viernes, 16 de diciembre de 2011

List of top consulting firms 2012


Following is a list of the top consulting firms around the world with such details as ranking, company name, website url, headquarters, year founded, approximate number of employees, male to female ratio, and other statistics. Being a top consulting firm do not means always prestige and do not bring quality and values automatically, but clients and job seekers of the consulting profession may be interested by these statistics.

Purpose: To summarize and provide beneficial statistical information about the consulting industry and provide quick access gateway to a list of the top consulting companies and websites.
Serving: Researchers, students, professionals, job seekers in the consulting industry and all who seek information about top consulting companies.

 

Disclaimer: We are not claiming any rights, responsibilites or ownership pertaining to creating, developing, designing, or programming any of the websites listed on this page. All websites listed on this page are publically available for viewing on the internet.

Rankings: Any ranking information regarding the listings above have been made by 3rd parties, organizations which make their ranking info available on public viewable pages free of charge. For this particular listing we have gathered inforamtion from various sources on the internet, including, cnn.com, vault.com, fortune.com and linkedin.com.

The 2011 Best Firms to Work For (according to Consulting Magazine):

 

The Best Consulting Firms to Work For 2011

  1. Bain & Company
  2. The Boston Consulting Group
  3. North Highland
  4. Point B
  5. Deloitte Consulting
  6. Slalom Consulting
  7. McKinsey & Company
  8. PwC
  9. Booz Allen Hamilton
  10. Huron Consulting Group
  11. Ernst & Young
  12. Accenture
  13. Crowe Horwath
  14. Monitor
  15. A.T. Kearney

The Best Small Consulting Firms to Work For 2011

  1. Stroud Consulting
  2. Impact Advisors
  3. Cask
  4. Vynamic
  5. Infinitive
  6. Fitzgerald Analytics
  7. Lenati
  8. Jabian Consulting
  9. PeopleFirm
  10. HiSoft (formerly Nouveon)
  11. Plus Consulting
  12. Meridian Compensation Partners
  13. Marakon
  14. SEI
  15. IBB Consulting Group

 

 

 

Rank

Consulting Firms

HQ

Industry

Type

# of
employees

Year
founded

Med
age

Male

Fe-

male

1

McKinsey & Company Greater New York City Area Management Consulting Partnership 15000 1926 29 67% 33%

2

The Boston Consulting Group, Inc Greater Boston Area Management Consulting Partnership 6000 1963 28 67% 33%

3

Bain & Company Greater Boston Area Management Consulting Privately Held 10000 1973 28 65% 35%

4

Booz & Company Washington DC Metro Area Management Consulting Privately Held 22000 1914 32 64% 36%

5

Deloitte Consulting LLP Greater New York City Area Financial Services Partnership 168000 - 29 61% 39%

6

Monitor Group Greater Boston Area Management Consulting Privately Held 1500 1983 29 63% 37%

7

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Greater New York City Area Accounting Partnership 17500 - 29 59% 41%

8

Mercer LLC Greater New York City Area Human Resources Public 18000 1937 34 51% 49%

9

Ernst & Young LLP Greater New York City Area Accounting Partnership 144000 - 29 59% 41%

10

Oliver Wyman Greater New York City Area Management Consulting Public 1001 - 30 70% 30%

11

Accenture Greater Chicago Area Management Consulting Public 177000 1989 30 67% 33%

12

IBM Global Business Services Greater New York City Area Information Technology and Services Public 300000 1911 34 76% 24%

13

KPMG LLP Amsterdam Area, Netherlands Accounting Partnership 137000 - 30 60% 40%

14

Towers Watson Greater Philadelphia Area Management Consulting Privately Held 6400 1934 34 52% 48%

15

AlixPartners, LLP Greater Detroit Area Management Consulting Privately Held 900 1981 35 77% 23%

16

A.T. Kearney Greater Chicago Area Management Consulting Partnership 2700 1926 30 68% 32%

17

Braxton Consulting Eurpe & Latin America Management Consulting Privately Held 250 1996 31 54% 46%

18

The Parthenon Group Greater Boston Area Management Consulting Privately Held 200 1999 28 62% 38%

19

Towers Watson - Financial Services Public 14000 - 34 53% 47%

20

L.E.K. Consulting London, UK Management Consulting Partnership 900 1983 28 70% 30%

21

FTI Consulting, Inc. Washington DC Metro Area Management Consulting Public 3500 1982 32 71% 29%

22

Alvarez & Marsal Greater New York City Area Management Consulting Privately Held 1600 1983 33 73% 27%

23

NERA Economic Consulting Greater New York City Area Management Consulting Public 600 1961 27 61% 39%

24

Capgemini Paris Area, France Information Technology and Services Privately Held 91000 1967 32 77% 23%

25

Navigant Consulting, Inc. Greater Chicago Area Management Consulting Public 2500 1983 32 62% 38%

26

Huron Consulting Group Greater Chicago Area Management Consulting Public 2000 2002 30 61% 39%

27

Hewitt Associates Greater Chicago Area Outsourcing/Offshoring Public 25000 1940 32 55% 45%

28

Roland Berger Strategy Consultants - Management Consulting Partnership 2100 1967 28 72% 28%

29

ZS Associates Greater Chicago Area Management Consulting Privately Held 1400 1983 27 72% 28%

30

CRA International, Inc. Greater Boston Area Management Consulting Public 800 1965 33 65% 35%

31

Arthur D. Little Paris Area, France Management Consulting Privately Held 1000 - 30 75% 25%

32

Kurt Salmon Associates Greater Atlanta Area Management Consulting Public 700 1935 33 63% 37%

33

LECG San Francisco Bay Area Management Consulting Public 1200 1988 34 69% 31%

34

Gallup Consulting District of Columbia Management Consulting Privately Held 2000 - 27 60% 40%

35

Aon Consulting Worldwide Greater Chicago Area Management Consulting Public 6300 1983 36 52% 48%

36

BraxtonTechnology Europe, Asia & Latin America Technology Consulting & Services Privately Held 219 2005 26 74% 26%

37

Cornerstone Research San Francisco Bay Area Legal Services Privately Held 201 1989 27 61% 39%

38

Corporate Executive Board Washington DC Metro Area Management Consulting Public 2000 1979 28 50% 50%

39

Hay Group Greater Philadelphia Area Management Consulting Privately Held 2600 1943 32 47% 53%

40

Analysis Group, Inc. Greater Boston Area Management Consulting Privately Held 500 1981 30 62% 38%

41

Milliman, Inc Greater Seattle Area Insurance Privately Held 2000 1947 35 62% 38%

42

Zolfo Cooper Greater New York City Area Financial Services Privately Held 75 - 31 67% 33%

43

Mars & Co - - - - 1979 - - -

44

The Advisory Board Company Washington DC Metro Area Hospital & Health Care Public 1000 1979 28 43% 57%

45

Putnam Associates Greater Boston Area Management Consulting Privately Held 50 1988 26 64% 36%

46

First Manhattan Consulting Group Greater New York City Area Management Consulting Privately Held 51 1980 26 76% 24%

47

IMS Health Incorporated Greater Philadelphia Area Pharmaceuticals Public 10000 1954 34 57% 43%

48

Buck Consultants Greater New York City Area Human Resources Public 1900 1916 38 55% 45%

49

Giuliani Partners LLC Greater New York City Area Management Consulting Privately Held 11 2002 45 79% 21%

50

Archstone Consulting Greater New York City Area Management Consulting Privately Held 250 2003 34 63% 37%

 

sábado, 25 de junio de 2011

THE DUBAI FINANCIAL CENTER (DIFC), Memoranda

New bilateral MoU partners include the Qatar Financial Centre Regulatory Authority, Autorité des Marchés Financiers (France), the New York State Banking Department and The Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions, Canada. At the same time, the DFSA signed multilateral MoUs with the Asian-Oceanian Standard-Setters Group and International Association of Insurance Supervisors. Meanwhile, the DIFC Courts signed its first international MoU with Jordan in Q2 2010. Adding to its existing MoUs with judicial counterparties from Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and Ras Al Khaima.

Last year the DFSA, after consultation with a panel of market practitioners and experts, made a series of regulatory changes to the DIFC’s Collective Investment Funds regime in order to make the Centre a more attractive investment centre for both international and domestic fund managers. In the third quarter the Carlyle Group became the first company to establish and manage an investment vehicle under the new funds regime.

2010 also saw continued DIFC Authority efforts aimed at supporting dialogue and international co-operation between counterparties, as well as creating strategic partnerships with international jurisdictions thus strengthening the DIFC’s offering to clients.

Six Memoranda of Understating (MoUs) were signed in 2010 to bring the total up to 11 MoUs with various jurisdictions. The MoUs signed in 2010 were with Luxembourg, Madrid Centro Financiero, the UAE Ministry of Finance, the Economic Zones World, the Dubai Department of Economic Development and the Dubai Department of Tourism & Commerce Marketing. Meanwhile, the other independent entities under the DIFC umbrella, the DFSA and DIFC Courts, have also both signed a number of different cooperation agreements during 2010.

Over the course of 2010, the DFSA entered into eight new bilateral MoUs and two new multilateral MoUs, bringing the total MoUs signed to date to 56.

Governor of DIFC Ahmed Humaid Al Tayer, said: “The solid growth witnessed by DIFC in 2010 reflects the importance of the Centre to financial and business institutions seeking to take advantage of opportunities present in the UAE and the wider region. With its continuous efforts to develop further its modern infrastructure, free zone offering and self-governing laws and courts, DIFC has consolidated its position as the pre-eminent and favoured financial centre in the region."

“We have already started reaping the rewards of our new business strategy and we are confident that DIFC will continue to play an important role in providing market participants vital support in the rapidly changing business environment in the region” He added.

CEO of DIFC Authority Abdulla Mohammed Al Awar, said: “We are very proud of the growth and success we have achieved on different levels in 2010. There is no doubt that the road ahead remains challenging. Although, we believe that there are still many untapped opportunities that our new strategy will position us to take advantage of.

We are committed to growing our existing client partnerships and we look forward to the continued support and guidance of our clients in our journey together to achieving greater success.”

lunes, 14 de marzo de 2011

Knowledge-related Motives.

Recent research findings suggest that knowledge assets both push and pull SMEs into international markets.There are also related findings from a number of OECD countries (Sweden, Ireland, and Canada) and non-OECD economies (Chile, India and Indonesia) on the internationalization triggering effects of knowledge aspects, including R&D investment, innovation capabilities, unique product or technology, management, and language skills; and firm resource base, as indicated by such proxies as size, age, and experience. The push dimension pertains to the importance of managersprevious international experience and related management capacity factors, as observed in studies among Canadian firms, Spanish firms, and Swedish firms. Search for knowledge assets may also pull SMEs into international markets, as suggested by Kocker and Buhl's findings that firms internationalize to obtain missing know-how required to maintain their lead in technological development.

Growth Motives.

Growth Motives.

Growth opportunities associated with international markets were identified as a key driver of firm internationalization in several recent studies. Orser et al. (2008), for example, reports say that after allowing for the impacts of firm size and sector, Canadian legal firms whose owners had expressed growth intentions were more than twice as likely to export, than those whose owners did not indicate growth ambitions. Firms‟ overseas venturing decision also seems to be motivated by a need for business growth, profits, an increased market size, a stronger market position, and to reduce dependence on a single or smaller number of markets. The possibility of growth in other markets and increased profit opportunities from international expansion were highlighted as key stimuli for exporting among the Australian, British, Spanish, Swedish, and US firms investigated in recent studies.

miércoles, 9 de febrero de 2011

European Union Direct Taxes

Permanent Establishment is a vital concept in international taxation. While for direct taxes, it is mainly defined by the OECD Model Convention, the European VAT Directive and its implementing Regulation provide an EU-wide approach for VAT.
Difficulties arise as terminology and definitions in indirect and direct tax diverge. Moreover, countries have implemented and interpreted the EU and OECD rules in a different way, impacting on issues like cross-border reorganisations, transfer pricing, taxation of dividends and interest and royalties, tax residence, temporary and permanent transfer of assets, place of supply and VAT liability.
In both direct and indirect tax, the concept of Permanent Establishment has undergone very recent changes: The 2010 changes to the OECD Model Convention and Commentary, and in particular the new Art. 7, will be adopted in national law, as speakers from the Netherlands and Germany will report. The effect of the new definition on treaties with other countries will also be considered.
Some of this topic is addressed in the new book "European Union Direct Taxes", by the International Tax Professor Salvador Trinxet Llorca.
In indirect tax, the current more important issue is the practical consequences of the adoption of the Regulation implementing the EU VAT Directive in January 2011.