The ALM Vanguard · 2018 ALM Media Properties, LLC 4 Buyer Ratings Guide Deal complexity and the lower quality of assets in deals has made due diligence more difficult, requiring

$$$

$$

Buyer Ratings Guide

The ALM Vanguard: Transactions-Divestitures Consulting

December 2018

Source: ALM Intelligence’s Transactions-Divestitures Consulting (c) 2018; used by licensing permissions

Tomek JankowskiSenior Analyst, Management Consulting ResearchT +1 212-457-9175 [email protected]

Authors

For more information, visit the ALM Intelligence website at www.alm.com/intelligence/industries-we-serve/consulting-industry/

© 2018 ALM Media Properties, LLC 2

Buyer Ratings Guide

Contents

Overview 3

ALM Vanguard of Transactions-Divestitures Consulting Providers 6

Provider Capability Rankings 7

Rating Level Summaries 8

Leader Assessments 9

Provider Capability Ratings 10

Best in Class Providers 11

Provider Briefs 12

Definitions 29

Methodology 31

About ALM Intelligence 33



Buyer Ratings Guide

OverviewCapability Drivers

Divestitures continue to grow as a portion of M&A, but the low-hanging fruit is gone, leaving assets whose values need to be

scrutinized more. The overall volume of M&A transactions has been down as of late 2018, but the value per deal has soared.

Mega deals are back. Record-high valuations for all assets complicates the picture: it is still very much a seller’s market. At the

same time, there is an intense drive to accelerate the execution process of deals, putting tremendous pressure on consulting

providers to compress the process while at the same time helping clients achieve the expected value from deals. This is the

sellside M&A market in 2018.

Clients – and this extends by now well into the middle-tier strata – have become more sophisticated about their portfolio and

general growth strategy, and divestitures are an important tool in that kit. This is not just for private equity companies; 2018

has seen steady growth in sellside deals driven by strategic clients. In fact, in a sign of just how integral M&A has become for

clients, divestiture numbers have been impacted more recently by a spike in clients eschewing a full divestiture in favor of

alternative structure transactions: joint ventures.

Private equity firms, as they are confronted by assets of questionable quality (but for which they will pay record levels of

multiples of earnings), have also become more sophisticated about deals. Many are developing some in-house operational

and IT resources to address such concerns. They are also more complementary than competitive with the work traditionally

carried out by investment banks or consulting providers, but clearly private equity does not want to fully rely on these external

partners. This has allowed them to assume not just more financial risk but operational risk as well, opening the door for some

private equity firms to accept carve-outs as a portfolio tool as well.

There are, as always, headwinds. There are fears that 2019 may bring a recession, the potential for a more painful “hard” Brexit,

that the ongoing trade war between the US and China could do irreparable damage to global economic relationships, and

that growing populist and nationalist sentiment could make accessing talent more difficult for firms. The 2017 tax reform in

the US brought welcome relief for corporations, but the US administration’s erratic behavior in trade policy and other areas

has sparked caution. Some worry that, for whatever policies the current administration follows, they may abruptly change in

2020 – putting a wrench in long-term growth strategies. Some clients have sped deals up, seeking to wrap them up before

2020, while others have instead chosen to wait, putting a hold on some cross-border strategic plans. Most have accepted that

political instability is an inescapable part of doing business in our modern world. Geopolitical instability has also dampened

cross-border deals to emerging market regions in some industries.

Consulting to divestituresThe consulting space for divestitures in 2017 was becoming crowded, and that trend continues. Since about 2015, an increasing

number of consulting providers offer sellside M&A services. In general, the increasing complexity of divestitures has favored

one-stop consulting shops and external project managers more than in buyside M&A, but specialists and boutiques still do

well. This complexity has also made sellside (“reverse”) due diligence a staple for US deals, for both strategic and financial

clients, though still not quite to European levels.



Buyer Ratings Guide

Deal complexity and the lower quality of assets in deals has made due diligence more difficult, requiring more resources from

consulting providers. However, clients are also under pressure to complete deals quicker, compressing the deal process and

putting further pressure on providers to dedicate more resources to each deal. This has favored the providers who are better

able to acquire technology assets and amass the talent to operate this technology.

Further, the pressure for speed notwithstanding, ultimate value has become the main goal, forcing consulting providers

to take a long-term approach to sellside deals in particular. This means looking beyond the transaction process itself and

ensuring that all impacted entities – the selling organization and the new stand-alone – fully achieve the value goals set in

the process. This has translated into paying greater attention to TSA negotiation and management, ensuring that they close

out when and as anticipated. It has also opened opportunities for long-term relationships for providers as clients seek help

reassessing and tweaking deals weeks, months, and years after Day One.

It also has resulted in a complete and multi-dimensional due diligence process that not only includes other factors beyond

finance but an integrated, matrixed model approach that takes into account how each factor impacts the others. Some

consulting providers led the charge with this complete due diligence approach a few years ago, most notably the strategy

consulting providers, but in 2018 providers with a traditional uni-factor due diligence approach have been forced to invest

heavily into broadening their due diligence offering. Clients have welcomed the greater visibility this enhanced due diligence

provides them throughout the process with less uncertainty as deals move toward the closing.

Shareholders are also becoming more sophisticated and want greater transparency into operations, growth strategy and

the associated risks. This has fueled activism that has become an important driver of sellside M&A. So much so that many

consulting providers offer services for clients that address shareholder activism. Most of these offerings are politically

defensive in nature, with only a handful addressing shareholder activism by reaching beyond strategic communications and

preemptively addressing shareholder concerns up front. Long an American problem, activist shareholder-related consulting

is much sought after in Europe in 2018. Even Japan is seeing increased consulting activity around this issue as the breakup of

huge conglomerates has opened doors for private equity firms with the resulting shareholders demanding a refocus on core

assets and improved governance, including improved risk management.

While much of this favors providers with more resources, none can completely escape the pressure on fees this massive

investment in technology assets and resources requires. The technology itself mitigates some of this through lowered costs

and increased efficiencies, and the long-term relationships also bring further opportunities. Nevertheless, transaction advisory

(both buyside and sellside) is pushing consulting providers further down the path of assetization, which fundamentally

changes the traditional consulting model. Some of the larger providers have been forced to make up deal volume in their

pipelines by delving deeper into mid-tier client deals than they have historically. These fee pressures have led to some price

erosion among the larger providers, further encouraging the development of technology solutions.




Buyer Ratings Guide

Providers in The ALM Vanguard™ Divestiture Consulting space share these essential differentiating attributes:

The tech experience: Nearly every major player in the M&A space is developing some sort of project management and

other slick client-interfacing technology tools. For some time, clients were wowed by these tools, but that shine has worn off.

Now, clients want tools that can dramatically improve their prospects for achieving maximum value in deals. Data analytics

tools are table stakes now. Providers need to not only have effective technology tools but must be able to deploy them in

conjunction with other provider expertise that significantly enhances the client experience and, ultimately, deal value.

The tech experience II: The line between technology companies and others is blurring, with just about every organization

today being forced to reinvent itself as a technology company to some degree. This is driving a lot of M&A activity with most

deals on the buyside driven by the need for companies to acquire technology assets. However, this changes operating models

and impacts everything from accounting –what is revenue recognition like in a company used to traditional products that

now has IP assets? – to talent strategies. This, in turn, is driving divestitures as the goalposts for what is a core competency

moves for clients. Successful providers in sellside M&A are not just able to help clients restructure their technology resources

in a transition, but also help reconcile their technology needs with their business strategies.

The due diligence omni-channel: Clients need a more holistic picture of the risks they are undertaking in deals to be able to

make the critical decisions throughout a deal, including whether to continue. Providers need to provide clients with that 360°

view, whether through their own in-house resources or via alliances.

Anticipating land mines: While cross-border deals involving emerging market countries are in a lull in late 2018, the basic

economic logic driving them remains, and they are not going away any time soon. At least for the short- to mid-term, the

backlash to globalization in the form of populist politics remains palpable. Successful providers must be equipped to help

clients navigate the difficult global political environment and the resulting unsettled economic waters clients operate in. This

includes traditional competencies around regulations and compliance, tax strategy, and risk management, but also needs to

extend to a new tool to their kit, political efficiency. This involves helping clients adapt tactically at every operating level to

an uncertain world.




Buyer Ratings Guide

ALM Vanguard of Transactions-Divestitures Consulting Providers

LEADERS

CHALLENGERS

Low High

Hig

hLo

w

CONTENDERS

Dep

th o

f Con

sulti

ng C

apab

ilitie

s

Breadth of Consulting Capabilities

DeloittePwC

Bain & Company

EY

Accenture

McKinsey & Company

AlixPartners

KPMG

Boston Consulting Group

L.E.K. ConsultingCrowe LLP

A.T. KearneyBaker Tilly

Rothschild & Co.

West Monroe Partners

Centric Consulting

Houlihan Lokey

Alvarez & Marsal

Du� & Phelps

FTI Consulting

goetzpartners

Grant Thornton

Oliver Wyman

Mercer

North Highland

Stax

First Key Consulting

Greenhill & Co.

Logan Consulting

Source: ALM Intelligence

The ALM Vanguard of Transactions-Divestitures Consulting Providers assesses firms in terms of their relative ability to create

impact for their clients. For this, the ALM Vanguard displays the relative position of the providers featured in this report,

deemed capable in transactions-divestitures consulting, based on an evaluation of their overall capabilities according to a

consistent set of criteria. Capability depth denotes a provider’s capacity to get results for clients, while capability breadth

indicates its ability to deploy that capacity across multiple client scenarios.

Consulting is distinctive from other industries because of the variety of client contexts that providers encounter in terms of

ambitions, needs, and abilities that alter what it takes to create impact. As providers seek to deploy their capacity to create

client impact (depth) across industry sectors, geographic regions, and interfaces with adjacent functional and technical

capabilities (breadth), they increase the complexity of their engagement models. The downward slope of the lines that

separate the tiers of the market captures the trade-off between low-complexity engagement models (designed to maximize

the capacity to create impact for a narrow set of client applications) and high-complexity engagement models (made to

maximize deployability and create impact for a wide variety of client applications).



Buyer Ratings Guide

Provider Capability Rankings

The figures below indicate the change in consulting providers’ ranks in terms of their overall capability depth, breadth, and

client impact. (See the Definitions section of this report for a detailed breakdown of underlying capabilities.) Ranking position

number one denotes the top-ranked provider.

Depth Breadth Client Impact

2017 2018 2017 2018 2017 2018

1 Boston Consulting Group

Boston Consulting Group 1 PwC EY 1 Boston Consulting

GroupBoston Consulting Group

Leader

2 Bain & Company Bain & Company 2 Deloitte PwC 2 PwC EY

3 Deloitte (Tied 3) EY 3 EY Deloitte 3 Deloitte Bain & CompanyEY (Tied 3) Deloitte (Tied 4) 4 KPMG KPMG 4 Bain & Company PwC

Houlihan Lokey (Tied 3) PwC (Tied 4) 5 Mercer Bain & Company 5 EY Deloitte

PwC (Tied 3) KPMG 6 FTI Consulting Boston Consulting Group 6 KPMG KPMG

7 KPMG Stax 7 Grant Thornton Mercer 7 AlixPartners McKinsey & Company

8 AlixPartners (Tied 8) McKinsey & Company 8 Alvarez & Marsal McKinsey &

Company 8 Alvarez & Marsal L.E.K. Consulting

Challengers

Riveron Consulting** (Tied 8)

L.E.K. Consulting (Tied 9) 9 North Highland Crowe LLP 9 Houlihan Lokey Stax

Stax (Tied 8) West Monroe Partners (Tied 9) 10 Baker Tilly FTI Consulting 10 Crowe LLP Crowe LLP

West Monroe Partners (Tied 8)

AlixPartners (Tied 11) 11 Duff & Phelps Grant Thornton 11 West Monroe

PartnersWest Monroe Partners

12 Alvarez & Marsal (Tied 12)

Alvarez & Marsal (Tied 11) 12 Crowe LLP L.E.K. Consulting 12 FTI Consulting Alvarez & Marsal

The Chertoff Group** (Tied 12) Crowe LLP (Tied 11) 13 Bain & Company North Highland 13 Riveron

Consulting** FTI Consulting

Crowe LLP (Tied 12) First Key Consulting* (Tied 11) 14 RSM** Alvarez & Marsal 14 McKinsey &

CompanyFirst Key Consulting*

McKinsey & Company (Tied 12)

FTI Consulting (Tied 15) 15 Boston Consulting

Group A.T. Kearney 15 Stax AlixPartners

Rothschilds & Co (Tied 12)

Houlihan Lokey (Tied 15) 16 Roland Berger** Accenture 16 Roland Berger** Mercer

17 FTI Consulting (Tied 17)

A.T. Kearney (Tied 17) 17 AlixPartners Baker Tilly 17 L.E.K. Consulting Grant Thornton

L.E.K. Consulting (Tied 17) Baker Tilly (Tied 17) 18 McKinsey &

Company First Key Consulting* 18 The Chertoff Group** A.T. Kearney

Roland Berger** (Tied 17)

Grant Thornton (Tied 17) 19 L.E.K. Consulting West Monroe

Partners 19 Rothschilds & Co Baker Tilly

20 goetzpartners (Tied 20) Mercer (Tied 17) 20 BDO

International** AlixPartners 20 North Highland Houlihan Lokey

North Highland (Tied 20)

Duff & Phelps (Tied 21) 21 West Monroe

Partners Duff & Phelps 21 Mercer North Highland

22 A.T. Kearney (Tied 22)

North Highland (Tied 21) 22 A.T. Kearney Oliver Wyman 22 Grant Thornton Duff & Phelps

Baker Tilly (Tied 22) goetzpartners 23 Riveron Consulting** Stax 23 Baker Tilly goetzpartners

Contender

Grant Thornton (Tied 22) Rothschild & Co 24 Oliver Wyman Houlihan Lokey 24 goetzpartners Rothschild & Co

Mercer (Tied 22) Oliver Wyman 25 Accenture Centric Consulting* 25 A.T. Kearney Oliver Wyman

Oliver Wyman (Tied 22) Accenture (Tied 26) 26 Houlihan Lokey goetzpartners 26 Oliver Wyman Accenture

27 Accenture Centric Consulting* (Tied 26) 27 Capgemini** Logan Consulting* 27 Accenture Centric

Consulting*

28 Duff & Phelps (Tied 28) Logan Consulting* 28 The Chertoff

Group** Rothschild & Co 28 Duff & Phelps Logan Consulting*

RSM** (Tied 28) Greenhill & Co.* 29 goetzpartners Greenhill & Co.* 29 RSM** Greenhill & Co.*

30 Capgemini** 30 Stax 30 Capgemini**

31 BDO International** 31 Rothschilds & Co 31 BDO International**

*Firms not previously covered , ** Not covered in 2018 Source: ALM Intelligence



Buyer Ratings Guide

Rating Level Summaries

ALM Intelligence rates providers according to a three-level scale based on their relative breadth and depth of overall

capabilities. Each rating level corresponds to an area in the ALM Vanguard graphic bounded by a downward sloping line

designed to equate engagement models of different degrees of complexity.

Rating Level Providers Description

Leaders

Bain & Company Boston Consulting Group The leaders are at the top of the market in terms of their capabilities to create client impact through their depth of expertise and ability to deploy it across a range of engagement models. They are unique in their ability to independently execute a broad array of projects across the full spectrum of client contexts. They range from providers in the top quintile in terms of depth of capability for low-complexity engagement models to those that combine above average depth of capability with the ability to deploy it across high-complexity engagement models.

Deloitte EY

KPMG McKinsey & Company

PwC

Challengers

A.T. Kearney AlixPartners The challengers can execute end-to-end projects in low complexity engagement models or a substantial portion of project components in high-complexity engagement models. They range from those with above-average depth of capability for low-complexity engagement models to those that combine depth of capability between the bottom third and top half of the distribution, with the ability to deploy it in high complexity engagement models.

Alvarez & Marsal Baker Tilly

Crowe LLP Duff & Phelps

First Key Consulting FTI Consulting

Grant Thornton Houlihan Lokey

L.E.K. Consulting Mercer

North Highland Stax

West Monroe Partners

Contenders

Accenture Centric Consulting The contenders can execute a substantial portion of projects in low-complexity engagement models or a single phase or project instance in high-complexity engagement models. They range from those with average depth of capability for low-complexity engagement models to those that combine depth of capability in the bottom third of the distribution with the ability to deploy it in high-complexity engagement models.

goetzpartners Greenhill & Co.

Logan Consulting Oliver Wyman

Rothschild & Co.




Buyer Ratings Guide

Leader Assessments

The ALM Vanguard of Transactions-Divestitures Consulting Providers comprises the following Leaders.

“EY is seen as the heavyweight for operational aspects of deals and has improved the integration of its investments in deal strategy (see Parthenon, and the Bulger Partners acquisition in 2018). EY also continues to invest in its deal-related technology assets, which are complementary to its approach.”

- Tomek Jankowski, Senior Analyst, Management Consulting Research, ALM Intelligence



Buyer Ratings Guide

The table below provides detailed capability ratings for Transactions-Divestitures consulting providers. (See the Definitions sec-tion of this report for explanations of the capabilities.)

Provider Capability Ratings

Legend: Very Strong Strong Moderate Weak None

Provider Capabilities: Transactions-Divestitures Consulting Discovery Design Delivery

Needs Assessment

External Market Insight

Internal Client Insight Strategy Operating

SystemManagement

SystemProject

ManagementClient

Capability Development

Enabling Tools

EY

A.T. Kearney

Accenture

AlixPartners

Alvarez & Marsal

Bain & Company

Baker Tilly

Boston Consulting Group

Centric Consulting

Crowe LLP

Deloitte

Duff & Phelps

First Key Consulting

FTI Consulting

goetzpartners

Grant Thornton

Greenhill & Co.

Houlihan Lokey

KPMG

L.E.K. Consulting

Logan Consulting

McKinsey & Company

Mercer

North Highland

Oliver Wyman

PwC

Rothschild & Co

Stax

West Monroe PartnersSource: ALM Intelligence



Buyer Ratings Guide

Best in Class Providers

Providers identified as best in class evidence deep capabilities in specific areas of transactions-divestitures consulting and

stand out from their peers for their highly effective and often innovative consulting approaches and service delivery.

Capability Areas Provider Strengths

Management System EY

Already one of the more functionally integrated providers in TAS, EY brings leading operations and human capital capabilities to bear in TAS and has recently been aligning its legal and investment banking areas more closely with the TAS teams.




Buyer Ratings Guide

Provider Briefs

Leaders EYApproach One of the few consulting firms with a dedicated divestiture practice (though internally EY refers to these services as its sell

& separate offering) EY has undertaken a significant investment to upstream to bring more weight to the earlier stages of the deal process. These investments have targeted technology as well as hires and closer integration between the TAS-DAS, investment banking and legal teams. These also include acquisitions, such as EY’s Parthenon unit acquiring TAS strategy firm Bulger Partners in mid-2018. The new focus has honed in on four core service delivery goals in sellside M&A: value preservation with no surprises, accelerated closing, minimal disruptions, and enhanced credibility for EY and client management at the end of the deal process. Services span front-end strategic considerations (strategic portfolio alignment, value creation), thorough deal continuum (preparation and separation planning, the equity story and diligence, negotiation and execution, and post-closing). As a full service, end-to-end provider in TAS, EY combines multiple competencies: portfolio strategy, optimization and management; presale diligence, transaction analytics, equity story development, tax structuring, preparation of deal basis and auditable financials, negotiation and execution, operational separation planning, readiness assessment and day-one planning, and improvement of the remaining business. EY’s broader capital agenda offering continues to have an important impact for divestiture clients: establishing working capital requirements at the new company, valuing post-spin off working capital improvements, developing a sellside narrative for working capital peg and future improvement opportunities, identifying and executing working capital improvement opportunities pre- and post-sale, and designing working capital improvement services in TSAs.

Practice Structure

EY’s Divestiture Advisory Services (DAS) are part of the firm’s legacy Transaction Advisory Services group in its Consulting practice.

Service Delivery Model

Divestitures have become an increasingly important part of EY’s offering in TAS. EY’s value proposition is focused on taking the comprehensive approach from strategy to exit, being able to bring multi-track advisory experience for complex deals, to be complementary to other advisors in the deal ecosystem, bring buy- and sellside experience, offer integrated services across the divestiture life cycle (e.g., divestiture work plan, strategic decisions, market assessments, project management, financial, tax, human resource and operational matters), the ability to exhibit EY’s level of assistance, and access to cutting-edge technology and tools. To that latter point, EY has also built up an impactful array of continues to invest in M&A-related tools utilizing Big Data analytics, AI and machine learning – such as its digital M&A financial planner and implementation tool Capital Edge, ePlaybook, carveX, and Embryonic which helps clients visualize their ecosystem.




Buyer Ratings Guide

DefinitionsWhat is Transactions-Divestitures Consulting?

Transactions-Divestitures consulting forms part of ALM’s

series on Corporate finance consulting forms part of

the management consulting services directed at clients’

corporate office activities. Its objective is to help companies

optimize their investment and financing decisions to

maximize the value from their strategies.

Corporate finance consulting includes four services.

■ Transactions-Acquisitions: executes the acquisition of

assets in line with the portfolio and capital strategy

through target identification, due diligence, and

integration planning services.

■ Transactions-Divestitures: executes the divestiture of

assets in line with the portfolio and capital strategy

through asset identification, due diligence, bidding

process management, capital markets, and separation

planning services.

■ Joint Ventures & Alliances: addresses activities targeted

at obtaining resources and capabilities by borrowing

them from, or co-developing them with, external partners, including the partnering strategy, deals management, and

partnership structure and management.

■ Balance Sheet Strategy & Investor Communications: targets the financing of current operations and future growth,

including the total shareholder return strategy, capital allocation for growth, optimization of short- and long-term

financial management, and protection of assets, investor strategy and management, and activist response services.

Ente

rpris

e St

rate

gy

Corporate

Finance

Operating Model StrategyCustomer

Research &

Development

Supp

ly C

hain

Operations

Rewards

Management

Talent &

Workforce

Risk

Digital &Technology

BackO�ce

CorporateO�ce

FrontO�ce

MiddleO�ce




Buyer Ratings Guide

DefinitionsConsulting Provider Capabilities

Capability Areas Capabilities Descriptions

Discovery

Needs Assessment

Establishing goals and objectives for the project and determining which stakeholders need to be involved from the client organization, consulting firm, and third parties

External Market Insight

Using knowledge and experience to create hypotheses through trend analysis, benchmarking, maturity assessments, and case studies

Internal Client Insight

Obtaining internal client insights through assessments, data analyses, interviews, and workshops, and incorporating findings in the business case and roadmap design

Design

Strategy Aligning the strategy with the goals of the client’s talent and business strategies

Operating System

Configuring client resources – information, technology, talent and other assets – to generate the value-add intended by the strategy

Management System

Mobilizing, managing, measuring, and motivating client resources to execute the strategy through governance, organizational structures, and performance management

Delivery

Project Management

Allocating, aligning, and coordinating resources in sequenced activities to execute and sustain the strategy

Client Capability Development

Developing the client’s technical skills and adapting mindsets and behaviors to execute and sustain the strategy and process design

Enabling Tools Employing tools for diagnostic and design activities that support creating, executing, and sustaining the strategy


Provider Capability Rankings Descriptions Depth: a measurement of a consulting provider’s strength based on its capabilities, including such factors as resources,

proprietary methodologies, and intellectual properties

Breadth: a consulting provider’s ability to deploy its capabilities in multiple client scenarios across industry sectors, geographic

regions, and interfaces with adjacent functional and technical capabilities

Client impact: a consulting provider’s capacity to get results for clients based on the combination of its capability depth and

breadth adjusted by the degree of engagement model complexity incurred by its breadth across industry sectors, geographic

regions, and interfaces with adjacent functional and technical capabilities


MethodologyOverview

ALM Intelligence has been researching the management, financial, and IT consulting industry for over 40 years, studying

the global consulting marketplace at multiple levels. The resulting market analyses help buyers of consulting services to

effectively target best in class providers, and help consulting providers to identify and evaluate business opportunities.

The proprietary research methodology comprises four components:

■ Extensive interviews with consulting practice leaders, financial analysts, consulting clients, and clientside industry experts

■ Data and background material from the proprietary library of research on the consulting industry and individual firms

■ Quantitative data collection from primary and secondary sources

■ Key economic data relevant to the sector(s) being analyzed

The research output for a project is derived predominantly from primary research.

Data is obtained through a centralized effort, with teams of analysts collecting, assessing, fact-checking, and refreshing

baseline information on leading consultancies and consulting markets. This information populates an extensive knowledge

base of consulting providers, widely regarded as among the most comprehensive in the world.

Working collaboratively, analysts narrow their research to the most discrete and pertinent intersection of consulting service/

industry/geography.

The experience and knowledge of the analyst team are critical to the success of these research endeavors. Directors and

associate directors average over a decade of consulting and/or analyst experience, with an emphasis on professional services.

Junior analysts typically bring an average of five years of consulting and/or analyst experience.

The group’s long-term relationships with consulting clients and industry leaders are based on trust and respect. ALM

Intelligence’s fundamental goal is to deliver objective assessments and insightful viewpoints on the management, financial,

and IT consulting market.


Buyer Ratings GuideSource: ALM Intelligence’s Transactions-Divestitures Consulting (c) 2018; used by licensing permissions

MethodologyHow We Evaluate Consulting Providers

ALM Intelligence’s goal is to deliver objective assessments

to help buyers of consulting services effectively identify and

maximize the benefits of working with best in class providers.

ALM Intelligence evaluates consulting providers with respect

to a particular consulting area in terms of the following

baseline criteria. The general criteria below are refined and

customized over the course of the research effort based on

input from clients and providers:

■ Consulting approach: What are providers’ points of

view on the root causes of client challenges? How do

those points of view inform choices about how best to

resolve them? How do providers view the intersection of

these needs and solutions with other consulting or non-

consulting offerings or cross-cutting themes?

■ Consulting organization: How do providers organize

and deploy their capabilities? What sort of consultants

and other human resources do they possess, and how do

they obtain and use them? What sorts of partnerships, collaborations, and alliances with external parties do they use to

bolster their capabilities?

■ Consulting service delivery model: How do providers deliver their services? Do they employ any particular processes or

methodologies, preconfigured tools, or other unique elements of service delivery? Do they follow any particular sequence

or direction in their service delivery? How do they measure outcomes?

■ Client pain points and needs assessments: What factors most influence successful engagements in the opinion

of clients? What capabilities do providers need to bring to their engagements to be compelling? What sources of

differentiation matter most to consulting buyers?

■ Future development: What investments are providers making or planning to make to enhance their future capabilities?

In addition to briefings with consulting buyers and providers, ALM Intelligence uses a mosaic approach to derive its findings.

This incorporates primary research conducted with industry practitioners, academics, and other experts and secondary

research on providers’ public information and other third-party sources of data and analysis.

Depth Breadth

AdjacenciesDelivery

Design

Discovery Geographies

Industries

Resources

Service Delivery

Strategy

OperatingModel



Buyer Ratings GuideSource: ALM Intelligence’s Transactions-Divestitures Consulting (c) 2018; used by licensing permissions


Buyer Ratings Guide

About ALM Intelligence

ALM Intelligence provides accurate and reliable market sizing and forecasts on consulting services worldwide, needs-analysis

and vendor profiling for buyers of consulting services, timely and insightful intelligence on the top consulting firms in their

respective markets, and operational benchmarks that measure consulting performance. ALM Intelligence’s research spans

multiple service areas, client vertical industries, and geographies. Our analysts provide expert commentary at consulting

industry events worldwide, and offer custom research for Management Consulting and IT Services firms. More information

about ALM Intelligence is available at www.alm.com/intelligence/industries-we-serve/consulting-industry/.

ALM, an information and intelligence company, provides customers with critical news, data, analysis, marketing solutions and

events to successfully manage the business of business. For further information and to purchase ALM Intelligence research,

contact [email protected], 855-808-4550.


Documents

The ALM Vanguard · 2018 ALM Media Properties, LLC 4 Buyer Ratings Guide Deal complexity and the lower quality of assets in deals has made due diligence more difficult, requiring