The Big Con: How the Consulting Industry Weakens our Businesses, Infantilizes our Governments and Warps our Economies
- Downloads：1240
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2023-04-03 06:51:50
- Update Date：2025-09-13
- Status：finish
- Author：Mariana Mazzucato
- ISBN：0593492676
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
A vital and timely investigation into the opaque and powerful consulting industry and what to do about it
There is an entrenched relationship between the consulting industry and the way business and government are managed today that must change。
Mariana Mazzucato and Rosie Collington show that our economies’ reliance on companies such as McKinsey & Company， Boston Consulting Group， Bain & Company， PwC， Deloitte， KPMG， and EY stunts innovation， obfuscates corporate and political accountability， and impedes our collective mission of halting climate breakdown。
The “Big Con” describes the confidence trick the consulting industry performs in contracts with hollowed-out and risk-averse governments and shareholder value-maximizing firms。 It grew from the 1980s and 1990s in the wake of reforms by the neoliberal right and Third Way progressives， and it thrives on the ills of modern capitalism， from financialization and privatization to the climate crisis。 It is possible because of the unique power that big consultancies wield through extensive contracts and networks as advisors， legitimators， and outsourcers and the illusion that they are objective sources of expertise and capacity。 In the end， the Big Con weakens our businesses， infantilizes our governments， and warps our economies。
In The Big Con， Mazzucato and Collington throw back the curtain on the consulting industry。 They dive deep into important case studies of consultants taking the reins with disastrous results and the tragic failures of governments to respond adequately to the COVID-19 pandemic。 The result is an important and exhilarating intellectual journey into the modern economy’s beating heart。 With peerless scholarship， and a wealth of original research， Mazzucato and Collington argue brilliantly for building a new system in which public and private sectors work innovatively for the common good。
There is an entrenched relationship between the consulting industry and the way business and government are managed today that must change。
Mariana Mazzucato and Rosie Collington show that our economies’ reliance on companies such as McKinsey & Company， Boston Consulting Group， Bain & Company， PwC， Deloitte， KPMG， and EY stunts innovation， obfuscates corporate and political accountability， and impedes our collective mission of halting climate breakdown。
The “Big Con” describes the confidence trick the consulting industry performs in contracts with hollowed-out and risk-averse governments and shareholder value-maximizing firms。 It grew from the 1980s and 1990s in the wake of reforms by the neoliberal right and Third Way progressives， and it thrives on the ills of modern capitalism， from financialization and privatization to the climate crisis。 It is possible because of the unique power that big consultancies wield through extensive contracts and networks as advisors， legitimators， and outsourcers and the illusion that they are objective sources of expertise and capacity。 In the end， the Big Con weakens our businesses， infantilizes our governments， and warps our economies。
In The Big Con， Mazzucato and Collington throw back the curtain on the consulting industry。 They dive deep into important case studies of consultants taking the reins with disastrous results and the tragic failures of governments to respond adequately to the COVID-19 pandemic。 The result is an important and exhilarating intellectual journey into the modern economy’s beating heart。 With peerless scholarship， and a wealth of original research， Mazzucato and Collington argue brilliantly for building a new system in which public and private sectors work innovatively for the common good。
Reviews
Robert Sale
，
I came to this book as a management consultant with a healthy dose of scepticism for management consulting。Buried in the book is an important story about the rise of neoliberalism from the ideas of academics such as Friedrich von Hayek and Milton Friedman， the translation of these ideas into public policy under politicians such as Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan， and the emergence of 'New Public Management' and everything that entailed - including， most significantly in this context， the out I came to this book as a management consultant with a healthy dose of scepticism for management consulting。Buried in the book is an important story about the rise of neoliberalism from the ideas of academics such as Friedrich von Hayek and Milton Friedman， the translation of these ideas into public policy under politicians such as Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan， and the emergence of 'New Public Management' and everything that entailed - including， most significantly in this context， the outsourcing of swathes of government activity to the private sector and the subsequent erosion of public sector capability。 All the elements of this story are here - but this isn't quite the story the authors tell。 Instead， they take one facet of the story （the rise of the 'consulting industry' over the past few decades） and concentrate their firepower on it。I believe the widespread scepticism of consulting is warranted。 Any industry in which so much government and other funding is invested should be the subject of of intense scrutiny。 And the authors highlight numerous highly concerning examples of poor performance， conflicts of interest and other infractions on the part of consultants。 Nonetheless， I found the book had major issues that weakened it's arguments。First， it lacked a coherent definition of what consulting is。 At the outset， the authors' say their focus is on the largest and best known consulting firms such as 'the big three' （McKinsey， Bain， BCG） and 'the big four' （EY， PwC， KPMG， Deloitte）。 Initially， that's true - although， with so much attention on the conflict of interest between the big four's consulting arms and their audit arms， I started to wonder if consulting in itself was really the issue。 But then they rattle off example after example of what I wouldn't consider to be consulting; in particular， outsourcing of government services （e。g。 prisons） to firms such as Serco and of IT （e。g。 healthcare。gov） to firms such as CGI Group。 Eventually， it becomes clear this book isn't about the 'consulting industry' so much as it's about government outsourcing （to consulting firms， yes， but also to many other companies） - a worthy subject for a book， just not the book I was expecting based on the title， the blurb and the reviews I'd read。Second， in their attacks on these 'consulting firms'， the authors are polemical to the point of coming across as one-sided。 Rather than demonstrating to the reader that consulting firms are - I'm struggling to think of a better word - bad， they take it as their starting point。 As a result， evidence that seems flimsy or neutral on its own is treated as damning。 For example， "a survey that found 75 per cent of consultants ‘agreed that public servants do not have the required expertise that consultants have’" is taken not as possible evidence of the erosion of public sector capability （as is referenced elsewhere in the book） but as evidence that "graduate consulting programmes instil confidence in the practices of consultology"。 The use of that term "consultogy" （their word for the charlatanism they accuse consultants of） only adds to the impression they are treating consulting less as an object of serious inquiry， as I would hope any author would approach the topic of a ~250 page book， than as the target for a take-down。 This one-sidedness also came through in the examples the authors provided。 Their main example of consultants creating value for their clients was a British consultant creating a computer system to enable Chile's Allende government to centrally plan the national economy - a system that， due to the Pinochet coup， was never used。 One of their main examples of consultants not creating value was CGI Group's botched rollout of healthcare。gov （a key part of the market-based healthcare reforms known as ObamaCare）。 While it was poorly implemented， healthcare。gov is now in use and has contributed to millions of additional Americans getting healthcare。 This gave the impression the authors may have been defining 'value' based not outcomes but on alignment with their political views。Third， the authors don't adequately engage with the question of why public servants hire consultants。 Given the entry requirements and competition for positions in the public service， you would expect public servants to be relatively well educated and intelligent， as they are in my experience。 Consistent with this， the authors say we can't simply conclude public servants are "idiots" （so far， so good）。 They also point out that many public servants are sceptical of consultants （almost always true， in my experience）。 And yet ultimately they conclude public servants are the victims of consultants adept at creating "an impression of value" rather than creating actual value - which would seem to conflict with their earlier statements that public servants are not idiots and that they are sceptical of consultants。 It may be true that some consultants make their living by creating only an impression of value - but couldn't we say the same about public servants themselves （not to mention politicians and academics）？ And yet， a more convincing answer to why public servants hire consultants is right there， earlier in the book - it's because the ideas of neoliberal academics and the actions of politicians both right and left have changed the incentives public servants face （for example， by capping the number of employees government agencies can hire， thereby forcing them to outsource if they want to fulfil their responsibilities）。 This raises the questions of whether consultants are the main issue here or just one manifestation of a deeper issue （that being neoliberalism）。A good example of the authors not sufficiently engaging with the question of why public servants hire consultants is their repeated suggestion that public servants hire academics instead of consultants。 Given public servants already can and do draw on academics， it would have been interesting to explore the question of why they don't do so more often。In short， the authors take a complex story of neoliberal ideas filtering through government over many decades， and make it a black-and-white story of consultants being "a Big Con"。 Ultimately I was left wondering if the authors had felt the need to dumb down their arguments for a non-academic audience。Interestingly， I found the authors' arguments more persuasive when I read them in short articles promoting the book （on the Guardian and the ABC， for example）。 And the final chapter of the book （the conclusion） was more compelling than the book as a whole。 It's as though the authors have taken an article's worth of insights and stretched them out to book length。 Rather than bolstering their arguments， this seems to have weakened them。 。。。more
Chrissy
，
Although the topic itself is interesting， the book is pretty dull。 I couldn’t get through the book nor the audiobook。 （The narrator’s voice is tiring。） I thought it would be more like When McKinsey Comes to Town， but sadly it wasn’t。
Dorota
，
The ubiquity of consulting companies is a concern， as I know from my own experience， and it deserves a better book than this one: chaotic， repetitive， largely anecdotal， often failing to conviencingly prove causality in its argumentation。 A wasted opportunity to address the topic。
Cristian Cristea
，
This is a necessary book， like the others from the same author。It shows something that we knew it happens but couldn’t quite explain。 It shows how the private interests steer the game and how governments rendered incompetent by the neoliberal policies are watching from the sideline while filling their pockets。 Consultancy behemoths know everyone and can influence important decisions in all opacity。 They are useful as scapegoats when things go bad because nothing can really harm them。 The authors This is a necessary book， like the others from the same author。It shows something that we knew it happens but couldn’t quite explain。 It shows how the private interests steer the game and how governments rendered incompetent by the neoliberal policies are watching from the sideline while filling their pockets。 Consultancy behemoths know everyone and can influence important decisions in all opacity。 They are useful as scapegoats when things go bad because nothing can really harm them。 The authors also have some suggestions。 I find it is too little to simply mention these suggestions in the last pages。 We definitely need narratives on how to move on from the status quo。 Dedicated books to this subject are never too many。 。。。more
Ellen
，
A book about the consulting industry might /sound/ dry， but this really isn't。 Non-fiction of this kind （mostly pertaining to politics and economics） is at its best when it equips the reader with a vocabulary to discuss pertinent issues with the people around them in layman's terms。 I had always been suspicious of consulting firms， but have never really been able to articulate what it is about them that seems so encroachingly insidious。 Graduating university， many of the job adverts I saw were f A book about the consulting industry might /sound/ dry， but this really isn't。 Non-fiction of this kind （mostly pertaining to politics and economics） is at its best when it equips the reader with a vocabulary to discuss pertinent issues with the people around them in layman's terms。 I had always been suspicious of consulting firms， but have never really been able to articulate what it is about them that seems so encroachingly insidious。 Graduating university， many of the job adverts I saw were for consultancy positions， and I remember thinking "What could I possibly consult on？ I have no expertise。" Turns out， that doesn't particularly matter to consultancies either。 The Big Con is a thorough dressing down of consultancies and the governments that have become so reliant on them。 Mazzucato and Collington go through a range of global examples， illustrating the ways in which consultancies have hollowed out the capabilities and expertise of public services， piloting them themselves like a parasite with the interests of its wealthiest clients at hearts。 This has had impacts on healthcare systems in countries like Sweden and the UK， disaster recovery in Puerto Rico， and global responses to the pandemic。 Notably， this ends with a distinct warning about how bringing in consultancies to do climate policy when they often serve the interests of our largest carbon emitters could be one of the greatest determiners in how we respond to the unfolding climate crisis。 Truly scary stuff。 Highly recommend！ 。。。more
Tomasz Onyszko
，
It isn't a book full of anecdotes but it is filled with examples。 The authors go through the consulting industry's history， its state， how consulting companies developed over the years， extended the scope of their service and areas， and always 。。。 avoided responsibility。It is methodological write about the state of consulting industry and how it ended up wrapped around the companies and governments。 Examples are illustrating the point， not just providing catchy and funny points and anecdotes。Aut It isn't a book full of anecdotes but it is filled with examples。 The authors go through the consulting industry's history， its state， how consulting companies developed over the years， extended the scope of their service and areas， and always 。。。 avoided responsibility。It is methodological write about the state of consulting industry and how it ended up wrapped around the companies and governments。 Examples are illustrating the point， not just providing catchy and funny points and anecdotes。Authors are clearly skeptical about the industry but they are proving the point without bashing it。 The boards and governments outsourced responsibility for decisions to consultants， letting them keep the knowledge and generate profits without oversight， control over conflicts of interest， and good governance。The book describes how consulting companies took on tasks they needed to be more competent with disclosing conflict of interest and how they are not accountable for decisions they made。If you want further read on similar topic I recommend "The management myth"。 。。。more
Keno
，
so i really enjoyed 90% of this book， the explanations as to how consultanties have hollowed out businesses and governments over the course of the 20th century are fascinatinghowever mazzucato is def more of a centrist than me and i think that the purported solutions that she tacks on to the end of the book are kind of fucking insane。。。 she basically argues that governments and businesses need to work together based on standards that governments set themselves regarding tendering fees and contin so i really enjoyed 90% of this book， the explanations as to how consultanties have hollowed out businesses and governments over the course of the 20th century are fascinatinghowever mazzucato is def more of a centrist than me and i think that the purported solutions that she tacks on to the end of the book are kind of fucking insane。。。 she basically argues that governments and businesses need to work together based on standards that governments set themselves regarding tendering fees and contingencies （that will be shared by the contracting and contracted parties）。 she doesn't give any reason as to how or why governments will be motivated to do this！ and i don't agree that rent-seeking big four / big three consultancies will change their mission statements internally out of the good of their hearts。 soooo lol 。。。more
Miccaeli
，
3。5
Ben Rogers
，
Consult This！This is a thought-provoking and insightful analysis of the consulting industry and its impact on businesses， governments， and economies。Through extensive research and case studies， the author sheds light on how consulting firms often prioritize their own interests over those of their clients， resulting in weakened businesses and infantilized governments。 The book also highlights the negative effects of consulting on innovation， economic growth， and inequality。While the book can be a Consult This！This is a thought-provoking and insightful analysis of the consulting industry and its impact on businesses， governments， and economies。Through extensive research and case studies， the author sheds light on how consulting firms often prioritize their own interests over those of their clients， resulting in weakened businesses and infantilized governments。 The book also highlights the negative effects of consulting on innovation， economic growth， and inequality。While the book can be a bit lengthy and meandering at times， Mazzucato's well-organized and well-argued points make it a valuable read for anyone interested in politics， economics， or business。Overall， the book challenges conventional wisdom and provides a much-needed critique of the consulting industry。 I highly recommend it to anyone looking for a fresh perspective on this topic。I for one， picked this book up due to some recent updates from my union - to learn more about this subject。3。2/5 。。。more
Dominic King
，
Disappointing; myopicVery disappointing compared to The Moonshot Economy。 Mazzucato clearly has an axe to grind with the consulting industry。 Doubtless justified in many instances but ultimately it's very imbalanced （are consultants worthless？）， and comes across as a diatribe。 Some examples of good collaboration would have made the point better than the catalogue of apparent failures。 Also， odd that she uses so much of the dense jargon （"consultanese"） folk in the industry will be painfully fami Disappointing; myopicVery disappointing compared to The Moonshot Economy。 Mazzucato clearly has an axe to grind with the consulting industry。 Doubtless justified in many instances but ultimately it's very imbalanced （are consultants worthless？）， and comes across as a diatribe。 Some examples of good collaboration would have made the point better than the catalogue of apparent failures。 Also， odd that she uses so much of the dense jargon （"consultanese"） folk in the industry will be painfully familiar with。 。。。more
Katie Bruell
，
I gave up on this one。 I agree with everything they're saying， I just didn't need to read it in so much detail。 I would have loved this as a long-form essay in The Atlantic or New Yorker。 I gave up on this one。 I agree with everything they're saying， I just didn't need to read it in so much detail。 I would have loved this as a long-form essay in The Atlantic or New Yorker。 。。。more
Sophia
，
Eye-opener。
Carlosfelipe Pardo
，
The book could be half the length， but it does provide interesting cases in that additional extension。 The hypothesis is very interesting and well researched， and conclusions are fantastically straightforward and useful。 A must-read for government higher-ups。
Maciej Walinski
，
Much of this book fed into the confirmation bias I already have regarding my disdain for the big consulting firms - purveyors of word salads， meaningless insights， endless statistics， and 1984esque doublespeak - but it really was very well written and superbly researched。The authors outline their arguements in a clear， concise manner， and most importantly have the requisite supporting evidence to back it all up。 I'm sure there are valid counterpoints for some of the assertions， but it would be v Much of this book fed into the confirmation bias I already have regarding my disdain for the big consulting firms - purveyors of word salads， meaningless insights， endless statistics， and 1984esque doublespeak - but it really was very well written and superbly researched。The authors outline their arguements in a clear， concise manner， and most importantly have the requisite supporting evidence to back it all up。 I'm sure there are valid counterpoints for some of the assertions， but it would be very difficult to refute most of the claims based on the sources provided。 I for one certainly enjoyed reading that much of my antipathy for management consulting was validated。To most who read this book （the liberal left）， nothing contained within will be particularly shocking or revelatory， but the authors do a great job of digging into just how deep and convoluted the whole mess is - particularly when it comes to government and environmental initiatives。 They also offer some practical suggestions on how to start detangling from it， and maybe give our future generations a chance of fostering a better， more sustainable existence。 Will it make an impact？ Unlikely。 I don't think too many government or economic elites， and certainly no business magnates and neoliberals， will bother picking this up。 They certainly wouldn't be swayed by the arguements if they do， but I would like to see this as required reading in upper year economics programs， and as a prerequisite for those who are entering MBA programs。 Maybe then the pull to work for consultanices will have lessened just enough to search， or even create， better alternatives。 。。。more
Todd Cheng
，
Uncomfortable。 What is not raised in the book is that in the 1990s a presidential directive decreed that work that is not inherently government should be near sourced to industry。 The government should not compete with tax payer。 Now 40+ years into this experiment details are emerging that this too is not the utopian policy。 There are additional costs to the taxed public of outsourcing labor and struggle of thought。 There are complex mechanisms of manipulation that are being brought to transpare Uncomfortable。 What is not raised in the book is that in the 1990s a presidential directive decreed that work that is not inherently government should be near sourced to industry。 The government should not compete with tax payer。 Now 40+ years into this experiment details are emerging that this too is not the utopian policy。 There are additional costs to the taxed public of outsourcing labor and struggle of thought。 There are complex mechanisms of manipulation that are being brought to transparency。 。。。more
Chris Sargeantson
，
Although this book provides a good summary of the case against the prevalence of consultancies in modern democracy， it prescribes the cause of these problems to a particular form of modern capitalism， rather than capitalism itself。 There is no real solution posed here beyond superficial tinkering which I feel， given the scale of the issue described， warranted far deeper thinking and a wide range of options considering。 I wasn't expecting any engagement with the notion of increased economic democ Although this book provides a good summary of the case against the prevalence of consultancies in modern democracy， it prescribes the cause of these problems to a particular form of modern capitalism， rather than capitalism itself。 There is no real solution posed here beyond superficial tinkering which I feel， given the scale of the issue described， warranted far deeper thinking and a wide range of options considering。 I wasn't expecting any engagement with the notion of increased economic democracy - and thus， true insulation from dominance by consultancies both publicly traded and privately owned - but even social democrats recognise the value this idea has within a capitalist framework in safeguarding political democracy from this sort of exploitation。 Also， I found it very funny that technocratic nationalist extraordinaire Giuseppe Conte was described as "left wing。" Almost worth losing a star in itself。 。。。more
Princess
，
5/5。 The book does what it’s set out to do， a critique on the BigConsulting industry and how it’s hallowed public service governments。 Consulting services should be adding value to organizations so that they need not have to rely on them again。 Using an analogy by the others， you wouldn’t want your therapist to purposely make you worse so that you can keep seeing them and giving them more money。 As a lawyer， there are many parallels to the legal field， and gave me lots to think about。 I am proud 5/5。 The book does what it’s set out to do， a critique on the BigConsulting industry and how it’s hallowed public service governments。 Consulting services should be adding value to organizations so that they need not have to rely on them again。 Using an analogy by the others， you wouldn’t want your therapist to purposely make you worse so that you can keep seeing them and giving them more money。 As a lawyer， there are many parallels to the legal field， and gave me lots to think about。 I am proud of the civil service。 We must invest in it if we want to meaningfully address and solve the policy issues impacting everyday lives。 I will be shopping this book around for everyone I know 。。。more
Colin Donaldson
，
Having worked in consulting I was interested to read this book。 From my personal experience I recognised many of the traits described。 Some of the large projects I worked on were a total waste of time and money。 However this was often due to the project goals being too vague in the first place。 Then on smaller projects consultants were often used to shift blame for decisions management wanted to take （as highlighted in the book）。 Consultants used well are useful， when they are hired for specific Having worked in consulting I was interested to read this book。 From my personal experience I recognised many of the traits described。 Some of the large projects I worked on were a total waste of time and money。 However this was often due to the project goals being too vague in the first place。 Then on smaller projects consultants were often used to shift blame for decisions management wanted to take （as highlighted in the book）。 Consultants used well are useful， when they are hired for specific （and it has to be very specific） purposes where there isn't sufficient knowledge or capacity in house， and only for set budgets and set time-frames， with clauses assuring the knowhow is then transferred to the client。 Overall I found it a good read， and a wake-up call for just how extensive the use of consultancies have been in government and how the lack of transparency has lead to many conflicts of interest being unaddressed。 Sometimes the book remained anecdotal， and lacked empirical data。 The recommendations at the end of the book are valid， but it would have been good to have a little more development， or examples of how it is done well。 。。。more
Tom Winstanley
，
As someone who has worked in professional services for my entire career and as a consultant for much of this， I was never going to agree with all of the findings of "The Big Con: How the Consulting industry weakens our businesses， infantilises our governments and warps our economies" by the totally brilliant Mariana Mazzucato （I would recommend every book of hers that I have read so far）。 That notwithstanding， this book should be mandatory reading for anyone involved in the industry: it is incre As someone who has worked in professional services for my entire career and as a consultant for much of this， I was never going to agree with all of the findings of "The Big Con: How the Consulting industry weakens our businesses， infantilises our governments and warps our economies" by the totally brilliant Mariana Mazzucato （I would recommend every book of hers that I have read so far）。 That notwithstanding， this book should be mandatory reading for anyone involved in the industry: it is incredibly well researched and provides a systematic look at both the demand and supply side challenges of the growth in consultancies and the way they can impact in particular government departments， contributing through the economic system they support - despite mostly overwhelmingly good intentions - to a hollowing out of capability in these organisations。 "To steer， you have to also row" is an insightful analogy and something I strongly recognise: the most impactful programmes I have worked on， leading consulting teams in both the private and public sector have been delivered more as a "peer" with some specific insights， skills， to an individual or team with a strong capacity and desire for self-sufficiency。It is hard to argue with the systemic challenges that Professor Mazzucato highlights and she is nuanced in her positions， differentiating between traditional policy and strategy consulting and wider professional services organisations， providing augmentation and IT services。 I only really disagree with one part of the analysis; the assertion that professional services organisations are unwilling to take on end-to-end responsibility for delivery of an outcome。 Although this may well be true for strategy consultancies （and even there， examples can be found）， for larger scale operational delivery programmes and outsourcing， I would argue that the desire is typically there， but the willingness or ability of the procuring institution to a。 enable the consultancy to control all of the parameters that allow it to own the outcome and - perhaps more critically - b。 price for the risk appropriately without losing the tender are actually the key factors driving the current problematic commercial contracting structures in government。 This is， however， a minor niggle given the overall analysis。 The concluding chapters， present some thoughts on how to address these problems at a systemic level， and I have to admit I would have liked a tick more on this and a little less of the painstaking analysis， as compelling as it is; hopefully there will be a companion book - given Mazzucato's role at the UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose， she is perfectly position to do drive this agenda further。。 Unsurprisingly， I would hope that this will see not just a strengthening of the demand-side organisations own capacity for policy innovation and scaled delivery excellence， but also a recognition that the there *are* huge pools of outstanding talent and capacity within the industry that are willing to find different approaches to delivering value and tapping into these in ways that create an alignment of both interests and outcomes between the actors in this messy and complex problem space！ 。。。more
Jasper van Dijk
，
Het werd tijd dat het op grote schaal inhuren van consultants door overheden werd geproblematiseerd。 Want ja， overheden bouwen door het inhuren van consultants te weinig kennis op， zijn vaak duurder uit dan wanneer ze het zelf doen en zijn nu soms compleet afhankelijk zijn van een specifiek privaat bedrijf， bijvoorbeeld omdat zij hun hele IT beheren。 De anekdotes – het enige wat het boek heeft– zijn op deze punten overtuigend。Maar het boek wil meer。 Het wil de gehele consultancy industrie wegze Het werd tijd dat het op grote schaal inhuren van consultants door overheden werd geproblematiseerd。 Want ja， overheden bouwen door het inhuren van consultants te weinig kennis op， zijn vaak duurder uit dan wanneer ze het zelf doen en zijn nu soms compleet afhankelijk zijn van een specifiek privaat bedrijf， bijvoorbeeld omdat zij hun hele IT beheren。 De anekdotes – het enige wat het boek heeft– zijn op deze punten overtuigend。Maar het boek wil meer。 Het wil de gehele consultancy industrie wegzetten als een amper waarde toevoegend fenomeen （rent seeking）。 Maar waarom huren bedrijven dan zoveel consultants in？ Mazzucato en Collington hebben een antwoord。 Volgens hen doen bedrijven dat omdat ze misleid worden。 Consultancy is een grote zwendel （Big Con）， waar bedrijven keer op keer intrappen。 Deze bold claim wordt amper onderbouwd。 Waar wel een poging tot onderbouwing wordt gedaan is bij de stelling dat consultants geen waarde toevoegen。 Het probleem is dat dit weer alleen maar anekdotes zijn。 Consultant X was bij bedrijf Y。 Het ging helemaal mis bij bedrijf Y。 Dus consultant X heeft schuld。 En bij genoeg voorbeelden kan je dan de indruk wekken dat consultancy amper waarde toevoegt。 Niet gek dat je veel voorbeelden vindt dat bij bedrijven waar het mis gaat vaak de vingerafdrukken van consultants zitten。 Want zoals de auteurs in het begin van het boek ook zeggen: alle grote bedrijven gebruiken consultants。 Bizar wordt het als ze beargumenteren dat consultants vaak adviseren om mensen te ontslaan en daarom geen waarde toevoegen。 Het is niet de taak van bedrijven om zoveel mogelijk mensen in dienst te nemen; het is de taak van bedrijven in de samenleving om mensen en kapitaal het meest productief in te zetten。 Dat arbeid （en kapitaal） vrijkomt bij onproductief gebruik ervan is dan ook dé voorwaarde voor economische groei。Er zijn wel wat terechte punten verder。 Terecht dat ze aanstippen dat consultants lastig aansprakelijk kunnen worden gesteld als zij onethische of financieel desastreuze adviezen geven。 En goed dat ze benadrukken dat er geen enkele transparantie is over wie consultants allemaal adviseren。 Dit kan ertoe leiden dat consultant advies geven wat vooral henzelf goed uitkomt。Dus kortom: Het boek was krachtiger geweest als ze bij de verwevenheid van consultancy en publieke sector waren gebleven。 Dat de gehele adviesindustrie een grote zwendel is， is een te grote claim。 。。。more
David Wineberg
，
Consulting is an evil that is hollowing out government， dumbing down the civil service and profiting massively while enjoying corruption like conflict of interest and insider information。 That is the essence of The Big Con， by Mariana Mazzucato and Rosie Collington。 There is a clear way out， but the authors actually missed it。First let me say I am a fan of Mariana Mazzucato。 I am not going to repeat my praise of her work here， but readers are free to think I am prejudiced in favor of her writing Consulting is an evil that is hollowing out government， dumbing down the civil service and profiting massively while enjoying corruption like conflict of interest and insider information。 That is the essence of The Big Con， by Mariana Mazzucato and Rosie Collington。 There is a clear way out， but the authors actually missed it。First let me say I am a fan of Mariana Mazzucato。 I am not going to repeat my praise of her work here， but readers are free to think I am prejudiced in favor of her writing。 And that I will review anything of hers that comes my way。 All true。As for the consulting plague， it was hatched， as so many plagues have been， by the Thatcher-Reagan misunderstanding of how the world works。 With government being the problem， anything it could do to outsource any research or new functionality， had automatically to be better than the civil service doing the work by itself。 Between cutting back on civil servants and their budgets， and cutting them out of the very projects they’d been assigned， this has become a self-fulfilling prophecy。 It has resulted in terribly botched projects （Think healthcare。gov）， conflicts of interest， and of course massive transfers of tax money into the accounts of consultancies。 Outsourcing， which is meant to save money， has mutated into costing far more than the institution would have spent to do the same job on its own。 Globally， $900 billion is spent on consultants， the authors say。 Setting the pace， consultant fees increased 40 times during Thatcher’s time in office， as she slashed government services。 She turned the government of the UK in a “consultocracy”。 The Labour governments that followed expanded it even more。 The French government today is going through a scandal of how incredibly， massively and even arrogantly President Macron farms out work to consultants， possibly even for personal/party use in his capacity as president。The authors traipse through history， showing how management consultants started small， often growing out of accounting contractors。 It wasn’t long before the accounting side was being offered for little or nothing， just to get a foot in the door and feed off the fat consulting contracts that kept popping up。 Using a little insider information never hurt anyone。 Everything is relationships， and when civil servants need to call on someone， they call whom they know， of course。 So consulting firms make sure they are known， spending lavishly。The result has been four massive， global consultancies raking in hundreds of billions。 They use the old bait-and-switch。 A senior partner， with all kinds of expertise， promises the world in personal meetings。 But when the contract is signed， twenty-somethings fresh out of college show up to run the show。 The authors give horrifying examples of the proposals they specified to implement， based on incomplete research， premature assumptions， and lack of experience in the subject matter。 Then there’s good old， garden-variety conflict of interest。 Consultancies will knowingly work for both the fossil fuel industry and environment departments of government at the same time， for example。 This can mean giving bad advice to government in order to smooth out the bumps for industry。 It got to the point where the twenty-year-olds got together and protested at McKinsey， leading to the resignation of a senior partner who had to admit， yes， that’s what we do here。 Meanwhile， at EY （Ernst & Young）， the new climate-sensitive efforts resulted in the appointment of a chief sustainability officer。 Almost naturally， he had been managing partner of the energy division， which served the fossil fuels producers。 Similarly， McKinsey is right in there battling for net-zero carbon contracts， while at the same time advising “at least forty-three of the hundred biggest polluters” in the world， the authors say。If that weren’t enough， some consultancies have investment funds that buy and sell based on their intimate knowledge of what is about to happen in industries affected by their work for government。It is so profitable than one British consultancy collected contracts far and wide， then hired other consultancies to actually do the work。 This saved it labor that it did not have， and really， much of any effort at all。 It eventually blew up and went bankrupt， but clearly， someone else will try the same model。A favored strategy is to look totally confident and slash through the corporate structure。 James McKinsey himself handled the Marshall Field （Department Store chain） case， where he slashed payrolls by 1200， stopped all vertical integration in favor of outsourcing， and was promptly offered the positions of board chairman and CEO。 He accepted。 Today， job interviews at McKinsey focus on the same confidence and self-esteem， the authors say。 Any wavering or uncertainty would weaken the whole firm in the eyes of the client。 Arrogance is bred right into the culture。Another nice perk is the lack of responsibility。 When a project fails， the blame goes to government， not the consultancy that created and implemented it。 There is so much money sloshing around that the major consultancies can afford to take the knocks when they screw up， the authors say。 They have the marketing， communication， public relations and outside services to ward off any attack and just look to the next series of contracts。 If anything is too big in this scenario， it is not government; it is the consultancies leaching from it。 Risk is minimal; rewards are huge， the authors say。And government knows it。 After a scam wherein consultancy KPMG used its influence in tax changes to help its corporate clients avoid taxes， a British Labour MP， Margaret Hodge， said it was “tantamount to a scam，” “a ridiculous conflict of interest，” and “poacher turned gamekeeper turned poacher syndrome。” Which held some weight， as Hodge herself came to Parliament from Price Waterhouse， another giant consultancy。 In many countries， it is perfectly legal for politicians to be in the pay of consultancies， even while in office。 In the UK， the Labour Party itself was found to be enjoying accounting services from KPMG at no cost。 The corruption is just plain blatant。Among the latest consulting fads is ESG， which purports to show how enthusiastic and successful firms are in things like sustainability， diversity and governance。 It is so subjective and arbitrary as to be useless: “a giant societal placebo where we think we’re making progress， even though we’re not，” according to Tariq Fancy， Blackrock’s former chief sustainability officer。 Based on ESG numbers， investors make totally ill-informed decisions on what to buy and sell。The whole business of climate change is rife with consultocracy。 The authors say it provides a “veil of commitment without the mandate for action，” as nations make more and more promises they have literally no way of keeping。 One has only to look at carbon production。 Despite all the pledges， it continues to rise into record territory。 Holding temperatures to a 1。5° increase is a global joke，In conclusion， the authors posit four changes to ameliorate the situation。 Things like better contracts that aren’t so one-sided in favor of the consultants。 There’s sharing the risk and so on， but they don’t go nearly far enough。 They don’t take the （to me） obvious step that would stop this completely。Government should have its own internal， freestanding consultancy。 It should have teams of consultants that could come in to define and help set up a project， all while keeping it confidential。 They could store their findings， research and reports in a central place， so that all government departments and agencies could see what has been tried already， and analysts and other consultants could leverage that experience for the job at hand。 Just like the big four consultancies。 Government could rebuild its former expertise， while avoiding the whole blame game and risking leaks。This would dramatically lower the cost of such efforts， and as the knowledge base grew， make it even more powerful than the proprietary ones the consultancies use today。 This government consultancy would be open to all departments and agencies， maybe even at the state level。 It would strengthen the knowledge and skills of civil servants and lead directly to measurable improvements in efforts， services and project completions internally。 Institutional knowledge would have meaning again。 And it would cost billions less than what they spend today。 It’s an: “Ok， where do I sign？” solution。Why they didn’t suggest this （if only just to tear it down）， I do not know。 But as NASA explained， it would be unthinkable for consultancies to come away with all the discoveries and knowledge， leaving the space agency with nothing of its own。 NASA would have been “captured by brochuremanship，” as so many others have。 This whole book is a vivid demonstration of this syndrome – taking away from government and enfeebling it。 If government can have internal accounting， it can have an internal consultancy that would save taxpayers hundreds of billions。That would have made this thorough and careful book into a blockbuster。David Wineberg。If you liked this review， I invite you to read my book The Straight Dope。 It’s an essay collection based on my first thousand reviews and what I learned。 Right now it’s FREE for Prime members， otherwise — cheap！ Reputed to be fascinating and a superfast read。 And you already know it is well-written。 https://www。amazon。com/Straight-Dope-。。。 。。。more
Frank Lindt
，
A long scientific business administration article turned into book， that is what the Big Con is。 It does not bring any new revelations to the forefront but helps solidify the argument that government is too reliant on consultants and increasingly incapable of managing its own affairs。 The authors argue that the consultants aren’t either。
Jon Higgins
，
An apt title for a book with nothing new to say。
Marc Sabatier
，
Well written， but more journalistic in style than academic。 That makes it easy to read and engaging， but some of the simplifications where quite tiresome。They argue that consultants succeed in pulling a "confidence trick" off， where they seem to competent， but in reality， its just a bunch of handwaiving。 So business's aren't hiring consultants for functional reasons， but because they have been tricked by the consultant houses。 This claim is backed by anecdotes citing that consultants are encoura Well written， but more journalistic in style than academic。 That makes it easy to read and engaging， but some of the simplifications where quite tiresome。They argue that consultants succeed in pulling a "confidence trick" off， where they seem to competent， but in reality， its just a bunch of handwaiving。 So business's aren't hiring consultants for functional reasons， but because they have been tricked by the consultant houses。 This claim is backed by anecdotes citing that consultants are encouraged not to show uncertainty， but always showing confidence in there proposals。 It would've been helpfull for the argument if actual studies systematically reviewing the effects of consultants were presented， but this is left to speculation。The criticism of consulting methods are also hard to blame on consultants rather than the fact that ressources are scarce。 They criticize "downsizing" methods for causing "emotional exhaustion" with employees。 Naturally， it would be preferable that firms didn't have to downsize and could keep everyone on their team。 But what is the counterfactual here？ That， absent of consultants， the world would be free of hardships？Naturally， they bring up valid points with potential conflicts of interest， and the negative effects on organisations when employee don't get the learning experience of solving a given problem。 These are legitimate， but hardly unknown。 In the end， the authors offer some recommendations for governments， where one is to develop in-house consulting firms （citing Germany as an example， see page 244）。 If consultants offer no functional purpose， then why would governments be better off with in-house consulting branches？ Perhaps because the methods and stake-holder function （giving an outside perspective） provided by consultants actually has value。 Maybe there is still something to learn from "The Big Con"。 。。。more
Sebastian Gebski
，
I liked TBC far more than "Mission Economy"。Before I started reading， I was afraid Mazzucato may have picked an easy way （picking on cherry-picking f*ckups & play the emotions: "they are stealing money from children in need！"）。 Fortunately， she's much better than that。Yes， there are plenty of anecdotes here， but they are well put in context， not anonymized， and aimed to illustrate a thesis。 The analysis is calm， scientific， and to the point。 The identified flaws （of consulting） very closely map I liked TBC far more than "Mission Economy"。Before I started reading， I was afraid Mazzucato may have picked an easy way （picking on cherry-picking f*ckups & play the emotions: "they are stealing money from children in need！"）。 Fortunately， she's much better than that。Yes， there are plenty of anecdotes here， but they are well put in context， not anonymized， and aimed to illustrate a thesis。 The analysis is calm， scientific， and to the point。 The identified flaws （of consulting） very closely map onto my own personal judgment （acquired while working for & with consulting companies - for over 13 years）。What did I miss here？ Mazzucato didn't dive very deep into the history: of why consulting has gained its position & what has changed （in practical terms） since then。 For obvious reasons， she brings in more details from public service cases （where transparency is granted by law） than private ones。In the end， this book （IMHO） gives a good， accurate depiction of today's "big name" consulting。 The more people realize how it really works and how little value it brings， the better。P。S。 The sustainability chapter is pure gold。 。。。more
J
，
Interesting perspective but too anecdotal to write a book about it。
Tristan Eagling
，
Depending on your frame of reference， consultants fall somewhere on a spectrum between a vital source of expertise， filling in gaps， and allowing net benefit through 'economies of knowledge'。 To parasitic bullsh*t merchants， leeching off the public purse， and diverting money （that could be spent on R&D， nurses， or social protection） to overpaid charlatans， whose only real skill is creating the illusion of expertise and well-formatted slide decks。 It's fair to say Mariana Mazzucato veers to the l Depending on your frame of reference， consultants fall somewhere on a spectrum between a vital source of expertise， filling in gaps， and allowing net benefit through 'economies of knowledge'。 To parasitic bullsh*t merchants， leeching off the public purse， and diverting money （that could be spent on R&D， nurses， or social protection） to overpaid charlatans， whose only real skill is creating the illusion of expertise and well-formatted slide decks。 It's fair to say Mariana Mazzucato veers to the latter camp more than the former and provides a compelling argument for why more people should。 The Big Con: How the Consulting Industry Weakens our Businesses， Infantilizes our Governments and Warps our Economies is not a page-turner full of dinner party-friendly anecdotes， but given the authors' academic backgrounds， it was never going to be。 It is， however， an important well-researched book that examines the often non altruistic incentives of consultants and those who hire them， why the current system is flawed and crucially why that matters。 Even the biggest advocates of the consultant industry will often question the mismatch between the value they generate and the fees they charge。 The Big Con tackles the excessive fees， but goes far beyond just this， and also examines how the overuse of consultants may be gutting our institutions of expertise and experience。 Most worrying， we are shown that consultants not only benefit from our current neoliberal order， but have in no small part， helped perpetuate and shape the very system they now thrive in。 The Big con is a must-read for anyone interested in the industry， whether you believe Mckinsey's claim to be 'the greatest private sector catalyst for decarbonization'， or you think that is just rhetoric， and you have become increasingly wary of the well-presented reports， presented by young and enthusiastic， well-presented consultants。 。。。more
Jen
，
"The desire to secure additional rewards through new contracts wins out over the exchange of honest advice and expertise -- exactly what we're told is the raison d'etre of the consulting industry。" "The desire to secure additional rewards through new contracts wins out over the exchange of honest advice and expertise -- exactly what we're told is the raison d'etre of the consulting industry。" 。。。more
Morgan
，
A fascinating look at how the consulting industry affects governments， businesses， and economies in negative ways。 It is very clear from the beginning how much research went into The Big Con。 I’m definitely going to be thinking about this book when I’m reading “When McKinsey Comes to Town” for a book club next month！ Thank you to Penguin Press for sending me this ARC。
Toke Dahler
，
Incisive， timely and cleverly uses one questionable sector as the lens to understand wider societal change。 Loved it
tpg0
，
As an AI language model， I don't have the ability to have an opinion。 However， based on the title， the book seems to be a critical analysis of the consulting industry and its impact on businesses， governments， and economies。 It might offer insights on the drawbacks and negative effects of consulting， which could be useful for businesses and policymakers。
tpg1
，
I am an AI language model and I don't have personal opinions or beliefs about books。 However， "The Big Con: How the Consulting Industry Weakens our Businesses， Infantilizes our Governments and Warps our Economies" is a non-fiction book written by British author， journalist， and commentator， David Craig。 The book is a critical examination of the consulting industry and its role in shaping policies and decisions of governments and corporations。 It argues that consultants often use questionable tactics and methods to sell their services and that their advice is not always sound or in the best interests of their clients。 The book is well researched and provides a thought-provoking critique of the consulting industry。
tpg2
，