The reason they're hired is that decision-makers at firms want to take risk, but they don't want to be fired if it blows up in their face.
If I'm a CEO and I hire McKinsey to recommend to me the thing I already wanted to do, then I can take credit if it works, or I can cover my ass if it fails and say, "McKinsey's Harvard-trained consultants told me to do this."
Other firms, like Accenture, actually do some implementation of projects, which means they're also a temporary staffing solution in some cases.
I remember Saudi cutting funding for consultants though: https://dgagroup.com/insight/asg-analysis-saudi-arabia-issue...
The king was supposedly pissed that the nation's leaders were not even taking responsibility for the economic plan. They'd say things like, "Here's a plan written by McKinsey." Which is a little odd because you'd think that they'd steal ideas and all that. It's easier to claim ownership. It's more cost-effective to fire the people who hire expensive consultants.
Insane amounts of energy and capital being incinerated for no particular benefit, and with no prospect of a return on investment.
josephcsible•6mo ago