Big Consulting at the AI Crossroads

The partnership model's leverage engine is stalling.

Firms must make a critical decision soon:

Choose between three operating models before the window for optionality closes.

Model 1: Platform Pivot

→ Cut partner distributions to fund R&D

→ Transform IP from slides to systems clients use daily

→ Kill the hourly model for subscription/outcomes pricing

→ Clients: Real-time insights, predictable pricing

→ Upside: Software-like margins, data moat

→ Risk: Partner exodus, cultural resistance

Model 2: Hybrid AI

→ Acquire AI firms but preserve partnership structure

→ Quietly freeze hiring, let attrition shrink pyramid base

→ Keep client-facing work human & automate back-office

→ Clients: Familiar experience but declining innovation

→ Upside: 3-5 more years of strong cashflow

→ Risk: Mid-level talent exodus, slower decline

Model 3: Maintain Status-Quo

→ "AI-enhance" deliverables without structural change

→ Preserve partner model as market share erodes

→ Stick to hourly billing as industry shifts to outcomes

→ Clients: Paying premium rates for commoditized work

→ Upside: Maximizes short-term partner profits

→ Risk: Market share erosion as clients churn

Forward-thinking clients are already asking: Why pay for an army of consultants when systems can deliver the same insights continuously?

The winners won't be those who add AI to old workflows.

They'll be those who fundamentally reimagine what strategic advice means in an AI-driven world.

Signals to watch for:

→ Is R&D outpacing partner distributions?

→ Do engineers exceed consultants in new hires?

→ Has pricing moved from hours to outcomes?

Which path would you choose and why?

Is there a fourth option we're missing?