Alert: Unlike what many claim, it is not the end of consultancy!
Broken Promises in the Land of Vision
Saudi Arabia has long been a magnet for the world’s most prestigious consulting firms. Eager to ride the wave of Vision 2030—a $3 trillion economic transformation plan—the likes of McKinsey, BCG, Bain & Company, and the Big Four (PwC, Deloitte, EY, and KPMG) set up shop in Riyadh, bringing with them sleek slide decks, polished expatriate teams, and decades of Western consulting expertise. But today, cracks are showing.
What started as a bonanza of advisory contracts has shifted into a more contentious chapter. Firms that once wielded unparalleled influence are now under scrutiny from both within and outside the Kingdom. In early 2025, PwC was banned from bidding for new advisory contracts with the Saudi sovereign wealth fund, the Public Investment Fund (PIF), after it allegedly tried to poach talent from NEOM — one of Saudi Arabia’s most high-profile mega-projects. The fallout was swift: resignations, internal reshuffling, and a reputational dent across the Gulf.
Deloitte, too, has had its stumbles. It faced a two-year ban from auditing listed companies following the Mohammad Al-Mojil Group scandal, raising eyebrows about oversight and accountability. And while McKinsey has enjoyed deep integration within ministries, it recently also has been blacklisted by PIF. Rumours say the reason is NEOM’s cost versus return problems, attributed to ill-crafted advice. What went wrong? At the core, the Western consulting model—heavily reliant on top-down strategy development, external talent, and high-cost engagements—clashed with the political, cultural, and operational fabric of Saudi Arabia. Despite the high-level access consultants enjoyed, many failed to build enduring local capacity or adequately transfer knowledge. They also turned into mere facilitators of any idea, rather than ‘critical friends’ they pretend to be. Ministries became dependent on overly optimistic PowerPoint solutions, but lacked the tools and trained staff to scrutinize, let alone implement them.
Cultural Clashes and Institutional Friction
Saudi Arabia is not just another emerging market—it is a deeply complex, rapidly transforming nation-state balancing tradition and ambition. Vision 2030 is not merely an economic reform plan; it is a national project aimed at redefining the Saudi identity in a post-oil era. Many consultants underestimated the political stakes, social sensitivities, and institutional voids they were navigating.
The consultants’ challenges weren’t only about deliverables; they were about misalignment. A Saudi minister was recently quoted in the Financial Times voicing frustration that ministries had “outsourced their brains” and lacked sustainable internal expertise. Foreign consultants often applied cookie-cutter solutions, imported wholesale from Western bureaucracies or developed economies, without tailoring them sufficiently to local realities. These consultants also have a tendency to cover bigger and bigger fields of the consulting market – or what they declare to be their core business. This leads to the big consultancies today doing work they have little expertise in – often delivering outcomes that do not capture the complexity of the problem and therefore not solving, but often increasing it.
Moreover, the Big Four and strategy houses staffed projects predominantly with expatriates, some with little to no regional experience. This created a cultural divide. In some cases, consultants failed to understand how decisions are made in a royal court system, how tribal networks shape loyalty and influence, or how social conservatism constrains public-sector reform.
On top of that, resentment grew around the vast sums paid to foreign firms—while young Saudi graduates struggled to find meaningful employment. This has led to a push for “Saudization” in consulting, with government mandates to employ more nationals and favour domestic firms. These shifts are not cosmetic; they represent a deep desire for sovereignty in strategic decision-making.
If the old model of global consulting dominance is losing steam, what could replace it?
1. Capacity-Building First, Strategy Second:
Saudi ministries and agencies need long-term institutional partners, not just short-term advisors. Successful firms will focus on embedding teams that train, coach, and develop local leaders. Instead of handing over 100-page reports, they must leave behind people who can think critically and act decisively.
2. A Hybrid Public-Private Advisory Model:
One promising alternative is the creation of semi-independent think tanks and delivery units staffed by both Saudis and select international experts. These hybrid entities could work closely with ministries while remaining nimble and insulated from bureaucracy. Examples already exist, such as the Center for Spending Efficiency and the National Center for Privatization.
3. Local Ecosystems of Expertise:
Rather than relying on four global giants, Saudi Arabia could cultivate a competitive ecosystem of more specialized, international, but also increasingly regional and local consultancies, universities, and applied research centers. These latter institutions would be more culturally attuned and likely to grow deeper roots in the Kingdom. Think of them as national strategy partners, not just service providers.
4. Open Source and Consulting as a service:
Another alternative lies in rethinking the very delivery of consulting. Digital platforms, knowledge-sharing portals, and AI tools could democratize access to expertise. Instead of million-dollar engagements, ministries might subscribe to continuously updated, modular consulting solutions customized by locally run teams that work with global experts.
Saudi Arabia’s leadership has made it clear that the Kingdom wants results—not reports. For global consultants, the message is also clear: adapt, localize, and partner—or be replaced. The sun may not be setting on the consulting industry in the Gulf, but its shape is rapidly changing. The winners will be those who understand that in this part of the world, transformation cannot only be flown in—it must be grown from within.
