Editors’ Note: This letter has been updated to reflect developments.

To the Editor:

Re “Buttigieg Bid for Transparency Derails at McKinsey” (news article, Dec. 8):

I am a retired biotechnology executive and an alum of McKinsey & Company, having worked there from 1990 to 1993. Despite having many issues with McKinsey’s recent choice of clients (ICE, Saudi Arabia, Purdue Pharma, etc.), I find the idea that Pete Buttigieg is hiding something nefarious about his time there ridiculous.

Coming straight out of school with no prior business experience, he would have spent a couple of years as a glorified analyst, and maybe some time as a junior project manager. He would have had no decision-making authority about what he worked on, would not have been in any position to make policy and is truly not allowed to talk about his clients.

Most people running for president have confidential information in their past, whether as lawyers or as legislators or as businesspeople. That doesn’t mean that it’s sleazy — just that it’s a competitive world where organizations need to keep secrets from their competitors. I for one believe that it’s important for our leaders to understand and value the private sector.

McKinsey has now released Pete from his confidentiality agreement after his clients agreed to waive their confidentiality provisions. The situation shouldn’t be a reflection on Pete’s ethical standards. There is no sign that he wasn’t an ethical person during these years or any others.