When organisations engage technology consultants, they assume they’re hiring objective advisors. But beneath the surface of professional presentations and impressive credentials lies a set of practices that fundamentally compromise the advice being delivered—practices so embedded in the consulting industry that most organisations don’t even know to look for them.
These aren’t isolated incidents of poor behaviour. They’re systemic issues baked into business models, invisible to clients until the damage is done.
The Question Nobody Asks
“Do you receive any financial compensation from the vendors you recommend?”
It’s a simple question. But in over a decade of consulting, I’ve rarely seen organisations ask it during procurement. The answer, however, reveals everything about whose interests are actually being served.
Hidden vendor kickbacks—commissions, rebates, referral fees—create a fundamental conflict of interest. When a consultant stands to gain financially from recommending particular software, their advice is no longer purely about what’s best for your organisation. It’s influenced by what’s best for their bottom line.
I’ve watched organisations discover (often too late) that their “trusted advisor” had financial incentives that were never disclosed upfront. The frustrating part? This is completely preventable. But first, organisations need to understand the full scope of the problem.
Beyond Vendor Kickbacks: The Billing Inflation Game
Vendor commissions aren’t the only way consulting firms prioritise revenue over client outcomes. Another widespread practice involves deliberately inflating project teams with misrepresented resources.
Picture this: you engage a consulting firm for a critical technology transformation. The proposal includes several “Senior Consultants” at premium rates. What you may not realise is that some of these “senior” resources are actually graduates or junior staff, relabelled to justify dramatically higher billing rates.
This isn’t about having appropriate resources on a project. It’s about billing inflation masquerading as capability.
The practice works because it’s difficult to challenge. By the time you realise the “Senior Consultant” lacks the experience their title suggests, significant commitments have been made. Questioning it feels confrontational. Changing direction feels expensive and disruptive.
Consulting firms count on this inertia.
Two Sides of the Same Problem
What strikes me about both issues—vendor kickbacks and billing inflation—is that they share a common root: structures that prioritise the consulting firm’s revenue over the client’s outcomes.
Whether it’s hidden commissions influencing software recommendations or artificially inflated team compositions padding invoices, the client ultimately pays the price—not just financially, but in suboptimal solutions and compromised outcomes.
These practices persist because they’re incredibly profitable, and they’re largely invisible.
Vendor kickbacks aren’t disclosed unless specifically asked about. Billing inflation is hidden behind impressive titles and complex project structures. By the time organisations realise what’s happened, they’re too far into implementations to change direction easily. The switching costs—financial, operational, and political—become barriers to addressing the problem.
Consulting firms understand this dynamic and structure their engagements accordingly.
The Ethical Alternative
So what does ethical consulting look like in this landscape?
At Emergent, we’ve structured our approach around transparency and alignment with client interests:
No vendor kickbacks. We don’t accept commissions, rebates, or any financial compensation from software vendors. Our recommendations are based purely on what’s right for each client’s specific context.
Transparent resourcing. When we bring people onto a project, their title, experience, and billing rate align with reality. We don’t relabel junior staff as senior consultants to inflate invoices.
Does this make our business model harder? Absolutely. We’re paid purely for the value we deliver, not for hidden commissions or billing inflation.
But it means our clients know with absolute certainty that our advice serves their interests, not ours.
We maintain strong relationships with software vendors, but those relationships exist to benefit our clients through better roadmap visibility, stronger negotiations, faster issue resolution, and advocacy for the client’s perspective. Not to generate additional revenue streams.
What Organisations Can Do
If you’re procuring technology consulting services, here are the critical questions you should be asking:
About vendor relationships:
- Do you receive any financial compensation from the vendors you recommend?
- What is the nature of your relationships with software vendors?
- How do you ensure your vendor recommendations remain objective?
About resourcing and billing:
- What are the actual experience levels of the team members you’re proposing?
- How do your billing rates correspond to genuine seniority and capability?
- Can we see CVs and verify experience before engagement?
- What happens if we’re not satisfied with a team member’s performance?
About alignment and transparency:
- How do you structure your business model to avoid conflicts of interest?
- Can you provide references from clients about your transparency and ethical practices?
The most important thing? Don’t assume that professional credentials and impressive presentations guarantee ethical practices. Ask the uncomfortable questions. Demand transparency. Verify claims.
Why This Matters
Technology decisions are too important, too expensive, and too impactful to be influenced by hidden financial incentives or billing games.
Your software choices will shape your operations for years. The costs extend far beyond the initial implementation—they include ongoing licensing, support, training, integration with other systems, and the opportunity cost of choosing poorly.
When that choice is influenced by a consultant’s undisclosed commission or when you’re paying senior rates for junior capability, you’re not just overpaying. You’re potentially implementing suboptimal solutions that will cost you for years to come.
The Broader Industry Challenge
Individual organisations asking better questions helps, but it doesn’t solve the systemic problem.
These practices persist because they’re embedded in how the consulting industry operates. They’re taught implicitly through business models and reinforced through financial incentives. They’re normalised to the point where many consultants genuinely don’t see them as problematic.
Changing this requires industry-level conversations about standards, disclosure requirements, and what constitutes ethical consulting practice. It requires consultants willing to acknowledge these issues publicly, even when it’s uncomfortable. It requires organisations sharing their experiences—both positive and negative—so others can learn from them.
And it requires a fundamental shift in how we think about the consultant-client relationship: from a transactional engagement focused on billable hours to a genuine partnership focused on client outcomes.
Building Better Relationships
The irony is that ethical consulting practices actually lead to stronger, more sustainable client relationships.
When clients trust that your advice is genuinely in their best interests, they engage more openly. They’re more willing to share the real challenges they’re facing. They’re more receptive to difficult conversations about what needs to change.
This creates better outcomes—not just for the immediate project, but for the client’s long-term capability and success.
At Emergent, our strongest client relationships are built on this foundation of trust and transparency. We’re not trying to maximise billable hours. We’re trying to help organisations achieve genuine transformation that enables them to make their greatest positive impact.
The Path Forward
These practices—vendor kickbacks and billing inflation—persist because they’re hidden and unquestioned. The more openly we discuss them, the harder it becomes for them to continue unchallenged.
If you’ve experienced these issues, talking about them matters. If you’re procuring consulting services, asking the tough questions matters. If you’re a consultant, examining your own practices and business model matters.
The consulting industry can do better. It starts with making the invisible visible and refusing to accept conflicted advice as normal.
In my next article, I’ll explore another hidden challenge in technology consulting: the resourcing trap that organisations face when undertaking major transformations, and how to navigate the complex decision between building internal capability and engaging external expertise.
What’s been your experience with technology consultants? Have you encountered these hidden conflicts of interest? What questions have you found most valuable when engaging consulting services?
Anthony Butler is the Founder and Managing Director of Emergent, a digital transformation consultancy that helps organisations select, implement, and optimise software solutions. With experience consulting to over 60 organisations across more than 15 industries, Anthony advocates for transparent, client-centred consulting practices that prioritise genuine outcomes over billing opportunities.
