From Oracles to Operators—How the Fall of Big Consulting Creates Better Paths for Corporate ESG

Why Corporations Must Source Sustainability Expertise Differently

Executive Summary

The paradox facing today’s corporations is stark: Legacy consulting titans are shrinking just as organizational demand for deep, operational ESG and climate-transition capabilities hits an all-time high. McKinsey, for example, faces its largest layoffs in nearly 100 years, shedding over 5,000 jobs—with similar shedding happening at Deloitte and other major consulting firms. More importantly, the large-firm consulting sector is also losing reputational clout.

Meanwhile, ESG consulting is projected to grow from $10.8 billion in 2024 to $31.5 billion by 2033. Climate change consulting alone will expand from $6.45 billion to $10.15 billion by 2032. This timing creates a fundamental strategic challenge: How do you access world-class ESG expertise when the traditional gatekeepers are losing their grip?

The practical solution requires abandoning the artificial separation between sustainability and business strategy that characterizes most current ESG programs. Corporations should adopt multi-modal expertise sourcing—combining internal capability development, specialist boutiques, fractional experts, technology-enabled hybrids, and collaborative networks. ESG must become their operational infrastructure—ignoring the political flashpoints that occasionally flare up around it. For more on this, consider reading my piece, Who Will Decide ESG’s Future.

Introduction—The Inflection Point

The consulting landscape stands at an inflection point. The traditional powerhouses that once dominated corporate advisory services are facing unprecedented disruption. The combination of AI automation, talent exodus, and cultural skepticism of institutional expertise has fundamentally weakened their historic value proposition. Yet paradoxically, this upheaval arrives precisely when corporations face their most complex strategic challenges in decades: navigating climate transition and ESG strategy implementation.

The decline in the perceived relevance of large consulting firms is not a single-event phenomenon but a confluence of long-term structural shifts, self-inflicted wounds, and powerful external shocks. So again, where do you go for world-class ESG expertise when the old guard seems to be fading? This analysis provides a practical map based on real market dynamics and operational evidence from successful ESG implementations.

The combination of AI automation, talent exodus, and cultural skepticism of institutional expertise has fundamentally weakened the consulting giants—precisely when corporations face their most complex challenges in decades.

Historical Context—How Big Consulting Rose (and Why It Mattered)

The Post-War Boom and Managerial Complexity (1950s-1970s)

The post-World War II economic expansion created massive, complex, multinational corporations. These behemoths faced new challenges: organizing global supply chains, entering new markets, and managing diverse product portfolios. Consulting firms offered something internal teams often lacked—a seemingly objective, data-driven methodology for solving problems. They sold general managerial expertise and, importantly, prestige. Hiring McKinsey was not just about getting an answer; it was a signal to the board and the market that management was serious about change.

The “Up or Out” Model

This internal engine ensured constant renewal of talent. Young, brilliant MBAs from top schools were hired, worked exhaustively—and then they either rose through the ranks or left to become high-level executives in client companies. Obviously, this created a powerful alumni network that became a primary source of future business for the parent consultancy firms from which they came—guaranteeing persistent multi-million-dollar engagements for advisory services.

The Digital Revolution and Outsourcing (1980s-1990s)

The rise of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems like SAP and Oracle created a gold rush. These systems were incredibly complex and expensive to implement. Firms like Accenture (then Arthur Andersen's consulting arm) and IBM Global Services built massive practices around installing and configuring this software—locking clients into additional layers of multi-year, multi-million-dollar contracts. Consulting firms soon offered to take over non-core, often troublesome, functions of a business—Information Technology, Human Resource Administration, Finance, and Customer Service. They promised cost savings through economies of scale and deep expertise.

Large consultancies once sold not just answers but prestige—yet today, that very model is eroding under scrutiny and structural change.

During this period, the ‘consulting firm brand’ became synonymous with strategic wisdom and operational excellence. They were the “corporate doctors”—brought in to heal ailing businesses or supercharge healthy ones.

The Cracks—Emerging Doubts and Structural Weaknesses

High-Profile Failures and Scandals (Early 2000s-Present)

The most iconic example remains ENRON and Arthur Andersen. It’s been a quarter of the century since Andersen's dual role as auditor and consultant for ENRON created a catastrophic conflict of interest—which ultimately led to its dissolution. This was a watershed moment that first caused the public and regulators to question the objectivity and ethics of these consulting behemoths. Critics began to argue that consultancies often sold “cookie-cutter” strategies that were intellectually elegant but poorly suited to a specific company’s culture, market—and sometimes even the problem it purported to solve. (Incidentally, the same complaint is often heard today regarding ‘checkbox compliance’ and sustainability audit systems in ESG that were designed by many of these same firms.)

The Erosion of the Expertise Monopoly

As technology eventually became the core of every business, companies like Google, Amazon, and Apple began to attract the top talent that once flocked to consultancies. Corporations built their own sophisticated internal strategy and data science teams—finding these internal teams more attuned to the company’s specific needs and culture than external consultants were. The market has since seen an explosion of highly specialized firms focusing exclusively on digital marketing, cybersecurity, sustainability, and now AI implementation.

The “Mistrust of Experts” Cultural Shift

A crucial moment came about five years ago, around the arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic. It was marked by a broad, politically-motivated skepticism of institutional authority—from media to science to government. And it soon lapped at the shores of corporate expertise. When expert guidance on public health is widely dismissed, the recommendations of a 28-year-old MBA with a PowerPoint deck are even more easily questioned—regardless of the large firm whose logo is on the slides. This cultural current makes it harder for consultants to legitimize their suggestions solely on the basis of their brand name.

On top of that, the decline of big consultancy’s dominance in ESG and climate consulting specifically, reflects broader structural failures in their traditional model. A recent estimate attributed to IBM stated that 45% of current consulting work can be automated—primarily because AI is now more efficient at the data analysis and pattern recognition that forms the foundation of junior consultant work. In climate consulting specifically, this automation threat is acute: carbon footprint calculations, compliance mapping, and regulatory analysis increasingly require sophisticated high-volume data processing as opposed to nuanced strategic thinking.

The credibility gap became even more existential for many consulting firms when the corporate sustainability claims they produced for their clients faced intense scrutiny for greenwashing. The upshot of this emerging reality is that the aforementioned 28-year-old MBA from McKinsey recommending carbon strategies is now also viewed as lacking the operational credibility borne from actual experience that corporations pursuing legitimate climate transitions demand. This mirrors my consistent argument that authenticity and operational substance matter more than superficial reporting exercises.

The Perfect Storm—AI, Economics, and the Pandemic

The AI Disruption (The Self-Inflicted Wound?)

This is the most ironic and damning threat. Consulting’s core product has always been analysis and recommendation—processing data, identifying patterns, and suggesting a beneficial course of action. Advanced AI and machine learning tools can now analyze vast datasets, identify trends, and generate strategic options faster, cheaper, and often more accurately than a team of junior consultants. The fact is that scores of such newly graduated ‘whiz kids’ have historically formed the foundational ‘engine’ of all major consulting firms.

Automating the Bottom of the Pyramid

The traditional consulting model is a pyramid. The highly paid partners at the top are supported by an enormous base of junior analysts who do the grueling work of data gathering, cleaning, and preliminary analysis. AI is rapidly automating this very work, demolishing the economic engine of the model. Why hire a team of ten young MBAs for six months when an AI system can do 80% of the foundational work in a week or less?

The evidence confirms this shift: In 2024, only 14% of companies hired external consultants for ESG reporting, compared to almost 9 of every 10 in 2022. Instead, 67% added full-time staff to manage ESG data collection and the reporting systems that their expensive consultants had designed—and probably hoped to manage. This shift represents more than cost-cutting, though—it signals growing recognition that sustainability requires embedded and ongoing expertise rather than episodic advisory engagements.

AI is demolishing the economic engine of the consulting pyramid—why hire ten MBAs when an AI system can do 80% of the work in a week?

The Value-for-Money Reckoning

In an era of increased cost scrutiny, CFOs are also, understandably, taking a hard look at seven- and eight-figure consulting bills. Better analytical tools now allow for more accurate assessment of the return on investments. In connection with consulting advisory services, that ROI is often murky, difficult to measure, and challenging to justify. Clients are increasingly demanding pricing models tied to tangible outcomes or shared risk/reward—moving away from simple daily- and hourly-rate billing.

The Pandemic Acceleration

Then, along came COVID-19—and acted as a forced experiment. It proved that companies could make critical strategic decisions swiftly without embarking on a months-long, multi-million-dollar consulting study. They didn’t have a choice in the midst of nationwide lockdowns where, in many cases, the majority of their employees were considered “non-essential.” The situation underscores my fundamental view that operational embedding is vastly more crucial than slick analyses. Companies discovered they could achieve transformational results through internal capabilities when external constraints forced rapid decision-making.

The ESG Demand Paradox (Rising Need, Falling Fit)

As stated at the outset, despite big consulting’s structural challenges, demand for ESG and climate expertise is surging. The global ESG consulting market reached $10.8 billion in 2024, advancing at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 13.2% toward $31.5 billion by 2033—and may even reach $39 billion by 2034. Climate change consulting will grow from $6.45 billion to at least $10.15 billion by 2032. Who will fill this burgeoning need?

The pandemic proved companies could make critical strategic decisions swiftly without embarking on a months-long, multi-million-dollar consulting study.

Market and Behavior Signals

The hiring statistics tell the story: The technology sector saw 60% growth in green job postings, while 23% of job postings at utility companies now require green skills. Simultaneously, sustainability roles in finance departments increased by 11% and in legal by 14%—due to the higher exposure companies now face on climate issues. Even more surprising is the share of green talent hired into manufacturing—a jump of 7%.

Further, more sustainability executives now report directly to CEOs—rising from around 20% to more than 30% within the past five years (a staggering jump of more than half). Today, almost a third of companies brief their boards annually on sustainability risks.

How to Obtain Sustainability Guidance Now?

This creates a fundamental strategic challenge: Demand + Complexity = The need for different sourcing models. The traditional consulting approach of episodic advisory engagements obviously cannot address the operational embedding that successful ESG implementation requires.

Consultancies recognize this shift. They’re pivoting from recommending what to do to actually doing it and offering to manage it long-term. For example, global consulting firms that can not only develop designs of Scope 3 aligned frameworks for the entire international value chain at a transnational corporation, but can also build, integrate and operate those frameworks—perhaps using AI-powered platforms to run them—will survive.

But not every company that requires ESG and climate consulting needs or wants this kind of highly elevated operational integration. So where will everyone else get the more granular, uniquely specialized or locally specific sustainability expertise they need?

Demand + Complexity = The need for different sourcing models.

Sustainability requires embedded and ongoing expertise rather than episodic advisory engagements.

The Emerging Ecosystem—Five Models for ESG Expertise

Specialist Boutiques

Boutique sustainability consulting firms are capturing market share at unprecedented rates, growing 38% faster than traditional consulting powerhouses over the past two years. These firms, typically employing fewer than 50 consultants, offer hyper-specialized expertise in narrow domains like Scope 3 emissions management, circular economy implementation, or blue carbon strategies.

The boutique advantage is structural. While big firms struggle with bureaucratic overhead and generalist approaches, boutiques can pivot quickly to emerging regulations like the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) or develop cutting-edge expertise in areas like decarbonization guidance for specialized supply chains. Companies investing less than $500,000 on their ESG initiatives want partners who understand their unique challenges and can deliver measurable results.

This specialization represents exactly the trend that is currently emerging: Deep domain expertise is becoming essential, where value creation lies in the actual operational implementation—not flashy PowerPoint decks. Boutiques excel at the operational substance that creates competitive advantage—skipping over the stumbling block of compliance theater that damaged reputations at larger firms.

Deep domain expertise is becoming essential, where value creation lies in operational implementation—not flashy PowerPoint decks.

The Individual Expert Renaissance (Fractional/Independent)

The number of full-time independent consultants has grown by 6.5% to reach 27.7 million in 2024. This growth is particularly pronounced in sustainability, where “fractional sustainability officers” provide executive-level strategic guidance without the overhead of full-time employment.

The independent model offers unique advantages in ESG consulting. Unlike big firm consultants who rotate between industries, independent experts often bring decades of operational experience in specific sectors. At Business Talent Group—an on-demand marketplace that connects subject-matter experts, interim executives and project managers with leading companies—two-thirds of their independent consultants have both consulting and operational expertise. The company, which serves more than 50% of Fortune 100 corporations, states that this “unique dual perspective” is an extremely powerful problem-solving attribute. (More about the fundamentals of problem solving in a future article).

Fractional ESG consultants are particularly well-positioned for the current market. Companies need strategic oversight but often lack sufficient workload to justify full-time C-suite sustainability roles. A fractional model allows organizations to access executive-level expertise for 20-30 hours monthly at roughly 60-70% the cost of a full-time hire.

In my experience, independent experts deliver the operational credibility that successful ESG implementation demands. They’ve typically managed actual transformations rather than just analyzed them—which aligns with my repeated emphasis on operational embedding over theoretical frameworks.

Fractional ESG consultants deliver operational credibility that successful implementation demands.

Corporate In-House Expertise Development

The most dramatic shift may be corporations’ aggressive move to internalize sustainability expertise. As alluded to above, technology, information and media sectors saw a 60% jump in green job postings in 2024 compared to 2023, while 23% of job postings at public utilities are now basically “green.” Even sustainability roles in finance departments grew by 11%, with legal also increasing by 14%—driven by the increased liability exposure companies face on climate-related issues. And who could have predicted that in just 12 months, the share of green talent hired into the manufacturing sector would go up by 7%! The emergence of roles like “ESG Controller”—now employed by over half of Fortune 100 companies—demonstrates how sustainability is becoming embedded in core business functions.

This internalization reflects recognition that ESG integration requires ongoing cultural change rather than external recommendations. It mirrors the successful implementations I've observed where sustainability becomes integral to value creation rather than a parallel requirement imposed by external stakeholders. The latter has always made ESG seem like a compliance burden instead of the competitive advantage driver that it really is.

The most dramatic shift is corporations aggressively internalizing sustainability expertise—embedding it as a core business function.

Technology-Enabled Consulting Hybrids

The consulting firms thriving in the new landscape leverage technology to enhance rather than replace human expertise. Deloitte’s “GreenLight Solution” maps investment pathways and accesses a global database covering 16,000 incentive programs across 70 countries, while its “GreenSpace Tech” platform connects clients with climate technology providers.

This hybrid approach addresses a critical market need. While AI can automate data analysis, there is no question that successful climate transition requires nuanced judgment, stakeholder management, and cultural change leadership. These are areas where human expertise remains irreplaceable. The most successful firms are using technology to eliminate mundane tasks while focusing consultants on high-value strategic work.

This represents the “AI-Augmented Consultant” model—where technology handles the analysis and frees the human consultants to focus on judgment, stakeholder management, and implementation guidance. It’s this shift from advice to hands-on implementation support that creates lasting value.

Networks and Collaborative Models

Complex ESG challenges require multi-disciplinary expertise that no single consultant can provide. Independent consultants therefore are forming networks—and boutique firms are forming consortiums—to tackle large-scale projects while maintaining their specialized focus.

These collaborative models offer clients access to deep expertise across multiple domains—like carbon accounting, regulatory compliance, stakeholder engagement, and supply chain transformation—without the overhead of big firm bureaucracy. For consultants, these networks provide access to larger projects while maintaining autonomy and specialization.

Each Model Has Important Advantages:—

• Boutiques: Agility (which accounts for their 38% faster growth), specialization, cost-effectiveness (typically, 30-50% savings vs. big firms)

• Fractional: Executive expertise at 60-70% cost of full-time hires plus superior operational credibility

• In-house: Cultural embedding, ongoing capability, direct CEO reporting (which is already happening in 30% of companies)

• Tech-Hybrids: Optimized scale of analysis capabilities combined with experienced human judgment plus access to global databases

• Networks: Multi-disciplinary expertise without the enormous bureaucratic overhead—plus flexible project assembly dynamics (allowing client companies to receive “greater value than the sum of the parts” might suggest)

What Corporations Actually Need

Matching Real Business Challenges to the Capabilities You Must Source

Modern ESG challenges demand four critical capabilities that align with operational value creation:—

Crucial Need: Implementation Over Analysis

Companies no longer need elaborate PowerPoint decks explaining why climate action matters. They need practical guidance on execution—how to redesign supply chains, implement carbon accounting systems, and manage stakeholder transitions. This favors consultants with operational experience over analytical frameworks.

Companies no longer need elaborate slide decks explaining why climate action matters. They need practical guidance on execution.

In my work restructuring companies across multiple sectors, the most successful sustainability initiatives have always begun with identifying specific business constraints—energy costs, labor turnover, supply chain disruptions, waste or water management expenses, and/or regulatory exposure—then engineering solutions that address those constraints while simultaneously advancing environmental or social aims (adjacent and aligned ESG objectives).

Crucial Need: Regulatory Navigation

With nearly 50,000 EU and some 3,000 US companies affected by CSRD and similar regulations emerging globally, companies need real-time expertise in how to address the evolving compliance requirements. This creates opportunities for specialists who can provide ongoing regulatory intelligence rather than periodic compliance audits.

Crucial Need: Credibility With Stakeholders

In an era of greenwashing scrutiny, ESG recommendations must withstand external validation. This favors consultants with deep technical expertise and operational track records over generalists whose primary credential is their prestigious firm affiliation. This requires no further explanation. Deep expertise is immediately discernable: It’s the difference between an experienced lifeguard and the salesguy who just works for the handbook publisher: Who would you want at the beach when you get a cramp in the water?

Crucial Need: Cultural Integration

Successful ESG transformation requires embedding sustainability into organizational culture and decision-making processes. Such internal change management work is inherently suited to ongoing relationships rather than episodic engagements.

From my experience across multiple turnaround situations, I have seen that when ESG initiatives address specific business vulnerabilities that could otherwise impair value creation, risk-adjusted returns improve. Organizations achieving genuine strategic value from ESG investments do three critical things: (1) Embed sustainability considerations into core operational processes; (2) Align incentive structures to support integrated objectives; and (3) Maintain measurement systems that demonstrate clear connections between environmental or social initiatives and financial performance. This kind of intrinsic change management is not accomplished by consultants who periodically “helicopter in.”

When ESG initiatives address specific business vulnerabilities, risk-adjusted returns improve.

The Overarching Goal: Sustainability drives improved EBITDA. When ESG is tied to business constraints and operational improvement, margin expansion follows. It’s that simple. You need an operator to get there, not an oracle.

The Regional and Sectoral Variation Now Arising in the Consulting Landscape

Europe currently leads the transition toward specialized providers—driven by CSRD requirements and aggressive climate policies. European companies increasingly favor boutique firms and independent experts who can navigate complex regulatory frameworks while providing culturally sensitive implementation guidance.

North America seems to be developing a hybrid approach, with large firms maintaining stronger positions in strategic advisory while specialist providers capture implementation work. This is understandable given the regulatory ambiguity in the United States around climate disclosure requirements and related issues.

The Asia-Pacific region represents the fastest-growing ESG consulting market, with projected 8% five-year compound annual growth. This is driving demand for local expertise that understands regional supply chains, how local and international regulatory environments intersect and diverge—and how to navigate what has become perhaps the most complex ‘stakeholder expectation landscape’ on the planet.

Practical Guidance to Tailor Your Sourcing Strategy for ESG and Climate Consulting

The regulatory intensity of your region matters. Therefore, use the following combinations depending on where you operate:—

• Europe: Specialist providers + ongoing regulatory intelligence

• North America: Hybrid model + internal capability building

• Asia-Pacific: Local expertise networks + regional consortiums

Economics and Incentives of the New Model

The economic drivers behind this transition are compelling for both clients and consultants. As discussed, companies report cost savings of 30-50% when engaging specialist providers versus big consulting firms, while independent consultants can earn $100,000+ annually working fractional arrangements.

The cost efficiency stems from eliminating big-firm overhead while accessing more targeted expertise. A specialist carbon accounting consultant charging $750 per day for 50 days of work ($37,500 annually) provides substantially more value than a full-time sustainability manager costing $140,000/year plus benefits. For complex projects requiring multiple specialties, networks of independent experts can deliver comprehensive solutions at competitive rates.

Other models include project-based lump-sum contracts for specific delivered results. This also aligns with the ongoing shift toward outcomes-based pricing and shared risk/reward models. Clients increasingly prefer pricing models tied to tangible outcomes, moving away from simple daily rate billing.

Risks, Limitations and Quality Assurance

Of course, the post-big-consulting world presents several challenges:—

Quality Control and Standardization: Independent providers and boutiques may lack standardized approaches, potentially creating inconsistencies in advice quality. Mitigation: Certification programs and network governance structures—where boutique firms or consultant networks establish formal peer review processes and shared quality standards.

Scalability Constraints: Boutiques may face challenges scaling to global enterprise-wide transformations across multinational value chains. Mitigation: Allow boutiques to create consortia and retain your own “integrator” to oversee the overall effort. This could be an internal project management officer (PMO) or an external project management specialist. (Project Management, when done right, is its own separate skillset—which I will unpack in a future piece.)

Integration Complexities: Even smaller corporations working with multiple specialist ESG or climate consulting providers need coordination capabilities. Mitigation: Outcomes-based contracts and systematic internal program management.

Credibility Gaps: Despite their expertise, independent consultants may struggle to gain board-level credibility for major strategic decisions. Some transformational initiatives may still require the perceived objectivity and prestige of established large-firm brands (the old “nobody-ever-got-fired-for-buying-IBM”-effect). Mitigation: Independent consultants can overcome credibility challenges through systematic documentation of their track record, including quantifiable outcomes from previous engagements and client testimonials that demonstrate measurable impact. They can also secure endorsements from recognizable industry leaders or by partnering with established organizations that can vouch for their capabilities.

On this point, it is important to note that there will likely remain a small, elite consulting tier for pure strategy advice on the most complex, CEO-level problems (mega-mergers and existential threats). However, this represents a much smaller market than existed before—and a large portion of this kind of work is likely to fall outside of what most companies will consider to be their ESG and climate consulting scope.

Strategic Implications and Actionable Playbook

As the meltdown of the traditional mega-firm consulting environment progresses, forward-thinking companies should develop multi-modal ESG expertise sourcing strategies:—

1. Audit Your Existing Capabilities

Assess internal ESG maturity versus external needs. Map what should be embedded internally and what requires external sourcing. Most organizations discover they need deep operational embedding (i.e., internal expertise) for culture change and execution, while requiring external specialists for regulatory navigation and technical implementation.

2. Build a Multi-Modal Sourcing Model to Fill Gaps Where Internal Maturity Is Lacking

• Strategic Foundation: Use established boutique firms or senior independent consultants to develop your overall ESG strategy and framework

• Implementation Excellence: Engage specialist practitioners for technical work—like carbon accounting, supply chain mapping, and stakeholder engagement

• Ongoing Advisory: Establish fractional or retainer relationships with senior experts for continuous strategic guidance

3. Pilot Outcomes-Based Pricing

Test new models by engaging a boutique or fractional expert on a single material use-case (Scope 3 decarbonization, supplier transition) with clear performance metrics and—where possible and applicable—shared risk/reward structures.

4. Invest in a Tech-Enabled Backbone

Build data platforms and regulatory dashboards rather than expensive, episodic, long-form studies. Ensure that the consultant building your strategic foundation (as mentioned in item 2) creates infrastructure for ongoing monitoring and optimization. Don’t emulate the old big-firm playbook which built models based on periodic assessments (checkbox compliance).

5. Formalize Network Integration

Appoint a coordinator—either internal PMO or external specialist—to align multiple provider efforts toward measurable outcomes. This role ensures consistent methodology and prevents conflicting recommendations.

The value proposition shifts from recommending what to do to actually doing it and managing it long-term. Ideally, your implementation specialists and your ongoing advisors will help you to build your internal ESG capabilities so that the long-term management becomes part of your solid operational embedding of the ESG implementation.

Successful ESG consultants of the future won’t be replaced by AI but will be empowered by it, using technology to handle data analysis while focusing on high-value tasks: nuanced judgment, stakeholder management, cultural change leadership, and creative problem-solving.

Conclusion—The Strategic Choice

The historical arc of large consulting firms is a story of the rise and fall of a specific form of information asymmetry. They rose to power because they had methodologies, data, and talent that their clients did not. Their decline is driven by the broad-based availability (called “democratization” by some) of that data and talent—and the emergence of new technology (AI) that can process information with superhuman efficiency.

The decline of consulting giants is driven by the broad-based availability of data and talent—plus the rise of AI that processes information with superhuman efficiency.

The path forward for large consulting firms is not to cling to their old identity as oracles who deliver answers from on high. Instead, they must become true partners—embedding themselves in their clients’ challenges, sharing the risks, and leveraging technology not as a product to sell, but as a tool to deliver tangible, measurable value that is tailored to the specific challenges of each client.

Importantly, the era of the individual expert has arrived—not as a replacement for institutional knowledge—which each company must seek to mature internally. The individual expert consultant will now be a more effective option to deliver the deep, specialized expertise—based on actual operational experience. This is what modern, complex ESG implementations demand. The future belongs to agile networks of such deep experts who can provide ongoing strategic guidance while collaborating on complex, multi-disciplinary challenges.

The era of the individual expert has arrived, delivering specialized, operational expertise that modern ESG demands.

CEOs therefore face an urgent strategic choice: Will they cling to legacy consulting models, or will they capitalize on the opportunity to integrate ESG as their operational advantage—embedding effective sustainability into every layer of production, governance and culture? The most successful organizations I’ve advised view ESG not as a reporting obligation or risk management exercise, but as a methodology for identifying and implementing operational improvements that create value for multiple stakeholders simultaneously.

The companies mastering this integration today will establish competitive advantages that persist long after the current upheaval in the world of consulting comes to an end. Hence, the winners in this race will be those who act now, engaging with the new ecosystem of available ESG talent to transform their operational frameworks using forward-looking sustainability approaches for strategic value creation.

The winners emerging after the current upheaval in the world of consulting comes to an end, will be those who act now—and engage with the new ecosystem of available ESG talent—to transform their operational frameworks using forward-looking sustainability approaches for strategic value creation.