Consultancies - Friend or Foe?

[DunkirkPie]

Hi all,

First time poster here.

I've been contracting for about six years, in data analytics (SAS programming) for financial services companies, mostly big banks. I've never had any trouble getting work and generally work around nine months a year.

I've started to find that when I'm contacted about potential new contracts, more often than not it is working through a consultancy like InfoSys, Wipro, Sopra Steria, etc. E.g. Bank X needs a piece of work doing, but instead of employing somebody to do it, or getting a contractor in, they outsource it to Consultancy Y, who instead of employing somebody, simply turn to the contract market (often via yet another intermediary, Recruitment Agency Z). In which case, I don't see what the consultancy is actually doing, other than taking a cut and introducing an extra layer of bureaucracy and compliance-and-governance BS.

My view is that I am in direct competition with these big consultancy firms, and that if they want to provide consultancy services then they should, you know, actually employ their own staff, train them and pay their national insurance, pension contributions etc, rather than simply leeching off the contract market.

My questions are: (1) is it my imagination or is this model becoming more prevalent, and (2) am I being unreasonable in refusing (so far) to have anything to do with these companies?

[NotAllThere]

1) It's not your imagination
2) You're not being unreasonable

There's a thread on here somewhere about the joys of working of the likes of InfoSys, Wipro...

[ladymuck]

There does seem to be a move towards this. HCL and Avanade are two more outfits I'm aware of.

HCL use an agency in the middle because they are really quite incompetent at the contract side of things. I worked via them in 2011 ish when my then client was playing agency bingo (chasing the lowest fees / biggest kickback) and I refused to put their contract anywhere near MyCo. This time around, having returned to that same client, they are using a couple of agencies in the middle who are handing out IR35 friendly contracts. As the day to day contract management is with the agency and not the HCL idiots, I'm happy to go with it for now. Payment terms are good and on time so can't complain too much.

If you want to take a gig via one of these, I would choose one with an agency in the middle that is UK based.

All this arrangement does is increase the cost to the client and decrease the rate to the contractor.

[Unai Emery]

Hi all,

First time poster here.

I've been contracting for about six years, in data analytics (SAS programming) for financial services companies, mostly big banks. I've never had any trouble getting work and generally work around nine months a year.

I've started to find that when I'm contacted about potential new contracts, more often than not it is working through a consultancy like InfoSys, Wipro, Sopra Steria, etc. E.g. Bank X needs a piece of work doing, but instead of employing somebody to do it, or getting a contractor in, they outsource it to Consultancy Y, who instead of employing somebody, simply turn to the contract market (often via yet another intermediary, Recruitment Agency Z). In which case, I don't see what the consultancy is actually doing, other than taking a cut and introducing an extra layer of bureaucracy and compliance-and-governance BS.

My view is that I am in direct competition with these big consultancy firms, and that if they want to provide consultancy services then they should, you know, actually employ their own staff, train them and pay their national insurance, pension contributions etc, rather than simply leeching off the contract market.

My questions are: (1) is it my imagination or is this model becoming more prevalent, and (2) am I being unreasonable in refusing (so far) to have anything to do with these companies?

I did a role for Tech Mahindra at BT.

I got canned 9 weeks into a 3 monther. Apparently I was just there as a stop gap until they'd sorted out the paperwork to bring in some bod from overseas.

By all accounts this happens quite a lot.

[DunkirkPie]

Thanks, yes obviously it goes without saying that either the end client or the contractor is effectively paying for all these middle men.

[northernladuk]

Thanks, yes obviously it goes without saying that either the end client or the contractor is effectively paying for all these middle men.

Maybe but they are also paying well under a contractor, local permie rates for these people. They are, without question, a lot cheaper. Not in the long run to be fair but pound for pound for a piece of work they are.

This conversation does appear to be 10+ years too late TBH. This has been going on for decades. It's gathered pace because of the models and offering maturing but there is nothing here that's not been going on for ever.

The consultancy needs to draft contractors on to meet their clients need? How naughty of them. Isn't that what the clients have done. Same question could be asked of the client. Why don't their train their own staff etc.

You do have some valid points but there does appear to be more than a hint of naivety in the whole discussion.

My view is that I am in direct competition with these big consultancy firms,

No you are not. They offer a completely different offering i.e. managed service. You might be in competition with the bod sitting at the desk, not the firm. It's comments like this that makes me think you don't fully understand the market, what they do, why and the bigger picture hence the naivety.

I'm not defending them or the model. I think it's a disgrace to be fair but it is what it is and has been for a long time and only an eejit wouldn't be able to guess it's going to happen more and more.

[DunkirkPie]

The consultancy needs to draft contractors on to meet their clients need? How naughty of them. Isn't that what the clients have done. Same question could be asked of the client. Why don't their train their own staff etc.

I don't think it's the same at all. The client is saying "We don't have the skills to do this, can you help us with it?" The consultancy is telling the client "Yes we can!" when in fact they can't.

My point is that simply drafting in a third party, and passing off their skills and work as your own, does not qualify as "consultancy" in my book.

[jmo21]

I don't think it's the same at all. The client is saying "We don't have the skills to do this, can you help us with it?" The consultancy is telling the client "Yes we can!" when in fact they can't.

My point is that simply drafting in a third party, and passing off their skills and work as your own, does not qualify as "consultancy" in my book.

Correct. It's called business.

[northernladuk]

I don't think it's the same at all. The client is saying "We don't have the skills to do this, can you help us with it?" The consultancy is telling the client "Yes we can!" when in fact they can't.

My point is that simply drafting in a third party, and passing off their skills and work as your own, does not qualify as "consultancy" in my book.

So a small part of what they do conflicts with yours. Their engagement model and agreements will be completely different. They will be under a managed service contract initially but then will sweep up anything they can do once they've got a foot in. One of these will be the odd bit of body shopping where they can. It's what they do. It's not their mainstream of work but it's certainly lucrative for them.

Yes they can, they organise a flexible resource to do the work. How they get this bod in front of a client doesn't matter, they still fulfil the clients needs. If you can't get this you shouldn't be in business.

[DunkirkPie]

If you can't get this you shouldn't be in business.

I get it, you arrogant, condescending prick, I just don't agree with it.