Toutes les informations dont vous avez besoin, en un coup d'œil !

Can you tell us a bit about your own career journey and what led you to take on the role of General Manager for Movemeon in the US?

I began my career working in the experiential marketing world, delivering experiences for some of the worlds largest brands and sports properties. We aimed to deliver best in class experiences for fans, consumers, and clients. I was very fortunate to work with many leading marketeers, whose attention to detail and client handling skills have been a strong foundation throughout my career. Since then, I have been leading and scaling disruptive teams and businesses, predominantly at the intersection of HR and technology, often working alongside first class ex-consulting minds. 

Prior to Movemeon, I relocated to the US to launch and scale a high performance team at a fast growing UK tech company. I knew of Movemeon as they sourced some incredible candidates and placed some pivotal roles for the firm. When I heard they were hiring a GM, and looking to expand into the US, it felt like the perfect opportunity to draw upon so much of my experience and skillset as well as provide some cultural translation.

What was the vision behind bringing Movemeon (with its specialist hiring, consulting & interim services) to the US market?

I’m very lucky - Movemeon has an incredible track record, candidate network, list of clients and brand recognition in Europe. The team had already spent a few years laying the groundwork in the US by building out our candidates and getting global referrals to clients. Given the success of the business in Europe, expanding into the largest and most mature consulting market was a matter of ‘when’ not ‘if’.

In your experience, what does Movemeon do differently or better than traditional hiring / consulting firms in the US?

What sets Movemeon apart is our engaged network of over 100,000 candidates globally in a very specialist area - current and former strategy consultants. On top of that, our tech driven delivery model means we can engage with better candidates faster than traditional methods.

Can you share some case studies or stories from US companies that illustrate how Movemeon solved a tough hiring or consulting problem?

On a recent call with the Head of Talent for a well known large cap PE firm, they mentioned they were currently hiring for a very specific role on the operating team and gave a one line description of a candidate they were looking for. Within 72 hours we had surfaced the perfect candidate whose background and resume literally “wrote the job description”.

In another recent scenario, a client rang us to say they’d been struggling with a very important role for almost a year, whilst it was slightly outside of our wheelhouse, we were able to agree a model that worked for both sides, and through our network, pull together a very strong shortlist within two weeks. We currently have a candidate in the final round for the role.

If you had to sum up in one sentence what companies in the US should expect if they work with Movemeon, what would that be?

A refreshing approach to a traditionally antiquated industry, through a high-touch and personal service, driven by a tech delivery model.


Looking ahead, what are your ambitions for Movemeon in the US over the next few years - whether that’s new services, industries, or ways of working with clients?‍

The US is Movemeon’s fastest growing market globally, both on the candidate and client side, and it’s only going to continue accelerating. We’re particularly seeing huge growth in the Private Equity vertical and we’re already growing the team to support, watch this space!

‍

Looking for the best talent in the US? Let us help.

‍

Consulting is going through a seismic shift. After years of double-digit growth, the combination of a tough macro-economic climate and more alternatives in the form of independent consultants and in-house ex-consulting talent is challenging the very foundations consulting is built on.

In this article, we talk through how we’re seeing client demands for consulting and advisory support shifting, and what this means in terms of a new landscape of advisory support.

If you’d like to know any more about how you’d deploy either model, or would like to see some example projects get in touch with our team here.

‍

Is consulting no longer recession-proof?

The old adage explains that you need consultants in the good times and the bad. As such the industry had historically been seen as largely recession-proof. This "professional services” resilience has resulted in an interest from private capital markets over the last few years, but is this being challenged in the consulting market?

Ten years ago, HBR first referenced “consulting on the cusp of disruption”. The post-COVID boom resulted in pay rises, over-hiring and an increasing reliance on non-core strategy work. This meant few in the industry were prepared for the correction in 2022-23. 

We highlighted what we saw in the industry, both from a client perspective and in the consulting firms:

On the client side:

• There’s increased need for deep industry experience
• Fees have reached unsustainable levels and typical delivery models are too rigid‍
• Quality isn’t what it used to be

Which has started to have knock-on effects to the consulting industry:

• Top performing partners leaving to launch boutiques
• Rise of quality in the freelancer market
• Change from AI on the horizon

‍

How is the market now responding?

The growth of consulting firms in the post-COVID era was driven by providing more advice outside of the core of strategy. Clients had found returns on bringing in expertise to help drive implementation, analytics and new products/ services. By January 2023, the Kennedy Research Reports found that strategic advisory had fallen to just 10% of the consulting industry’s revenue - from 17% just five years earlier.

The 10% of strategy work, which grew very little over the last five years, is seeing less disruption: Large Cap PE funds are still turning to McKinsey, BCG and Bain for due diligence, and development of the Value Creation Plan; the Boards of large corporates and enterprises are still choosing to get the assurance of one of these firms on the once in a decade decisions. 

However, for longer-term implementation, transformation projects and new market entry projects, we’re seeing a shift away from the traditional firms. PE and Enterprise clients are conscious they don’t have the capability or capacity to deliver these in-house. They are also aware that experts who have overseen similar projects countless times will help them avoid the pitfalls and maximise ROI. However, they are unwilling to spend the fees commanded by the traditional firms - especially when the delivery models designed around strategy projects (Partner only part-time; EM+2 team) are so rarely flexible, and the Partners at these firms often don’t have real operating experience.

This has meant that very few believe MBB defend their cost when implementing large change programs - 84% of executives saying that MBB were “no help at all” in a recent Emergn survey about change projects:

A new breed of competition and the risk of marketing myopia

Theodore Levit is often quoted by consultants. They’ve explained to many clients that focusing on delivering value must always usurp the pressures of continuing to sell current products and services. Kodak and Blockbuster are often cited as examples of not doing so.

It’s definitely time the consultants heed their own advice. Consulting for many years has been able to defend its price point through exceptional solutions and effective communication of these. There’s almost a bit of magic about how they get there. However, it is fundamentally a people business. And we’re increasingly seeing clients shifting towards other ways to access these people.

Twenty years ago the consulting alumni world was still pretty small. The firms were growing but not many had been through their intense training and coaching. As they’ve continued to grow, the alumni networks and number of “consulting trained” experts has grown exponentially. We’ve seen rapid growth for two types of advice: interim experts and agile consulting teams.

‍

Interim experts - embedded senior executives with deep operating experience

Typical roles and cost: The majority of the demand we find for interim executives are either roles responsible for overseeing a change (Chief Transformation Officers / Head of PMO) or are bringing in deep expertise (Chief Procurement Officer, Head of Pricing / Sales Excellence). The transformation roles tend to be 6-18 months in length; the experts normally 3-5 months. 

Typical profiles: A combination of ex-top tier consulting (ensures they can effectively work alongside the executive team) and deep operating experience. They’ve typically worked in industry in a senior or executive role for 5-10 years. This means they know what it takes to deliver real change. Day rates will vary a lot on profile and length of project, but are typically £1.5k - £4k.

What they offer that a consulting firm can’t: There are two main drivers: time and “operating experience”. For time, interim executives are the equivalent of a “Partner” on a consulting project. Typically with Partners, they are spread between multiple projects and as such you likely only get 1-2 days of their time a week. With an interim executive, you get them 100% of the time. Secondly, they all bring deep “operating” experience. Many consulting Partners have worked their way up through consulting, without having held senior roles in PE or Industry.

‍

Agile consulting teams: flexible, specialist, end-to-end

As part of our own consulting offering, we’re seeing client demand and ex-MBB Senior Partner supply converge across a number of specialism areas as outlined below.

‍

‍

Typical projects and cost: Complex decisions that need deep expertise. They are typically the main 2-3 initiatives post strategy development, and include new market entry, operational improvement, organisational design, procurement review, pricing strategy etc. They are high-impact projects that often have a big bottom-line impact. Cost varies on team composition, but typically ranges between £20-50k per week.

Typical profiles: Agile consulting firms are often led by an ex- senior Partner from McKinsey, BCG, Bain or equivalent, who leverages deep functional expertise from interims (as above). 

What they offer that a consulting firm can’t: While the ex-MBB Partners ensure the same level of assurance that you’d see with one of the large consulting firms, they are able to offer much more flexible models and deeper industry / operating experience. The flexibility starts with themselves, with potential to be anywhere between 100% staffed on a project to hardly involved - and they will flex up and down the team over the project lifetime. They also offer deep industry expertise, and are able to assemble an exceptional team of interims with backgrounds spanning a plethora of consulting firms and with the requisite functional / industry operating experience.

‍

If you’d like to know any more about how you’d deploy either model, or would like to see some example projects get in touch with our team here.

‍

Agile consulting delivering value in practice

To expand on this with some concrete examples from our own work, we’ve summarised some key challenges we’ve recently seen from clients and outlined why the agile consulting approach worked below: 

‍

Operational improvement for a PE-backed manufacturing business

A nationwide UK manufacturer, owned by a £50bn AUM PE fund, needed rapid EBITDA uplift across its product portfolio. An agile consulting team was assembled by Movemeon Consulting to deliver impact within 2 months, with a team comprising:

• Partner: Ex-McKinsey Senior Partner with over 20 years’ experience in operational improvement and manufacturing diagnostics;
• Engagement Manager: 5 years at McKinsey, followed by senior strategy and PE-backed operational roles;
• Associate: Ex-Bain Manager with deep regulated manufacturing experience;
• Analysts: Ex-LEK and Bain, both with operating experience and strong financial modelling / PE exposure. 

The challenge: Performance varied widely across sites, with underperformance dragging on overall profitability. The client needed a clear diagnostic and pragmatic turnaround roadmap, executed at speed.

The outcome: The team’s diagnostic identified 7 underperforming sites, developed tailored turnaround plans, and began embedding operational workstreams. The impact was so strong that the client permanently hired the EM from the agile team to continue the transformation.

Why agile consulting worked: This bespoke mix of ex-MBB consultants and operators, led by a senior industry expert, gave the client tier-one insight at pace and cost-efficiency, without the overhead of a traditional consulting firm. 

The result: Sustainable operational improvement, delivered by a right-sized, high-calibre team.

‍

Commercial strategy and PMI for a global consumer business

A $5bn consumer business, carved out by a $100bn+ AUM PE fund, required a new commercial strategy and seamless post-merger integration to set up the business for growth. A lean, agile consulting team was assembled to deliver across 12 months, consisting of:

• Sales Excellence & Transformation Director: 20 years’ operating experience at Expedia and Whitbread, with deep expertise in sales excellence, transformation, and commercial operations.
• Senior Consultant: Former BCG Senior Consultant with 5 years’ operating experience in high-growth tech businesses, notably having led PMI for consumer-focused businesses in 20+ countries.
  ‍

The challenge: The carve-out created a need to stand up commercial functions from scratch, while simultaneously implementing a robust sales excellence strategy to accelerate performance across global markets.
‍

The outcome: The agile team successfully established commercial functions, delivered a scalable sales excellence strategy, and ensured seamless integration across units. The impact was lasting - the client made a permanent hire of the Sales Excellence & Transformation Director to continue driving results post-project.
‍

Why agile consulting worked: By combining a former BCG strategist with a seasoned transformation operator, the client gained a tailored, high-impact team able to deliver both strategic clarity and operational execution - faster and more effectively than a traditional consultancy.

‍

The bottom line

Transformation isn’t just about ideas - it’s about embedding change. Strategy may set the direction, but execution decides whether the journey is completed.

Consulting firms are built around making the key and critical strategic decisions. And they are extremely effective at doing so. However, when it comes to driving the change and transformation, the operational expertise and flexibility offered by interim talent and agile consulting teams is increasingly out-competing the consultancies. 

‍

If you’d like to know any more about how you’d deploy either model, or would like to see some example projects get in touch with our team here.

‍

‍

‍

The death of consulting? Not according to the hiring data
‍

It’s clear that AI poses existential threats to the current consulting operating model. At the core of the consulting proposition is synthesising complex data, market intelligence and driving to clear recommendations. All things that AI will be able to do better than humans. It’s not an if; it’s a when.


Our quarterly market index highlights how hiring trends are evolving, with a particular focus on the near-term outlook for advisory roles.”

In our September analysis, we were very surprised to see that Advisory businesses hiring demand is outstripping that we’re seeing in Large Enterprises. Interestingly, it is also outstripping the demand we’re seeing in scale-ups (a market you’d expect to be seeing a boom from AI).

‍

‍

‍

So what’s going on?
‍

The risks posed to consulting by AI are widely discussed, and for good reason: At the heart of the consulting proposition lies the ability to synthesise complex data, interpret market intelligence and drive towards clear, actionable recommendations, precisely the areas where AI is advancing fastest. It’s not a question of if AI can outperform humans in these tasks, but when.
‍

This advancement raises existential questions about the industry’s current operating model, particularly for leaders thinking about project staffing, protecting margins, and developing the next generation of partners. The immediate concern for many is how this is impacting talent in, or looking to join consulting firms- why hire more people if AI can do the same things more cheaply?
‍

But this isn’t what we’re seeing. In fact, hiring demand is up within consulting. 
‍

Despite the noise around disruption, our data shows a very different short-term story. Hiring demand across the advisory sector has been rising sharply compared to last year. Initially, we hypothesised that this growth was concentrated in boutique firms, smaller, more agile players pivoting to build AI-focused propositions. If true, this would suggest not a real increase in overall demand, but rather a talent migration away from large consulting firms into specialist boutiques.
‍

However, the numbers told a different story. Hiring demand has risen by 21 percentage points in large firms, and by a more modest but still significant 9 percentage points in boutiques. In other words, demand is not confined to specialists, it’s happening across the board.

‍

‍

Why? Clients are grappling with the same questions about the impact of AI
‍

This trend points to a critical dynamic: The immediate impact of AI on consulting has been overstated. For many firms, the boom is being fuelled by client demand for guidance on exactly the issues senior leaders are worrying about themselves:
‍

• How to integrate AI into core operations.

• What it means for workforce design and resourcing.

• Where value creation opportunities lie in an AI-enabled world.

‍

Implications for consulting leaders
‍

This raises three important considerations for leaders in the consulting industry:
‍

1. Delivery models are shifting, but they’re not collapsing

While AI will automate traditional “analyst tasks,” the near-term demand is for advisory capacity, client guidance, and operating model design. This creates space for firms to rethink the shape and scale of delivery teams, rather than fearing their wholesale replacement.
‍

2. Margins are still defensible, but only when value add is clear

Clients are willing to invest in external expertise, but expectations are shifting. Firms must be ready to demonstrate the distinctive value of human insight alongside AI-driven efficiency, ensuring pricing models reflect both. We see this playing out in the mandates we see from consulting clients, most of whom are looking for deep expertise in a specific functional or industry area, not general capacity augmentation. 
‍

3. Talent development cannot be an afterthought

If the AI evolution continues as expected, the real long-term risk is not staffing cuts, it’s a potential skills gap. If AI erodes the traditional training ground of junior consultants, firms will need to ensure the next generation develops judgement, nuanced thinking, client relationship development skills and leadership capability.
‍

Is this a temporary uptick, or a longer term hiring trend?
‍

The jury’s still out on whether this demand surge is a short-lived reaction to AI uncertainty or the beginning of a new growth curve for consulting. But one thing is clear, in the short term, the consulting sector is experiencing a boom, not a bust.
‍

Consulting leaders should resist the temptation to over-correct. Instead, they should focus on building hybrid models, protecting margins through clear value articulation, and reimagining training for future leaders.
‍

What’s certain is that AI will reshape consulting, but for now it’s fuelling demand, not reducing it.

‍

Most of us dread “networking”, the awkward small talk, the forced introductions, the feeling of wanting to disappear under the canapé table. But Movemeon’s co-founder, Rich, argues that this isn’t networking at all. Find his advice below!

‍

Picture the scene.

You've just arrived at a corporate venue. You've picked up your name badge. You're thrust into a room full of people you don't know.

You feel obliged to try & scurry around introducing yourself to folks you'll probably never see again. If you're honest with yourself, you're tempted to hide under the canapé table. And you'll definitely find an excuse for an early exit.

This is what most people picture when we use the term "networking". And it understandably makes most of us want to run a mile.

What's more, it's almost totally ineffective. These aren't people who know you. So how can they trust you or advocate for you?

‍

So what is a better definition?

"Keeping in touch with people who know your capabilities & will advocate for you."

Typically these are people you've worked or partnered with in the past. Probably peers or former bosses. People who know you & like you. Or they might be people that those people have introduced you to with their backing.

When you reframe networking like this, your shoulders relax. In fact, you can picture that re-connecting with these people might actually be quite enjoyable.

‍

It's the network of their network where most opportunity lies.

Don't get me wrong. If you keep up with this group, it's not uncommon that one of them will give you a call at some point and ask you to join their team. (The timing might not be right. The opportunity might not be right. But it's always great to be asked).

Much more likely is that they'll think of you when someone in their network is chatting to them. It could be that their friend wants an expert point of view. Or a supplier recommendation. Or that they're building a new team and asking for suggestions. Either way, you'll be front of mind for an introduction.
‍

So what are my 8 tips for re-booting your networking and making it both sustainable & impactful?

1. Write a short list. 15-30 people who know your capabilities (ideally peers or seniors).
2. Put them in a spreadsheet / Trello board / other type of simple tracker.
3. Don't be scared to get back in touch with people you've lost touch with - you'll be surprised just how many are happy to hear from you.
4. Make a simple, realistic goal. E.g, meet 1 person per month (assuming you're in a full time job; stretch this target if you're actively job seeking).
5. Don't be transactional. This is about building trusted relationships.
6. Do be intentional. People who know & trust you are happy advise or support you.
7. Be resilient & systematic. If they didn't reply to your first message, follow up 1 week later (it's not because they dislike you; it's because they're busy & forgot to email back).
8. Give as well as take. Make thoughtful connections for these people. And lean into people trying to network with you. Remember how you feel about that person who is only in touch with you when they want something (we all know one). Don't be that person. Instead, "pay it forward" - good karma quickly comes around.

Implement these 8 simple tactics to make networking easy, enjoyable & accelerate your career.

‍

‍

About Rich and how you can work together

Rich started his career at McKinsey before working as a freelance consultant alongside co-founding Movemeon. Over 15 years he's helped over 5,000 organisations to hire - organisations of all sizes in all industries, globally - and developed a unique overview of what works to build successful, happy careers right up to CEO level.

He has always given advice via LinkedIn message to anyone who's asked for it. And in 2025 - encouraged by his network - he formalised this through the creation of OnUpBeyond .

The 2025 pilot of his career advisory sessions was massively oversubscribed, despite a price point in the thousands 000's. Those who managed to grab a place consistently reviewed the experience as 5*.

In July 2025, he relaunched his support in a truly accessible way via The Career Momentum Hour.

• Ask your questions for expert advice tailored to you.
• Weekly advisory sessions - listen in live or catchup in your own time via recordings.
• Regular senior guest speakers from CEOs, to Investment Directors to startup Founders to Exec Search bosses.
• Peer mentorship - your champion & trusted sounding board.

‍

‍Q2 market index reveals shifting dynamics in talent demand

‍

Hiring demand for permanent roles is at its highest we’ve seen for 18 months. We saw an initial strengthening in the market last quarter, but expected this to have dropped given the macroeconomic environment and the impact of tariffs.

However, after a small initial dip in May, the hiring market has continued to grow, reaching its 18-month peak in Q2 2025. As the hiring market has strengthened, the talent index (measuring the supply of great talent on the market) has started to drop. Between Q1 2024 and Q2 2025, the market index averaged at an all time high of 90, before dropping to 75 in July 2025. This is only slightly above the average for 2023 (70), when companies were still struggling to hire post COVID and the Great Resignation.

In this article we look at how different types of companies are being affected by these broader trends. We find that Private Equity is seeing a boom in demand for talent, driven by an increase in deals and an increased focus on operational improvement across ever larger portfolios. We were also surprised to see, despite the coverage that AI is already disrupting the advisory market, that there has been strong growth in hiring across consulting firms. 

Finally, we look at the different dynamics of the freelance and permanent markets: Whilst the permanent market has definitely tightened, with visibly less supply, freelance is still a high supply market for talent. We hypothesise that this is more driven by the broader freelance revolution, and a sharp increase in freelancers/ interims available who have chosen to freelance for more control over their work life (which projects they do; hours worked etc.). This might also be contributing to the righter permanent market.

‍

The Movemeon talent index

The Index is designed to give employers a read on the talent market: is it competitive? Are candidates open to new roles? Are certain industries or job types seeing more traction than others?

Below is how the index has changed over the last five years. For context, it's worth understanding the Movemeon community:

• It’s global: our 90k members are based across the world, with our main hubs in the UK, France, DACH, the Middle East, APAC and the US
• Everyone has worked in a leading consulting or accounting firm: 45% are ex-McKinsey, BCG and Bain; 30% are leading strategy firms; the remainder are the Big4
• They are future leaders and Board members: consultancies make up six of the top eight "CEO factories" (companies whose alumni become CEOs of the largest businesses). And this isn't constrained to just large businesses, with a disproportionate number of unicorns founded by consulting alumni

In terms of interpreting the numbers: 

• 0-25: a very hard market to hire in. Focus on retention, as replacing people is going to be hard.
• 25-50: a hard market to hire in. Be proactive and start talent pipelining for key positions.
• 50-75: a good market to hire in. Start looking to take advantage of the market, and strengthen key positions.
• ‍75-100: an exceptional market to hire in. Look to bring in exceptional talent that you’ll only get a few chances to snap up.

‍

The Talent Index has dropped from 80% last quarter to 77% this quarter. This is considerably below the average over the preceding 12 months of 90, and suggests it is getting harder for companies to hire the talent they need - in other words, demand is increasing as supply decreases. For a point of comparison, it is now at the average level of 2023, where a number of companies were still struggling to hire post COVID and the Great Resignation.

To understand the drivers of this, we are looking into the changes to hiring demand across different company types.

We’ve seen a real strengthening of the hiring market

‍

‍

There has been a very clear strengthening in the hiring market since January 2025. We’ve seen hiring activity broadly double over the past 6 months, although this has been very varied by company type.

‍

‍

Whilst Private Equity, Advisory and Scale-ups are fuelling demand in the hiring market, Corporates and Large Enterprises are continue to lag. When we compare the current hiring market with the previous 12 months an even clearer picture emerges: Private Equity funds and portfolio companies have seen sustained growth, whilst hiring across Corporates and Large Enterprises has declined.

‍

‍

Sharp increase in hiring demand for PE-backed companies

There are two primary drivers for hiring demand for PE-backed businesses - the number of new deals and the requirement for portfolio operations support. 

‍

New deal activity: There’s been a modest increase in PE deal activity in H1 of this year. This can be shown by EY’s market pulse: there were 275 deals over $100mn vs. 200 in H1 2024. However, this is a long way short of the 400 that were averaged in 2021, and analysing the amount of dry powder in the market, it feels like these are still depressed numbers. Interestingly, based on conversations with funds over the summer period, we’ve noticed a large uptick in deals which we are confident will carry on into H2, so are expecting PE deal activity becoming an increasingly strong driver of hiring demand. This is further supported by EY’s pulse survey, with an overwhelming majority (68%) expecting an uptick in deployment.

‍

‍

Portfolio operations support: The requirement of portfolio operations support is driven by the size of the portfolio and the transformation requirement to achieve the VCP. We believe the increased requirement of support has been the main driver of the increased demand in H1. As funds have held onto portfolio companies for longer, there has been a multiplier effect on the support required. Not only are there more portfolio companies to support, longer holding periods require more frequent chnage to VCPs, often with more hands-on transformation/ operational support. This is against a backdrop of an increased focus on operational improvement, as interest rates have risen and financial leverage has become less effective.

‍

An AI-driven boom for advisory firms? What’s going on

‍

The risks posed by AI to consulting have been widely written about. 

It’s clear that AI poses existential threats to the current consulting operating model. At the core of the consulting proposition is synthesising complex data, market intelligence and driving to clear recommendations. All things that AI will be able to do better than humans. It’s not an if; it’s a when.

‍

However, we’ve seen strong growth in hiring for advisory firms. So what’s going on?

Our initial hypothesis was that boutique advisory firms pivoting to focus on AI were growing fast and therefore needing to hire. This would suggest that rather than the advisory segment growing, that it was more a case of people moving from large consulting firms to smaller ones. However, when we ran the numbers, it became clear that hiring demand was coming from both both boutique and large advisory firms.

‍

‍

What this suggests is that the short-term impact of AI on consulting talent has been over-played. It might also indicate another trend at play: Consultancies going through a period of growth as their clients invest in getting to grips with what AI means for them and their operating model. What remains to be seen is if this is a temporary blip, or the future of consulting.

‍

Return of scale-up hiring - AI driven uptick, or return to normal levels?

The scale-up market has been depressed since the 2020-21 VC-driven bubble. The focus has increasingly been on the bottom line, and for many this has meant going into survival mode to elongate runways or drive towards cash-flow positive business models. 

‍

There has understandably been a big focus on AI scale-ups, and there is an increasing concern among many that there may be a new bubble forming around AI. But when we look at the hiring demand we’ve seen, it’s been broad and feels like more a return to normal levels.

‍

When we look at the increase in hiring demand, alongside the change in the Talent Index, it’s interesting to see that despite the growth in hiring there is still a lot of supply; the Talent Index remains stubbornly at 94%, well above average in the market. This suggests that this is still a market where there is a lot of talent looking - driven by 2-3 years of depressed hiring.

‍

‍

In Large Enterprises, hiring levels are still low, but for those hiring, it’s hard to find the very best talent

Large Enterprise hiring is trailing well below the growth we’re seeing across Private Equity, Advisory and Scale-ups. Not only is it below the average demand it’s seen over the last 18 months, it’s also reduced in growth over the last three months. 

‍

What’s interesting is that this doesn’t mean there’s oversupply in the market. We were expecting to see a very high Talent Index - indicating there’s a lot of talent in the market looking for new roles. However, at just 58%, Large Enterprises and Corporates have the lowest value of any of our different company types. This suggests there is a real attraction challenge - the growth of PE, and to some extent scale-ups, is taking talent away from more traditional routes like joining the Strategy team of a well-recognised, large, global business. 

‍

If Private Equity and Scale-ups continue their growth - we foresee this being a hard part of the market to hire in for the foreseeable future. It’s for this reason that we’re starting to see an increase in freelance and interim demand across Large Enterprises.

‍

Is the Freelance Revolution driving more supply in the freelance/ interim market

‍

Whilst the Talent Index has tightened for permanent roles, it appears to be more resilient in the freelance market, where a continued over-supply of talent persists.

We’ve seen broadly consistent demand across freelance and permanent roles on the hiring side, so it feels like there is something a bit more fundamental at play on the supply side. We have written extensively on the freelance revolution that we are witnessing in the market - some of the very best talent choosing to enter the freelance market to have more control over the work they do, and their lifestyle. The more resilient talent index suggests that very strong supply on this side of the market could be the main driver. It might also help explain why we’re seeing the dip in the permanent market.

‍

To find out more about hiring with Movemeon get in touch with our team here.

‍

‍

‍

This report marks the second instalment of Movemeon’s Quarterly Hiring Analysis — a regular update designed to help hiring managers and candidates stay ahead of the market across Private Equity, VC-backed scale-ups and large Enterprise businesses. Our insights are powered by over 1.8 million data points from the Movemeon platform, giving you a clear picture of how candidate interest and hiring demand are shifting.

At the heart of this analysis is the Movemeon Hiring Index — a scale from 0 to 100 that reflects how attractive the job market is for employers. In short: a higher index means higher candidate interest per role. When the economy slows, candidate supply tends to rise, pushing the index up. When hiring demand picks up and candidate availability falls, the index drops.

To find out more about hiring with Movemeon get in touch with our team here.

‍

‍

This quarter, we’ve seen a strengthening in the hiring market.

After 6 months in the second half of last year with a value between 90 and 100 (the highest values we’d seen, indicating high interest in new roles), the index dropped to 75 in January and 80 in February. 

We look at the drivers of this change, highlighting how a drop in the freelance market index pre-empted a drop in the permanent market index. We then look at how these trends have varied depending upon industry, finding that Private Equity is starting to lose it’s talent edge, just as there has been increased demand for hiring in the market. 

We conclude that all the drivers are there for a war for talent, but that this is likely to be localised initially to Private Equity backed-companies where we’re seeing both higher hiring demand coupled with a slight decrease in candidate supply. We forecast this to further expand into consulting and potentially corporates, driven by increased demand and reduced supply respectively.

‍

The Movemeon talent index

The Index is designed to give employers a read on the talent market: is it competitive? Are candidates open to new roles? Are certain industries or job types seeing more traction than others?

Below is how the index has changed over the last five years. For context, it's worth understanding who the Movemeon community are:

• It’s global: our 90k members are based across the world, with our main hubs in the UK, France, DACH, the Middle East, APAC and the US
• Everyone has worked in a leading consulting or accounting firm: 45% are ex-McKinsey, BCG and Bain; 30% are leading strategy firms; the remainder are the Big4
• They are future leaders and Board members: consultancies make up six of the top eight "CEO factories" (companies whose alumni become CEOs of the largest businesses. And this isn't constrained to just large businesses, with a disproportionate number of unicorns founded by consulting alumni

‍

‍

The freelance and permanent markets have broadly mirrored one another, although freelance has moved first and seen more rapid fluctuations

The freelance and interim market has broadly mirrored the permanent one, but tends to shift first — reacting more quickly to changes in business needs and macroeconomic signals. This can be seen by the permanent having a slight lag from the freelance index, as well as often slightly dampened highs and lows.

‍

‍

‍

‍

When we look at the index at a company level, we can see hiring is the hardest it has been for the past year, especially in consulting and corporates

Candidate interest in consulting and corporate roles is now at a one-year low. These sectors are beginning to feel the effects of tightening supply. In contrast, PE-backed companies — where hiring demand remains strong — are still benefiting from relatively high candidate availability, but that gap is closing thanks to slight increases in interest in start-ups/scale-ups as well as consulting. 

‍

‍

Is the war for top talent about to heat up again?

‍

The phrase “war for talent” was first coined by McKinsey in the late ’90s and resurfaced in 2022 during the Great Resignation and post-COVID hiring boom. Are we seeing a resurgence?

The answer lies in the balance between:

1. Candidate supply (captured by our Hiring Index captures)
   
   
2. Employer demand (based on volume and growth of roles posted)
   
   

What we’re seeing is clear: Q1 2025 was the busiest hiring quarter since early 2022. This suggests that overall demand is returning — and it’s being led by Private Equity.

In fact, PE’s share of total hiring demand has grown significantly over the past two years. As deal volume picks up and portfolio businesses push ahead with transformation plans, the ‘war for talent’ is likely to intensify, albeit localised at first.

‍

‍

‍

Whilst we expect this war for talent to be highly localised to Private Equity initially, we are forecasting that it will expand into consulting and corporates over the course of the next year. The expansion into consulting will predominantly be demand led: increased deal flow will result in more consulting work, which will mean more hiring in a slightly dampened market. For corporates the challenge will be supply led: their historic disadvantage in hiring ex-consulting talent compared with PE or consulting has further widened, meaning a small increase in demand will have a big impact.

‍

To find out more about hiring with Movemeon get in touch with our team here.

‍

Every fortnight or so I run a poll on my LinkedIn. Given my area of expertise, the polls explore consulting careers (in and after consulting) - why people start, why they leave and what they leave for. Typically 600-1,200 people join in (a pretty decent sample size) and overall, these polls have been viewed by over 500,000 people with more than 15,000 participants.

Why do I do these polls about post consulting careers?

Well, unlike many more linear careers, most consulting careers involve leaving consulting. So for a consultant, plotting a career is a bit of a minefield. And if you're trying to hire consulting-trained professionals, how best to attract them can be equally mind-boggling. So, I find the results of these polls particularly enlightening. Why?

• For employers (HR and hiring managers inside and outside of consulting firms), they unlock the secret sauce in retaining or attracting consulting-trained professionals (into roles like strategy, transformation, project management, commercial development, chief of staff etc) by shining a light on how most people think about their consulting careers.
• For consultants, they shed light on how others in the consulting industry feel and behave and accordingly, give you clear references for plotting your consulting career - either in or away from consulting itself.

In this article, I've collated 11 recent polls into 3 topics:

1. Firstly: "Starting a consulting career - why?"
2. Secondly: "Leaving consulting - why?"
3. And finally: "Leaving consulting - what for?"

So, let's get into the data...

Starting a consulting career - why?

Summary: simply put, the majority of people who start a consulting career...

• Don't regret the time spent in consulting (83%);
• Didn't join intending for a lifelong consulting career (88%) / did join as a means to an end (skills, network);
• Don't regret leaving consulting (93%) and;
• Would have been more likely to stay / would return if pay, progression and, especially, working hours improved (80%).

Consultants & former consultants - do you regret the time you spent / are spending in consulting?

Results: (link to data)

When you joined a consulting firm, was it as a "means to an end", or did you envisage a whole career in a consulting firm?

Results below (link to original data)

Do you regret leaving consulting?

Results below (link to original data)

What's the main reason you'd consider switching consulting firms / moving back to consulting?

Results below (link to original data)

Leaving consulting - why?

Summary: simply put, the majority of people leave a consulting career (i.e, leave a permanent role in a consulting firm) in order to...

• Improve their work-life balance / working hours which has..,.
• Deteriorated further during / thanks to covid

What's the main reason you left / would consider leaving consulting?

Results below (link to original data)

Leaving consulting - was work-life balance the main reason (or would it be, if you were to leave in the future)?

Results below (link to original data)

Consultants - how has your work-life balance changed through covid? I'm working..

Results below (link to original data)

Leaving consulting - what for?

Summary: simply put, consultants transition their careers out of consulting along the following lines...

• Scale-ups are the most sought-after company type, but the full range of organisations is appealing (the consulting skill set is extremely transferable so most options are open)
• Most consultants want their career to end up in a P&L or operational leadership role (CEO/COO track) - the most successful companies at hiring ex-consulting talent can show a path to these (typically using strategy / transformation teams as a stepping stone / leadership talent pipeline)
• Freelance consulting is becoming increasingly popular
• Current & former consultants want more data when it comes to choosing post-consulting careers, especially regarding compensation and work-life balance. We're on a mission to provide that - check it out here.

Consultants - what company type do you find most appealing (as a post consulting home)?

Results below (link to original data)

Current & former consultants - what job type would you most like your career to lead to (or for more senior folk, which has it lead to)?

Results below (link to original data)

Freelancing - Are you more of less likely than 12 months ago to consider doing some freelance work?

Results below (link to original data)

Would it be helpful to know which post-consulting careers have the best pay, working hours & job satisfaction?

Results below (link to original data)

Popular Resources

If you're trying to assess your options for a post-consulting career, here are some popular resources:

• Private equity - 29 questions to ask
• What is a Chief of Staff and why do they get hired?
• How to be successful as a freelance consultant
• 30 interviews with industry leaders (who used to be consultants)

Subscribe to our newsletter to receive our exclusive insights and career tips straight into your inbox every month:

Given the intense competition, receiving an offer to join a private equity firm is quite a significant achievement, and the temptation to accept the offer as soon as you receive it without having done any proper due diligence is thus huge. Overlooking this crucial step of the job-hunting process can lead to serious disappointment in the future and the fast-moving private equity industry is no exception in that respect.

Below are 29 questions that you should ask to ensure you make an enlightened decision.

Fund strategy & positioning

1. How many funds and/or product lines does the firm operate?
   More and more Private equity firms are diversifying their activity to include hedge funds (i.e. public market investing) or debt vehicles. Each business line requires a particular approach and investment strategy. As a consequence, this can give you a feel for the variety of the work (in terms of investment type) that you will face. Beware though; like any organisation, a firm that spreads across too many lines is likely to feel a bit disorganised.
   
   
2. What kind of assets does the company invest in? There are primarily two types of assets in private equity: companies and infrastructure. Again, referring to the first post of my series, the nature of the work differs between those two environments.
   
   
3. What is the fund's investment strategy? Each fund will more or less strictly position itself within a spectrum going from "distressed" (i.e. underperforming and close to bankruptcy) to "glamorous" or "high-growth" assets. The price paid but more importantly, the type of work and situations you will encounter will depend on the strategy. In a distressed fund, you should expect to be involved in heavy restructuring and cost-cutting programs. In a growth context, you will spend much of your time finding ways to develop the business' top-line.
   
   
4. What is the size of the fund? What is the fund's sweet spot in terms of enterprise value or equity cheque? As mentioned in the first post of this series, the type of work you will do will significantly differ if you join a small-cap (<$250m roughly), mid-cap ($250m to $1bn) or large-cap fund. The equity cheque (i.e. the amount the fund itself invests in a given company) is intimately linked to the fund size since a fund will typically make between 8 and 20 investments as well as to the enterprise value sweet spot since roughly 50% of the acquisition price will be paid by raising debt.
   
   
5. Which stage of the company's lifecycle does the fund invest in? As mentioned in an earlier post, private equity funds as a whole cover the entire company lifecycle, from birth (seed or VC) to maturity (LBO). You should expect VCs to be more "gut-feel" based whereas LBOs require deeper due diligence and involve a significant amount of financial structuring (absent in VCs which very often can only raise equity).
   
   
6. Where is the fund present? Where does the fund invest? On one hand, a global fund will limit country-specific risk exposure. On the other hand, the more global the fund, the more you will have to travel - especially if the office network is relatively loose, e.g. only one office to cover the whole of Europe.
   
   Practically speaking, the geographical remit is defined in two ways. First, investors sign a term sheet that formally defines the areas where the General Partners (or "GPs", i.e. the members of the private equity firm) can and cannot invest. Second, and more importantly, GPs have their own "comfort zone", which is often a subset of the theoretically authorised area. This question is important for you as it will determine the amount of travel you can expect from this job as well as the extent of the cultural gap you may face when meeting with management teams.
   
   
7. What kind of industries does the fund invest in? The majority of funds are "sector-agnostic" and will invest indifferently in all industries. Some (most often smaller ones) have specialised in one or a handful of industries, typically Retail or Tech.
   
   
8. Does the fund do minority and/or majority deals? By definition, if the fund only does minority deals it will rarely be able to exert full control over the company and therefore you should expect more time to be spent on the due diligence - to ensure that the business "as it is" is a good one. This situation is relatively rare in private equity as opposed to hedge funds
   
   
9. Is the fund committed or raised on a deal-by-deal basis? A committed fund will offer more stability and less dependence on market conditions. Furthermore, a firm seeking investor funding on a deal-by-deal basis may feel the pressure to invest regularly to keep momentum with investors, even if the climate or opportunities are not optimal.

Track record

1. When did the firm raise funds for the last time? This question will give you a feel for the type of work you will be doing. If the fund is recent (less than 2-3 years), you should expect to spend most of your time sourcing deals and executing investments for this new fund. If the fund is older, portfolio management ("harvesting") should take a growing share of your bandwidth.
   
   
2. Has the firm raised more than one fund? First-time funds can appear attractive because of their entrepreneurial nature and their subsequent potential. If the first fund is successful the second will be larger and the team will grow, potentially creating "upward gaps". However, growth in private equity is more often achieved through external hiring rather than internal promotion, so you should always consider career upside potential with a bit of caution.
   
   
3. How does the actual fundraising amount compare with the fundraising target? In the current environment, with liquidity being more than abundant, a fund not meeting its fundraising target has run out of favour with investors and such momentum is very difficult to reverse, so I advise you to stay away. Some funds exceed their target, but many will stop when they reach it in order not to overstretch their teams.
   
   
4. How does the latest actual fundraising amount compare with previous actuals? Fund growth is a clear indicator of momentum and expected team size evolution. In particular, if the firm has been raising a decreasing amount of money, it means investors are less and less convinced and, unless the firm manages to come up with a series of mind-blowing investments, you should expect the trend to continue and therefore the team to keep shrinking.
   
   
5. How have previous funds performed? Given the illiquid and long-term nature of private equity (funds have a 10-year lifespan), it takes time for struggling funds to be entirely wiped out of the market. An early indicator consists of benchmarking the latest funds' IRR. If those IRRs are disappointing, it will only be a matter of time before investors are free to switch their funds to another destination.
   
   
6. Has the fund made recent investments? A fund may decide to slow or fasten its investment pace depending on market conditions. However, a fund that has not put any money to work over the last 18 months is more likely struggling to source interesting deals and this should raise a flag.
   
   
7. How fragmented is the Limited Partner (or "LPs", i.e. investor) base? I am always concerned with "one-LP" funds where one investor has the practical right of life and death over the fund. I believe this not only creates uncertainty about the future of the fund in case of headwinds (both at fund and investor level) but also there is a risk of seeing the LP interfering with investment decisions (creating useless friction).

Operating model

1. How large is the firm globally? In London? A classic question. All funds started with very small teams and an entrepreneurial spirit, but some have grown so much that this early flavour may have disappeared quite significantly.
   
   
2. Are there other offices? If so, where? Where are the headquarters? What is the role of London? The worst case for you is to join a US-based fund which considers London (and Europe in general) as non-core to their strategy and as such does not give you a lot of consideration and does not involve you in the investment decisions. Fortunately, London is a strong financial place and such situations are rare (at least rarer than if you were applying in Paris or Madrid).
   
   
3. Are there investment committee members based in London? Building on the previous question, a negative answer will likely indicate that the office has been primarily set up to perform local sourcing and execute deals when told by the headquarters, which reduces the amount of autonomy you will enjoy and subsequently the interest of the job.
   
   
4. How is staffing decided? Are there teams dedicated to particular geographies/industries/product lines? This question will help you assess whether you are going to develop particular expertise or whether you are going to remain quite a generalist. Both approaches have their own pluses and minuses, but in any case, you would like to ensure that your prospective employer does not plan to specialise you in an industry you do not fancy.
   
   
5. Is there a dedicated operations team? If so, how large is it, what are its remit and background? If an operations team exists, you should expect to be consequently less involved in commercial and operational aspects of the due diligence and/or portfolio management.

People & culture

1. Where do people come from? PE professionals typically come from a mix of investment banking, consulting, accountancy/Transaction Services and Corporate. The way of approaching investments is influenced by this background.
   
   
2. How would you define the fund's culture? Some funds have an American culture, which as a Frenchman I would define as direct and energetic, others have a more British inclination, softer and possibly more political. This does not mean that one is generally better than the other but you need to make sure that the culture fits your way of working and interacting with others.
   
   
3. How many (net) additions to the team have there been in the last 24 months? In the investment team alone? The "fund size evolution" question, should help you assess the momentum the firm is benefiting from. A shrinking team is almost always a bad sign - the fund is losing momentum or struggling to attract talents to fill the gaps.
   
   
4. How many people have left the fund over the last 24 months? If you exclude "defined-length" contracts (such as the Associates program), churn should be low: jobs in private equity are rare, and people tend to stick to their seats if their role is interesting and if they believe the firm has decent future prospects. If churn is high (say more than 30% of the firm was renewed over the last 2 years), at least one of the two previously mentioned conditions was broken.
   
   
5. Who are the senior sponsors of the fund? Each private equity fund is chaired and/or advised by highly respected individuals within the investment industry. Such personalities act as a stamp of approval and tend to facilitate fundraising. Conversely, you should proceed carefully with not or weakly endorsed funds.
   
   
6. Can I meet the rest of the team? Private equity firms are small companies and the personal fit is even more important than in consulting - imagine that you will spend many years working with the same people on a series of projects. I thus encourage you to meet as many team members as possible to assess this fit.

Compensation and career path

1. Who has access to carried interest? How is carried interest computed? Carried interest (i.e. the performance fee that general partners receive when their investments generate an IRR in excess of a certain threshold) amounts to a very significant share of your compensation, especially at senior level. Always useful to know when you will be entitled to receive a share of the pie. Most often carried interest is computed and shared at fund level; however, a few funds (e.g. CVC Capital Partners) are famous for their "deal-by-deal carry structure".
   
   
2. What is the typical career path? You need to understand whether there is a "glass ceiling" that you will never be able to go through. Many US funds have formal fixed-term Associate programs which imply that you will need to leave after 2-3 years. Other funds may encourage investment professionals to leave once they reach a given tenure if there is no room for additional senior managers or partners. In any case, you should feel free to ask for specific examples.

FAQs

1. What are the potential drawbacks or challenges associated with joining a private equity fund that has recently raised funds (less than 2-3 years old), and how might the job responsibilities differ in comparison to joining a more established fund?
   
   Joining a private equity fund that has recently raised funds (less than 2-3 years old) may involve a greater emphasis on sourcing deals and executing investments for the new fund. This could mean a higher focus on building the fund's portfolio and establishing its presence in the market. The nature of the work may lean more towards the early stages of fund management, with portfolio management gaining prominence as the fund matures over time.
   
   
2. How can I assess the cultural fit within a private equity firm, especially considering the different cultural inclinations between American and British-founded funds mentioned in the post?
   
   Assessing cultural fit within a private equity firm involves understanding the underlying cultural dynamics, such as American or British inclinations. For instance, American cultures might be characterized as direct and energetic, while British cultures may be perceived as softer and possibly more political. You should consider your own working style and preferences to ensure alignment with the cultural nuances of the firm, as this can significantly impact job satisfaction and collaboration.
   
   
3. In the context of private equity fund size and fundraising, what are the implications for my career progression and job responsibilities based on whether the fund exceeds its fundraising target, stops at the target, or falls short of the target?
   
   The fundraising performance of a private equity fund can influence career progression and job responsibilities. If a fund exceeds its fundraising target, it might indicate strong investor confidence and potential team growth, creating upward career opportunities. Conversely, a fund that falls short of its target may face challenges, potentially leading to a shrinking team. Understanding the fund's fundraising success provides valuable insights into its momentum and the trajectory of the team, helping candidates make informed decisions about their long-term career prospects.
   
   

Continue reading the private equity series:

• 12 usual activities of a private equity associate
• The double-edged sword of working in private equity
• 9 principles to help you break in
• All private equity funds were not created equal
• When to look for the boarding gate?

Subscribe to our newsletter below to receive our exclusive insights and career tips straight into your inbox every month:

Explore jobs at Private Equity Firms on our free platform - it takes 2 minutes to sign up here