http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ec8daca8-f85d-11dd-aae8-000077b07658.htmlhttp://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1e97090a-f864-11dd-aae8-000077b07658.html

Seems a well-written article giving an accurate picture of reality - they should have interviewed accenture as well......I am at a top tier strat house - we are getting money, doing well even, but we have to work very hard and large new customers come mainly from rival firms. It is scary to hear partners - the future is opaque, one can look only about 2 to 3 months ahead. Those firms without large cash reserves are going to have a really hard time.

A bit of both, I believe.I've heard of many companies having 'consulting bans' in place before, even during normal times; however they tend to be gradually forgotten within the course of a year. A certain large UK telecoms firm which is reknowned for keeping the entire consulting sector afloat appears to put these in place regularly and then ignore them with equal equanimity when it turns out they lack the ability or will to do anything by themselves.Siemens, on the other hand, is a fairly well-run and boring firm who are likely to keep this one in place with solid, teutonic determination. We shall see.EC

This will be good news for the much maligned PA Consulting, as they have large cash reserves, have not (over)grown at the same pace as Tier 1 consultancies, and get most of their work from central and local government.

Peter S,That's a rather naive view!Haven't you considered the likely impact of additional competition in the market for government work, or the fact that governmental bodies themselves are going to find budgets for discretionary items squeezed over the coming year or two?On a related note, you should probably read "Managing the Professional Services Firm" by David Maister, which gives a good account for why expansion is imperative to the health of a consultancy. Note that this is not to say that periods of growth aren't going to be followed by the occasional bloodbath.EC