What happens to future Partners when AI changes the work?

Much of the narrative surrounding artificial intelligence (AI) in consulting has focused on productivity and efficiency gains. Firms are exploring how generative AI can streamline processes, reduce delivery costs and enhance client outcomes. Questions of utilisation, leverage, pricing and margins have dominated discussions as consulting organisations experiment with leaner, AI-enabled delivery models. These are all fundamental considerations, but they capture only part of the transformation now underway.

AI is changing more than how consulting work is delivered; it is changing how future consulting leaders will be developed.

For decades, the consulting pyramid has served two complementary purposes:

• ‍Economically, it enabled firms to scale expertise through leverage, combining Partner oversight with increasingly larger teams of junior consultants to deliver client work efficiently.
• Developmentally, it functioned as an apprenticeship system, providing consultants with the platform through which they developed technical expertise, acquired professional judgement, built commercial acumen and cultivated client relationships.

These two principles have traditionally reinforced one another creating an operating model that generated both profitability but also formed generations of consulting Partners.

While firms can redesign delivery models relatively quickly, redesigning the developmental architecture through which future leaders emerge has become a more complex organisational challenge.

This article explores that challenge in two parts. First, we examine how AI is reshaping the economics of consulting – altering delivery models and redefining the sources of Partner value. Second, we turn to the less-explored consequence of these changes: how AI may disrupt the pathways through which future consulting leaders acquire the judgement, commercial capability and client relationships that prepare them for Partnership.

Our discussions with Partners across the industry, ranging from boutique and mid-sized firms to larger global players, suggest that AI is beginning to decouple these two principles.

Part One: The economic transformation

Thinking beyond the leverage model

For decades, the consulting business model has relied upon a relatively simple premise: Partner expertise can be amplified through leverage. Partners originate work, shape client relationships and provide strategic oversight, while managers coordinate delivery and larger teams of junior consultants undertake much of the analytical execution. This pyramid structure has underpinned not only the industry's profitability but also the way consulting firms have traditionally created value.

As AI increasingly performs tasks that once required large teams of analysts and consultants, the relationship between human effort, project delivery and client value is changing. Rather than simply improving productivity, AI is altering the economics of consulting itself. Work that previously required large delivery teams can now be completed with significantly fewer people, prompting firms to reconsider long-standing assumptions about leverage, utilisation and pricing.

Across our interviews, Partners consistently questioned whether the traditional consulting pyramid remains the most effective commercial model for an AI-enabled environment. While few believed the pyramid would disappear entirely, many recognised that the economic foundations on which it was built are beginning to shift. As one Partner put it:

We now have a bigger group of juniors sitting in our P&L that are, at some point, just a cost, and we haven't yet figured out how to commercialise that... If you're only selling yourself and a few others, how do you still sell at a high enough price point? - Partner, Life Sciences, Boutique Specialist Firm

This tension reflects a broader commercial challenge. Until now, consulting firms generated revenue by combining senior expertise with leveraged delivery teams. If AI enables projects to be delivered with substantially fewer consultants, charging clients primarily for hours worked or team size becomes increasingly difficult to justify. Several Partners described experimenting with pricing models that place greater emphasis on outcomes and client impact rather than the amount of consulting effort involved [1, 2].

One Partner reflected on what this shift demands of the Partner role itself:

"I do think I'll have to learn to sell differently and, to sell those projects differently, I will obviously need to be able to run those projects differently… but that capability and that skill definitely needs to be built up because I, personally will never be able to commercially sell a product project at 80% of the current price point with a third of the team size which is maybe the sweet spot we need to get to.” - Partner, Life Sciences, Boutique Firm

The commercial implications extend beyond pricing alone and are encouraging firms to reconsider the structural implications within their existing delivery models.

Many Partners voiced theorising with alternative organisational structures. For example, some envisage obelisk models characterised by narrower junior cohorts and greater concentrations of senior expertise. Others described diamond structures built around stronger middle-management capability, while some anticipated more inverted configurations of the pyramid, where senior consultants remain much closer to delivery and smaller teams execute highly leveraged, AI-enabled work [3].

As one Partner cautioned:

“I think this discussion towards like full inversion of the pyramid might need a bit more granularity… but it's certainly moving away from, from the classical leverage model.” - Partner, Consumer & Retail, Tier 2 Strategy Consulting Firm

Despite differences in how firms expect delivery models to evolve, there was strong and consistent consensus on what clients will continue to value: human expertise remains central.

Throughout the interviews, Partners repeatedly reinforced that AI cannot diminish the importance of human expertise; rather, it increases the value of capabilities that technology struggles to replicate. As parts of consulting work becomes increasingly commoditised, competitive advantage is shifting towards judgement, contextual understanding, stakeholder influence and the ability to help clients navigate their own organisational complexities.

One Partner described the shift in these terms:

"What I see is true expertise is getting more and more important... When you come in as a partner of a strategy consulting firm, you really need to deliver value… and value in my view might be super specific industry knowledge, but even more so, value in being able to move discussions ahead on client side. So, I think stakeholder management is becoming more and more important. Because it cannot be easily outsourced to AI. So, the human touch, how you bring, convert data into decisions, that's for me one of the core shifts more on a strategic level." - Partner, Consumer & Retail, Strategy Consulting Firm

Others in support shared:

“You cannot replace two humans talking to each other or getting a client through a really difficult internal situation that they are dealing with, helping them figure out how to navigate their internal political landscape.” Partner, Life Sciences, Mid-sized Consulting Firm

"I'm actually finding I'm leaning more into the people and relationship aspect of my job because there's more time that has been released for that because of the scale that AI is giving us … I think the answer you spit out at the end of the project has to be 50% more nuanced, tailored, specific, insightful, innovative." - Partner, Life Sciences, Tier 2 Strategy Consulting Firm

For some firms, this shift is extending beyond individual working practices to formal changes in how the Partner role is defined. One Partner described how their firm had recently increased Partner utilisation targets to reflect the growing expectation that senior leaders remain closer to delivery and demonstrate value directly to clients:

"We have recently increased our utilisation target for Partners. How many days per week should you book on a project? We've increased it because we said exactly this: we need to show the client that we bring value, otherwise we're just pushed out of the equation." - Partner, Consumer & Retail, Tier 2 Strategy Consulting Firm

Collectively, these perspectives suggest that AI is not reducing the importance of the Partner role – it is redefining the basis of its value.

Historically, much of the Partner's economic value derived from orchestrating increasingly leveraged delivery teams. In an AI-enabled consulting model, this remains important, however, it is being shaped less by leverage alone and more by the ability to apply judgement, build trusted client relationships and help organisations make decisions in environments characterised by uncertainty and complexity.

Viewed through this lens, AI is shifting the balance of where value comes from and elevating the importance of human expertise and how that is demonstrated tangibly to the client.

Part Two: The developmental transformation

The discussion so far has focused on how AI is reshaping the economics of consulting. It is changing how work is delivered, redefining the basis of Partner value and prompting firms to rethink pricing, leverage and organisational design. For many firms, these commercial questions have become the primary focus of their AI strategies. Our interviews, however, revealed a second challenge that is arguably more consequential over the long term.

The consulting pyramid has long functioned as more than an economic model. It has been an apprenticeship system through which consultants progressively acquired technical expertise, professional judgement, commercial awareness and client credibility [4]. Through exposure, observation and participation, junior consultants gradually developed the commercial capabilities required to naturally step into leadership.

This developmental architecture emerged almost organically from the consulting operating model itself. The work that generated economic value also generated learning opportunities. As consultants progressed through increasingly complex engagements, they accumulated the experiences that ultimately prepared them for the Partner role.

That said, as analytical work becomes increasingly automated and senior consultants remain closer to delivery, some of the experiences that have historically developed future leaders may become less frequent. Several Partners questioned whether consultants would continue to receive the same exposure to proposal development, problem structuring, stakeholder management and client interaction that previous generations regarded as fundamental to their professional development.

For example, one Partner stated:

"The downside is that the manager or senior consultant who was getting the experience of working with me on it [proposal], that all goes out the window. So, they're getting less exposure.” - Partner, Life Sciences, Tier 2 Strategy Consulting Firm

For several leaders, this was not solely a question of development, but also a question of succession. Put promptly by another Partner:

"The question we asked ourselves was, how the hell are we going to train the next generation of consultants and leaders? Because you're now going to have a succession gap." - Partner, Life Sciences & Healthcare, Boutique Strategy Consulting Firm

This observation quietly captures what may become one of the profession's defining organisational challenges. For a long time, consulting firms have rarely needed to design leadership development explicitly because it emerged organically from the delivery model. The experiences that developed future Partners were embedded within day-to-day consulting work. If AI fundamentally changes that work, firms can no longer assume that leadership capability will continue to emerge in the same way.

This reverted back to whether the profession’s traditional career model remains fit for purpose and future scalability.

"The apprenticeship model piece is a big deal too because... historically we would hire somebody... who's bright and shiny… 22 and grinding on slides. Will we need that in four years? Probably not.” - Senior Managing Director, Life Sciences, Large Consulting Firm

Others anticipated the impact on entry-level talent to decline as firms increasingly prioritise consultants capable of hitting the ground running with AI.

"I would not be surprised if earlier-career hiring is tapered, and the real value in AI becomes knowing how to use it and what questions to ask." - Senior Vice President, Generalist, Tier 2 Consulting Firm

Yet our interviews also revealed a more optimistic perspective. Several Partners argued that AI may strengthen rather than weaken leadership development by accelerating exposure to higher-value work. Rather than spending years mastering repetitive analytical tasks, junior consultants may engage earlier in client discussions, strategic problem-solving and commercial decision-making. From this perspective, AI removes lower-value activities while creating opportunities to develop judgement more quickly.

One Partner explicitly stated:

"I don't agree with the premise that it's going to get rid of junior leverage. I think what it's going to do is, I think it raises the bar for what we think of as an analyst… It allows them to be really thinking and listening and asking really good questions. They're becoming better interviewers more quickly. And I suspect what this is going to mean is that it will allow our junior team members to accelerate faster and frankly be better consultants sooner.” - Partner, Life Sciences, Large Strategy Consulting Firm

Another summarised:

"An associate who knows how to use AI well has to be an associate times 1.5 in terms of the thinking." - Partner, Life Sciences, Mid-sized Strategy Consulting Firm

These perspectives illustrate that the future of consulting leadership remains somewhat uncertain. What emerged consistently across our interviews was not agreement about the outcome, but agreement that the assumptions underpinning leadership development can no longer be taken for granted. Whether AI ultimately compresses developmental opportunities or accelerates them will depend less on the technology itself than on how consulting firms redesign the experiences through which future Partners develop.

Redesigning the Leadership Pipeline

Taking this argument, if leadership capability can no longer be expected to emerge organically from the consulting operating model, firms will need to become considerably more deliberate in how they cultivate their future Partner pipeline. Recruitment, capability development, performance management and career progression will all require careful reconsideration as AI reshapes the nature of consulting work.

Several interviewees described this reassessment as already underway.

"We were actually having a meeting last week where we were questioning, is that the right cohort of people that are coming in? Are we sure it's the right capability we've hired for? Is our hiring process fit for purpose?" - Partner, Healthcare & Life Sciences, Boutique Strategy Firm

Others argued that firms will increasingly recruit for qualities that complement AI rather than compete with it. Critical thinking, curiosity, commercial judgement and emotional intelligence were consistently identified as capabilities that will become more, not less, important in an AI-enabled environment.

One Partner reflected:

"For me actually the critical thinking skill set becomes non-negotiable because I need somebody who can sit there and again use AI in a way that is very high return." - Partner, Life Sciences, Mid-sized consulting firm

Another emphasised the importance of intellectual curiosity:

"If we want our juniors to be spearheads within AI, at least for the next... two, three years, our assumption is that the main value we can add is by having extremely curious people with a high EQ as well because the curiosity is what will drive them to stay on top." - Partner, Healthcare & Life Sciences, Boutique Strategy Consulting Firm

These perspectives suggest that leadership development can no longer rely primarily on progression through increasingly complex analytical work. Instead, consulting firms may need to design development far more intentionally, creating structured opportunities for consultants to exercise judgement, build client relationships and develop commercial credibility much earlier in their careers.

The challenge facing consulting firms therefore points more broadly to redesigning the developmental architecture that has organically produced consulting leaders.

Conclusion

The consulting pyramid has always generated two forms of value simultaneously: commercial value for today's clients and developmental value for tomorrow's leaders. To some extent, our conversations reveal that AI is beginning to decouple these two functions.

Historically, the consulting operating model enabled firms to scale expertise commercially through leverage while simultaneously providing the apprenticeship through which successful Partner talent was developed. In doing so, it continually reproduced a consistent pipeline of leaders.

We are not suggesting that AI will inevitably weaken leadership development. Indeed, several Partners argued that AI may accelerate the development of future consultants by enabling earlier exposure to higher-value work and more meaningful client interactions. However, if AI continues to reshape the work through which consultants traditionally developed their expertise, leadership can no longer be treated as an unintended by-product of project delivery. Instead, firms will need to become far more deliberate in designing the experiences through which consultants develop the judgement, commercial acumen and client relationships that underpin successful consulting leadership.