The 6 figures of the Belgian Consulting Industry

A 5-year study on the 29 leading firms in Business, IT & Engineering Services and their
performance
Introduction
Where is useful data when you need it?
What you are about to read is the result of analyzing the 29 most important consultancies of
Belgium for the last 5 years. This analysis was conducted using about 1500 pages of financial
and social statements made available by the NBB.
Some Context
According to the National Bank of Belgium, the Belgian GDP in 2013 was roughly 389,3
bn. The aggregate revenues of the 29 companies were aout to study accounts for 0,38% of
that amount that same year< (1,467 bn)
These 0,38% get a lot of attention from customers, prospects, researchers and candidates from
diverse industries and backgrounds. Why? The consulting industry is a destination of choice
for young graduates and experienced professionals who want to become a trusted advisor for
board members and managers of medium and large companies.
Despite the prominent role it plays in todays economy, very little useful information
usually perspires through mainstream media about consulting as a job, an industry, or even
as a group of competitors fighting for deals and talent.
We started this investigation with one belief: the economics of consulting are quite simple
to understand from an outside perspective, via the analysis of financial and social
statements. Consulting indeed is essentially a people business, making it easier to approach
than assets-heavy industries, where human capital is only a fraction of total costs. This will
hopefully answer the question some of my MBA professors and colleagues might have: Why
would you go through such trouble, financial statements are nothing but a photoshopped
version of the economic reality of a company!
This report will hopefully help rebalance the information asymmetry between Belgian
candidates and prospective consulting employers, or that it will better inform prospects,
journalists, policy-makers and researchers about how the leading intellectual capital firms
are doing in Belgium.
A study on 29 companies cant explain the whole industry, obviously. However, it gives a
good insight on its driving forces. Indeed professional services are a fairly polarized market:
on one side stand large, international consultancies, on the other stand the legions of selfemployed experts who chose freelancing over salaried employment. The top 29 firms are
thereby a fairly representative sample of the market trends and fundamentals. The search

for mid-size regional players did not yield large results. If anything, these are niche providers
who spun off (or out) from the larger branded consultancies that trained them.
Methodology
We have divided the Belgian consulting industry into 3 segments: Management Consulting,
IT consulting and Engineering Services. Each segment is made of 9 to 10 firms.
Although all its participants are called consultants, there can be gaping differences between
them, based on geographical reach, industrial or functional expertise, delivery and invoicing
models, customer engagement methodologies, business development strategy and sales
processes, etc. Some firms belonging to the same segment are hardly comparable in terms of
skills, client typology and issues solved. Some firms from different segments also happen to
meet on the field in bidding wars to win the same deals.
However, very simple questions can be asked to all of these companies, who despite their
differences can equally address the worries of prospective candidates, such as:
- How much do they pay their people on average?
- How much do they spend on training?
- Are they profitable?
- Do international consultancies use more local or imported staff to work on
assignments?
- How good are they at keeping people?
- Are they on a growing trend?

Each of our report chapter brings a factual answer to one of these questions
Disclaimer: This report is a fact-based investigation using publicly available data. It does
not proceed from an internal assessment of its performance and management teams
effectiveness. It has been assembled in good faith and its author should authorize any
utilization outside of this report. He can be reached at the following email address
adhubert@eidosinsight.com.
Disclaimer 2: McKinsey and Bain do not provide detailed accounts of their activity, hence
their absence here. We also made a choice to not include IBM, HP or TCS and Infosys, as it
would have been impossible to unbundle their Hardware-related business from their
Consulting business figures. This report is therefore about consulting pure players only.

I/ Are they on a growing trend?

Here below is a 2009-2013 overview of end-year FTE (Full-Time Equivalent) on each
companys payroll.

2009-2013 FTE EVOLUTION

MANAGEME
NT
CONSULTIN
G

2013 2012 2011 2010 2009

BCG

118

108

101

97

96

Accenture

715

703

750

680

724

Roland
Berger

62

52

43

40

35

A.D. Little

25

27

30

33

35

AT Kearney

25

27

28

32

31

KPMG
Advisory

190

177

168

128

126

Deloitte
Consulting

497

515

473

432

403

PWC
Business
Advisors

58

56

55

42

43

E&Y
Business
Services

358

144

95

73

70

Kurt Salmon

25

28

36

45

31

TOTAL

2073 1837 1779 1602 1594

IT CONSULTING

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

McKinsey Solutions

59

47

28

N/A

N/A

Capgemini

689

713

740

705

635

Sopra

71

71

60

56

59

Atos

768

832

882

591

647

Keyrus

87

92

83

66

90

Unisys Consulting

95

109

108

151

161

CSC

474

533

526

472

405

Adneom

137

146

114

37

13

Trasys

272

284

301

292

359

Ordina

499

488

486

482

528

TOTAL

3151

3315

3328

2852

2897

ENGINEERING
SERVICES

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

Altran

564

595

618

634

694

Alten

244

281

323

358

204

Assystem

93

69

38

11

Akka

387

379

330

302

267

Belgatech

122

101

56

40

12

Pauwels

161

114

85

66

62

Matis

139

126

117

104

93

MCA

142

123

112

98

68

Intys

61

51

37

19

16

TOTAL

1913

1839

1716

1632

1417

Analysis - Management Consulting FTE Evolution

The top10 shows a significant 30% headcount growth from 2009 through to 2013 (from 1594
to 2073 FTE). The Belgian market for management consulting is proving resilient to the crisis
despite some actors being better than others at harnessing this growth.
All things being equal, E&Y seems to display an explosive growth pattern that we cant
definitively assure the root cause of. However it takes part to the general trend of Big Four
firms to engage more and more into management consulting.
2nd-tier firms such as Arthur D Little, AT Kearney and Kurt Salmon are on a bumpy road
with important year-on-year variations and an overall 5-year FTE decline.
Analysis - IT Consulting FTE Evolution
The top 10 displays here a more modest 5-year FTE 8,7% growth.
Here again, only one outlier: Adneom, who grew from 13 to 137 FTE in 5 years.

Steady decline from Unisys and Trasys along the emergence of McKinsey Solutions raises
the hypothesis of a multidimensional IT services market involving heterogeneous growth
potential and business requirements.
Noteworthy is the fact that the IT consulting top 10 has declining FTE since 2011, which
raises the hypothesis of the growing usage of offshore-heavy managed IT & Telecom services
thus requiring less onsite presence.
Analysis - Engineering Services FTE Evolution
The Engineering Services top9 has grown every year since 2009 from 1417 to 1913 FTE,
which means a 35% 5-year growth rate. This growth has mostly benefited small entrants
whose size 5 years ago was only a fraction of what it is today (especially Intys, Assystem,
Belgatech, and MCA who have doubled in size or more) while incumbents have grown at a
much slower pace.
The outlier is Altran, who has in a 35% growth market lost positions to competitors each
year since 2009. Altran losing presence in such a dynamic market might mean that the new
entrants growth is happening at its expense. The question becomes: What do they do
better? and/or What is Altrans problem? (Which is roughly the same question)
II/ How good are they at keeping people?
Here now is a 2009-2013 overview of each companys yearly turnover. People turnover is a
measure of a companys ability to retain people. We have computed it as follows: Number or
FTE out that year/Year-end FTE. Another methodology was possible: Number of FTE out
that year/Average FTE for the Year but the results only slightly differed. If anything, the first
methodology the one we adopted - is more flattering due to end-of-year traditional
recruitment efforts to make the numbers before the fiscal year closes.
2009-2013 EMPLOYEE TURNOVER EVOLUTION
MANAGEMENT
CONSULTING

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

BCG

33%

33%

46%

41%

24%

Accenture

17%

22%

23%

26%

36%

Roland Berger

11%

21%

19%

28%

23%

AD Little

28%

30%

33%

21%

17%

AT Kearney

28%

41%

57%

38%

48%

KPMG Advisory

15%

19%

17%

30%

25%

Deloitte Cltg

29%

22%

25%

26%

20%

PWC Business
Advisors

17%

23%

15%

33%

21%

E&Y Business
Services

15%

22%

34%

29%

20%

Kurt Salmon

72%

64%

56%

24%

10%

Average

27%

30%

32%

30%

25%

IT CONSULTING

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

McKinsey Solutions

19%

9%

0%

N/A

N/A

Capgemini

17%

20%

24%

15%

21%

Sopra

18%

18%

23%

14%

15%

Atos

14%

12%

15%

16%

13%

Keyrus

18%

12%

11%

52%

16%

Unisys Consulting

13%

15%

67%

23%

20%

CSC

19%

12%

14%

11%

11%

Adneom

62%

67%

24%

41%

46%

Trasys

15%

19%

23%

40%

19%

Ordina

17%

20%

26%

22%

19%

Average

21%

20%

23%

26%

20%

ENGINEERIN
G
SERVICES

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

Altran

35%

34%

39%

65%

N/D

Alten

42%

56%

61%

34%

49%

Assystem

31%

26%

37%

18%

100%

Akka

25%

21%

24%

21%

19%

Belgatech

23%

12%

41%

23%

50%

Pauwels

16%

23%

29%

77%

31%

Matis

29%

29%

32%

38%

26%

MCA

42%

33%

35%

24%

15%

Intys

33%

35%

27%

42%

38%

Average

31%

30%

36%

38%

41%

Analysis Management Consulting People Turnover

With an industry average revolving around 29% during the 2009-2013 period, management
consulting lives up to its reputation. Under certain conditions, a firm with a 28% employee
turnover or more could hypothetically be made of entirely different people after a 3,5 years
cycle. Of course this is a theoretical view, but quite revealing of the low survival rates the
industry is known for.
The obvious outlier is Kurt Salmon, with a rather impressive 72% rate in 2013, after already
being the worst player in 2012 and second only to AT Kearney in 2011 (64% and 56%).
Analysis IT Consulting People Turnover
The top10 IT consulting firms employee turnover is 22% for the period 2009-2013, it is the
lowest of the 3 segments weve studied. Adneoms very high turnover resonates with its very
fast FTE growth (see above). Sustaining such a headcount growth next to such high turnover
figures, Adneoms behavior yields the hypothesis of a high-speed recruitment process in
which consultants become the expendable variables of a short-cycle trial and error strategy.
This certainly proves efficient in the short run, but the thought that Adneom is currently
growing at the expense of its human capital - not along and thanks to it is impossible to
avoid.
Without Adneom as an outlier and Unisys exceptionally high turnover ratio in 2011, the
overall top10 average turnover ratio would be closer to 18%
Analysis Engineering Services People Turnover
Management consulting ratios seemed high at 29%: The top 9 Engineering consultancies
display an average 35% turnover ratio on the 2009-2013 period. In such a context, headcount
growth associated to employee churn put HR at the center of attention. When the average
engineering Services Company advertises its impressive recruitment objectives in business
press, little is actually known by normal folks about how even a 35% increase in the
workforce would merely offset the loss of all leavers.
The turnover ratios are one facet of the fact that engineering services firms live in a state of
permanent crisis. This has many repercussions at all levels of these companies business
performance, as we will see later in this report.
The two worst performers in the category are Alten and Altran. They incidentally are the
largest in terms of FTE count.
III/ How much do they spend on training?

We computed this KPI fairly simply by dividing the yearly formal training budget by the
salary costs. This gives us a good view of how much is spent in training for each euro of
employer costs. Each segment differentiates clearly from the 2 others in that respect.
2009-2013 TRAINING BUDGET (AS % OF SALARY
COSTS)
MANAGEMENT
CONSULTING

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

BCG

2,3%

2,6%

1,9%

1,5%

0,8%

Accenture

2,3%

2,9%

2,9%

3,3%

1,1%

Roland Berger

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

AD Little

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

AT Kearney

3,1%

3,3%

0,0%

0,0%

2,1%

KPMG Advisory

5,8%

6,8%

8,3%

9,0%

6,9%

Deloitte Cltg

6,0%

7,7%

7,4%

12,9%

10,0%

PWC Business
Advisors

0,0%

5,1%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

E&Y Business
Services

1,2%

1,8%

2,4%

0,9%

0,2%

Kurt Salmon

0,1%

0,1%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

Average

2,1%

3,0%

2,3%

2,8%

2,1%

IT CONSULTING

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

McKinsey Solutions

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

N/A

N/A

Capgemini

3,3%

3,0%

3,8%

4,4%

3,7%

Sopra

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

Atos

0,4%

0,5%

0,1%

0,1%

0,1%

Keyrus

0,1%

0,1%

0,1%

0,0%

1,8%

Unisys Consulting

0,9%

1,3%

0,3%

0,1%

0,1%

CSC

2,0%

2,4%

2,5%

0,8%

3,1%

Adneom

0,2%

0,2%

0,2%

0,3%

0,0%

Trasys

0,1%

0,1%

0,1%

0,1%

0,1%

Ordina

2,1%

2,5%

1,6%

1,2%

1,7%

Average

0,9%

1,0%

0,9%

0,8%

1,2%

ENGINEERI
NG
SERVICES

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

Altran

0,2%

0,2%

0,2%

0,2%

0,2%

Alten

0,2%

0,2%

0,2%

0,1%

0,2%

Assystem

0,2%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

Akka

0,1%

0,1%

0,1%

0,1%

0,1%

Belgatech

0,4%

0,4%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

Pauwels

0,3%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

Matis

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

MCA

0,1%

0,1%

0,1%

0,1%

0,0%

Intys

0,0%

0,6%

2,7%

2,2%

0,2%

Average

0,2%

0,2%

0,4%

0,3%

0,1%

Analysis Management Consulting Training Budget

2,46% of employee costs was dedicated to formal training in the top 10 of the management
consulting industry within the 2009-2013 period. Deloitte Consulting and KPMG Advisory
appear as the most significant outliers in the sample for their outstandingly high formal
training costs.
Notably low performers are Kurt Salmon, Arthur D. Little and Roland Berger Strategy
Consultants (close or equivalent to 0%, similarly to Engineering Services)
Analysis IT Consulting Training Budget
Overall, 1% of salary costs was dedicated to learning by the top10 IT Consulting firms during
the period covered by this report. A strong tendency to beat the average is noticeable at
Capgemini, Ordina and CSC where training cost patterns similar to management consulting
(2% and more) are observed.
On the other hand, McKinsey Solutions, Sopra, Atos, Keyrus, Trasys and Adneom practice
Engineering Services standards (near 0% formal training expenditures).

Analysis Engineering Services Training Budget

It is safe to say formal training budget is inexistent in the industry based on observable figures
and using benchmark provided by other firms claiming the consultant title.
At 0,2%, the top 9 Engineering Services training budget stands quite low compared to their
socio-economic raison dtre: fostering the professional development of an elite of scarce
R&D experts to change the world, save lives and improve daily life.
Aside from sporadic jumps in training costs from Intys, Belgatech and Pauwels, the top 9
surprisingly sticks to the 0,2% average as if it were a cross-industry policy.
Recommendation: Couldnt the marketing expenses (often bigger than training budgets by an
order of magnitude) be reduced to benefit the workforce and actually hold on the promise to
develop the skillset of the consultants?.
IV/How much do they pay their people on average?
Salary costs as declared in the annual income statement represent the all-incost of
workforce, including the employer charges, employee taxes and various subtractions related
to pension, health and social security. They provide a good proxy for average salary when one
knows the difference between the all-in cost (for the employer) and the net monthly salary
(for the employee).
We recommend the use of a conservative 2,35 multiplier to compute the all-in/net salary
difference. Example: the average all-in salary per person at BCG was 104.255 in 2012. This
gives 104255/(2,35*12)= 3@696 per month net per FTE on average.
(!) This multiplier is only a proxy that works as long as current Belgian Labor and Income
Tax regulations do not change.
2009-2013 AVERAGE SALARY COSTS
MANAGEMENT
CONSULTING

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

BCG

114.422

104.255

116.710

110.935

123.773

Accenture

119.216

108.313

106.776

94.014

110.219

Roland Berger

112.749

112.779

101.615

103.801

116.736

AD Little

120.548

122.118

103.485

86.799

87.594

AT Kearney

147.001

132.974

161.288

179.611

153.391

KPMG Advisory

74.547

70.239

59.972

67.713

88.534

Deloitte Cltg

73.033

72.093

68.748

68.206

68.596

PWC Business
Advisors

70.124

68.948

64.383

63.742

66.431

E&Y Business
Services

73.030

75.336

78.883

88.011

76.341

Kurt Salmon

66.449

69.542

86.617

67.820

83.660

Average

97.112

93.660

94.848

93.065

97.527

IT CONSULTING

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

McKinsey Solutions

114.989

109.545

68.174

N/A

N/A

Capgemini

87.364

87.144

89.830

83.387

90.088

Sopra

77.217

70.795

74.490

79.952

76.197

Atos

110.266

106.440

80.456

89.382

86.150

Keyrus

81.380

70.149

70.833

66.953

59.444

Unisys Consulting

75.309

62.363

68.490

61.612

55.947

CSC

98.859

95.611

87.208

87.466

96.424

Adneom

57.246

59.399

39.469

37.096

21.421

Trasys

78.334

77.216

72.435

86.598

76.991

Ordina

73.310

72.464

71.758

74.456

72.565

Average

85.427

81.113

72.314

74.100

70.581

ENGINEERI
NG
SERVICES

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

Altran

64.779

65.686

64.822

63.103

63.362

Alten

66.348

67.284

58.287

65.107

69.615

Assystem

53.502

46.821

35.616

24.367

63.647

Akka

58.756

54.211

53.460

53.077

52.241

Belgatech

54.645

43.068

47.814

37.753

58.831

Pauwels

49.311

46.287

47.065

53.905

54.418

Matis

63.474

60.776

60.259

51.796

53.781

MCA

49.983

52.805

51.746

44.559

45.021

Intys

64.829

61.506

52.603

59.010

53.168

Average

58.403

55.383

52.408

50.297

57.120

Analysis Management Consulting Salary Costs

Although the highest amongst the 3 segments, management consulting salaries should be
considered under an hourly perspective. It all comes down to how many hours per week one
works to get the work done, and therefore how much is made by the company in terms of
invoiceable bandwidth. These attractive salary levels are also a warning that customers do
pay for a work swiftly done, no matter the sacrifices made in terms of private life and hours
worked.
After a 4-year declining trend, the Management consulting Belgium top10 has recovered its
average salary levels of 2009.
There is a clear divide between Big Four management consulting practices and 1St and 2nd
tier management consulting pure players, with the notable exception of Kurt Salmon, whose
salary costs per FTE stand closer to Big Four averages.
Big four salary costs revolve around 71500 per year while top players go as high as 120000
to 140000 per year.
Best in class for Belgian Management Consulting top10 is AT Kearney, although an average
salary doesnt necessarily mean all classes of staff get above-market compensation.
Analysis IT Consulting Salary Costs
Broad generalizations are more challenging to extract from the top10 IT Consulting firms
salary costs analysis, with McKinsey Solutions and Adneom standing at the extremes of the
spectrum (114000 and 57000 average salary costs in 2013).
However, one interesting fact is that IT consulting salary costs from the Belgian top10 are the
only ones that display steady year-on-year increase, even at the worse moments of the crisis.
The other two segments have suffered average salary costs reduction, Management
Consulting and Engineering Services recouping their 2009 level.
Atos, CSC and Capgemini have consistently above-average salary costs across the whole 5year period.
Unisys Consulting and Keyrus have consistently been below average from 2009 to 2013.
Analysis Engineering Services Salary Costs
Altran and Alten dominate the sample in terms of salary costs across 2009 through to 2013,
closely followed by Intys and Matis who both only underperformed the average once, in
2009.
The only consistently below-average player in the top9 Engineering Services firm is MCA.
Akka is the one consistently closest to the average. Other firms come and go above and
below the average industry salary costs across the 5-year period.

An important difference with Management Consulting or IT consulting is the ability of top9

Engineering Services salary costs to stick to the mean, with firm-to-firm variances kept
within a reasonable 10-20% range.
V/ Are they profitable?
To keep things simple, we are using Operational Margin per FTE as a KPI: (Total Revenue(Subcontracting+Salary Costs))/Year-end FTE. Again, this is one of many KPI for
performance measurement; it can be improved based on actual management accounting
figures.
2009-2013 GROSS PROFIT PER FTE
MANAGEMENT
CONSULTING

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

BCG

15.294

12.570

40.118

48.803

49.352

Accenture

8.408

4.669

-6.892

10.032

7.841

Roland Berger

34.360

28.270

18.204

18.661

41.772

AD Little

2.257

15.744

-6.318

-10.561

25.435

AT Kearney

21.125

1.286

-48.125

-26.709

-14.946

KPMG Advisory

3.737

4.168

1.417

1.124

5.001

Deloitte Cltg

6.344

1.118

363

1.953

2.633

PWC Business
Advisors

-69

649

905

1.279

1.571

E&Y Business
Services

-205

3.796

3.814

417

2.563

Kurt Salmon

3.002

2.928

-29.393

22.603

9.493

Average

9.425

7.520

-2.591

6.760

13.071

IT CONSULTING

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

McKinsey Solutions

59.187

N/A

N/A

Capgemini

5.418

-386

1.783

5.736

-4.475

Sopra

4.881

4.304

-7.988

-1.503

-360

Atos

8.859

14.233

3.832

4.952

-2.835

Keyrus

3.734

5.024

7.478

3.344

212

Unisys Consulting

5.247

6.975

4.350

13.691

9.772

CSC

18.140

15.330

12.106

12.704

19.410

-567.597 -637.976

Adneom

6.321

-2.196

6.431

1.835

320

Trasys

7.631

7.016

5.079

6.679

15.530

Ordina

-4.527

-4.835

-1.772

-5.085

-3.440

Average (excl.
McKinsey)

6.190

5.052

3.478

4.706

3.793

ENGINEERI
NG
SERVICES

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

Altran

8.057

9.738

10.946

11.216

8.826

Alten

6.823

11.180

20.719

14.258

9.709

Assystem

12.580

13.511

22.137

23.471

-1.102

Akka

7.143

11.320

11.412

8.633

5.778

Belgatech

4.030

7.391

11.735

8.350

23.857

Pauwels

19.295

17.003

16.606

19.428

19.035

Matis

6.769

4.315

4.535

21

-3.977

MCA

18.274

27.924

25.045

12.443

16.875

Intys

14.517

11.000

12.385

-4.483

7.782

Average

10.832

12.598

15.058

10.371

9.643

Analysis Management Consulting Gross Profit per FTE

The top10 management consulting sample displays a V-shaped average gross profit curve,
with 2013 average profitability levels per FTE still behind those of 2009. The upward trend
could indicate a higher utilization rate of resources, although firms with intensive use of
international resources from other offices (see last chapter) might yield superior profits from
those while underutilizing their local staff. This would signify an improper resources-tomarket alignment.
Nevertheless, The Boston Consulting Group and Roland Berger Strategy Consultants
stand far above average gross profits per FTE. Other firms slalom above and below the top10
average with no homogeneous pattern.

Analysis IT consulting Gross Profit per FTE

The elephant in the room here is obviously McKinsey Solutions who boasts outstanding
gross profit per FTE levels in 2013 and deep negative profits the first two years of its
existence. Such an outlier was a liability to our average-based benchmarking, so we didnt
include it in our calculations.
Sopra and Capgemini seem to be recovering from negative profits incurred during the last
economic crisis, while Ordina has been operating at a loss during the whole period.
Trasys and Atos are doing rather well, despite the 2011 trough that the IT consulting top 10
firms seem to have all experienced, except for Keyrus and Adneom who had their 5-year
high that year.
Analysis Engineering Services Gross Profit per FTE
Engineering Services top9 firms display a reverse-V shape in terms of gross profit per FTE,
with 2011 a 5-year industry high. The downward trend since then could be a reflection of
overall industry growth and penetration by new entrants. An additional feature of engineering
services in Belgium is its commoditization, led by the appropriation of the sales process by
clients Procurement management teams (at least for the most mature, largest customers)
The eroding profits hypothesis may be confirmed in 2014 financial results, which we will
certainly follow up on in the next report (September-October 2015)
VI/How intensely do they leverage their international presence?
Aside from the marginal use of contractors and external suppliers, we believe subcontracting
costs can be interpreted as the internal transfer cost of consultants from non-local offices. If
the assumption is true, Subcontracting Costs are a good indicator of both the use of foreign
resources for Belgium-based assignments and of the market-to-capability alignment in
Belgium itself.
2009-2013 SUBCONTRACTING COSTS/SALARY COSTS
MANAGEMENT
CONSULTING

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

BCG

233,2%

260,7%

227,4%

252,4%

171,0%

Accenture

149,3%

165,6%

138,0%

190,1%

179,3%

Roland Berger

160,2%

113,5%

132,4%

103,7%

115,9%

AD Little

145,8%

148,7%

151,4%

140,2%

155,7%

AT Kearney

196,5%

201,1%

148,1%

125,5%

186,0%

KPMG Advisory

123,7%

126,2%

126,9%

168,3%

125,8%

Deloitte Cltg

136,1%

135,4%

252,9%

215,0%

222,8%

PWC Business
Advisors

134,4%

136,4%

128,1%

153,0%

156,9%

E&Y Business
Services

98,9%

169,9%

193,8%

175,6%

234,1%

Kurt Salmon

89,6%

84,4%

93,4%

84,5%

87,4%

Average

146,8%

154,2%

159,2%

160,8%

163,5%

IT CONSULTING

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

McKinsey Solutions

676,9%

1484,1%

1949,8%

N/A

N/A

Capgemini

30,2%

33,4%

42,7%

59,2%

39,0%

Sopra

45,5%

37,3%

35,1%

37,2%

42,0%

Atos

44,4%

50,0%

45,7%

31,2%

30,1%

Keyrus

43,3%

49,8%

54,6%

70,0%

49,4%

Unisys Consulting

92,9%

80,6%

94,8%

101,6%

94,2%

CSC

26,2%

25,3%

26,9%

31,5%

28,0%

Adneom

29,9%

32,2%

30,5%

N/A

N/A

Trasys

218,4%

193,0%

163,2%

132,6%

137,1%

Ordina

73,9%

90,7%

93,4%

67,7%

56,5%

Average (excl.
McKinsey)

67,2%

65,8%

65,2%

66,4%

59,5%

ENGINEERI
NG
SERVICES

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

Altran

69,6%

66,2%

66,2%

68,2%

57,1%

Alten

82,9%

60,9%

53,8%

43,3%

29,4%

Assystem

30,1%

37,5%

58,8%

111,9%

140,7%

Akka

33,5%

32,1%

31,2%

24,4%

24,0%

Belgatech

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Pauwels

107,8%

26,8%

29,6%

27,2%

132,8%

Matis

70,4%

75,4%

59,5%

60,4%

66,6%

MCA

63,8%

55,2%

47,8%

39,7%

42,3%

Intys

56,9%

64,8%

0,0%

0,0%

0,0%

Average

64,4%

52,4%

43,4%

46,9%

61,6%

Analysis Management Consulting Subcontracting intensity

As we work under the hypothesis that the bulk of subcontracting costs is actually internal
transfer prices for intra-company services, Belgium management consulting top10 firms are
the heaviest users of external help from their colleagues in Europe or beyond.
The management consulting top10 displays extraordinary use of non-local resources. Looking
at the 5-year averages though, this trend is slowing down (from 163,5% down to 146,8%).
Notable above-average outliers: BCG, AT Kearney and Accenture. The only below-average
firm is Kurt Salmon.
Analysis IT Consulting Subcontracting Intensity
Again, the setup of McKinsey Solutions activities weighs in heavily. Their sky-high
subcontracting-to-salary cost ratio is indeed declining as the business rises in autonomy,
although it remains at 7 to 1 2013.
Between 2009 and 2013, the top 10 IT consulting firms (excluding McKinsey Solutions) has
grown from 59,5% to 67,2%. This could be the reflection of the increasing use of offshore and
low-cost country resources, especially in the case of IT managed services that require a
limited exposure of back-office employees to the end customer.
Analysis Engineering Services Subcontracting Intensity
With averages similar to the IT Consulting market and after a 2011 low at 43,4%, the
engineering services top 9 shows a recovery in subcontracting ratios at around 65%.
Belgatech is the only firm without foreign branches to get resources or work done from.
Among the 4 dominant players (Altran, Alten, Akka, Assystem), theres a clear divide
between high usage of subcontracting from Altran and Alten (consistently above average
these last 3 years) and a low usage of it by Akka and Assystem, especially these last two
years.
Conclusion
A yearly follow-up version will be published on the website of Eidos InSight during the
September/October (to ensure all companies financial statements have been published)

You can contact us at adhubert@eidosinsight.com or +32 492 31 53 76.