y Survey May Have Been Rigged

Posted on by Adrienne Gonzalez

Does everyone remember Barry Salzberg's article in Forbes that finally shed light on the elusive wants and needs of the Gen Y digital ninjas? I know everyone was probably thrilled to finally understand what it is Millennials want since we've all been sitting here scratching our balding gray heads trying to figure it out.

Anyone with half a brain knew Barry was obviously pandering but thanks to one commenter, we may have a bit more insight into why Deloitte's survey showed its young staff care about silly things like social justice and mobile technology. While we can't confirm this statement for obvious reasons, the survey results were so far-fetched and ridiculous that I can only assume everything written below is true:

I am laughing. I am one of the 1000 who took the idiotic survey Barry talks about. I remember wondering what they were up to, because all the questions were written to steer the respondents to these exact responses. "Fuck you, pay me" was not among the possible answers. All the questions were written as if they presupposed that your major motivations centered around social justice and mobile technology in the workplace. You couldn't really answer truthfully.

Now that I see this article, the point of that survey becomes clear. Yep, just another bullshit marketing tool. Notice that Barry made a point of talking about mobile technology? What an interesting coincidence that Deloitte has recently been buying up other businesses (Übermind, anyone?) [Ed. note: Here's the story] that specialize in this area. "Millennials want mobile tech! Let Deloitte sell you the solution!" The funny part is that I'm actually not a millennial. I'm 42 years old, right smack in the middle of gen x. But since I'm only in my second year with the firm, the morons who administered this survey just assumed that I'm a twenty-something. So they sent me an invitation to participate in their bogus survey. 

I wonder if any of the clients and potential clients for whom Barry's comments are really intended actually believe any of this bullshit.

Well well, you don't say! A 42-year-old "accidentally" gets a copy of the survey and finds the possible answers to be carefully manufactured and guided so that no one could actually say they are driven more by money than the fallacy of business changing the world? As bizarre as it sounds, anyone who read Barry's fluff piece in Forbes can see why it's completely believable.

The ironic part here is that Barry himself recognized that Millennials aren't easily bullshitted (apparently neither are their Gen X predecessors):

Did I mention that this media-savvy generation is also jaded and suspicious? Unimpressed by title, well-traveled, and immune to P.R. in the old sense?  To anyone who imagines their heartstrings can be nimbly plucked, good luck.

You might not be able to nimbly pluck their heartstrings but apparently you can cattle-herd them into a predetermined survey conclusion with the right set of carefully crafted questions and answers.

Related Posts

Deloitte Is Lending Michigan a Helping Hand

Did I say lending? Sorry, that’s not technically accurate. Deloitte Consulting is monitoring Michigan’s welfare computer systems and that involves billable hours. Lots of them. $15 million worth.

The state of Michigan is spending millions of dollars on a contractor to run its welfare computer system partly because it doesn’t offer enough money to attract new hires. A system called Bridges keeps track of welfare cases in the Department of Human Services. In February, Deloitte Consulting was given a one-year contract for about $15 million to maintain it and make regular updates.

Of course it would be cheaper if the Wolverine State did this themselves but there’s a small problem:

[The State’s technology department] lost 15 people to early retirement in December and had several vacancies starting at roughly $42,000 a year. Nobody applied.

Mich. spends millions on contractor [AP]

Based on This Letter, You May Get the Impression That Deloitte Staff Were Lucky They Weren’t Taken Hostage Along with Their Workpapers

On Monday, we reported on Longtop Financial Technologies was the latest Chinese company to have their CFO quit, auditor resign and be accused of being a massive fraud. This particular story was interesting as one of the reasons cited by Deloitte for dumping LFT included “the unlawful detention of DTT’s audit files.” These accusations were described in much more detail in Deloitte’s letter to the company’s audit committee that was filed with the SEC and you may even conclude that the staff were thisclose to being hos

We italicized and bolded the best part.

The Audit Committee
Longtop Financial Technologies Limited
No. 61 Wanghai Road, Xiamen Software Park
Xiamen, Fujian Province
People’s Republic of China
Attention: Mr. Thomas Gurnee, Chairman of the Audit Committee

Dear Sirs,

Longtop Financial Technologies Limited (the “Company”) and together with its subsidiaries (the “Group”)
Audit for the Year Ended 31 March 2011

We hereby give you formal notice of our resignation as auditor of the Company.

Background and significant issues encountered by Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu CPA Ltd. (China) (“Deloitte”)

As part of the process for auditing the Company’s financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2011, we determined that, in regard to bank confirmations, it was appropriate to perform follow up visits to certain banks. These audit steps were recently performed and identified a number of very serious defects including: statements by bank staff that their bank had no record of certain transactions; confirmation replies previously received were said to be false; significant differences in deposit balances reported by the bank staff compared with the amounts identified in previously received confirmations (and in the books and records of the Group); and significant bank borrowings reported by bank staff not identified in previously received confirmations (and not recorded in the books and records of the Group).

In the light of this, a formal second round of bank confirmation was initiated on 17 May. Within hours however, as a result of intervention by the Company’s officials including the Chief Operating Officer, the confirmation process was stopped amid serious and troubling new developments including: calls to banks by the Company asserting that Deloitte was not their auditor; seizure by the Company’s staff of second round bank confirmation documentation on bank premises; threats to stop our staff leaving the Company premises unless they allowed the Company to retain our audit files then on the premises; and then seizure by the Company of certain of our working papers.

In that connection, we must insist that you promptly return our documents.

Then on 20 May the Chairman of the Company, Mr. Jia Xiao Gong called our Eastern Region Managing Partner, Mr. Paul Sin, and informed him in the course of their conversation that “there were fake revenue in the past so there were fake cash recorded on the books”. Mr. Jia did not answer when questioned as to the extent and duration of the discrepancies. When asked who was involved, Mr. Jia answered: “senior management”.

We bring these significant issues to your attention in the context of our responsibilities under Statement on Auditing Standards No. 99 “Consideration of Fraud in a Financial Statement Audit” issued by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.

Reasons for our resignation

The reasons for our resignation include: 1) the recently identified falsity of the Group’s financial records in relation to cash at bank and loan balances (and also now seemingly in the sales revenue); 2) the deliberate interference by the management in our audit process; and 3) the unlawful detention of our audit files. These recent developments undermine our ability to rely on the representations of the management which is an essential element of the audit process; hence our resignation.

Prior periods’ financial reports and our reports thereon

We have reached the conclusion that we are no longer able to place reliance on management representations in relation to prior period financial reports. Accordingly, we request that the Company take immediate steps to make the necessary 8-K filing to state that continuing reliance should no longer be placed on our audit reports on the previous financial statements and moreover that we decline to be associated with any of the Company’s financial communications during 2010 and 2011.

Our consent

We hereby consent to a copy of this letter being supplied to the SEC and the succeeding auditor to be appointed.

Section 10A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (U.S.)

In our view, without providing any legal conclusion, the circumstances mentioned above could constitute illegal acts for purposes of Section 10A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Accordingly, we remind the Board of its obligations under Section 10A of the Securities Exchange Act, including the notice requirements to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. You may consider taking legal advice on this.

Yours faithfully,
/s/ Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu CPA Ltd.
c.c.: The Board of Directors