Private consultants in both the public and private sectors

Introduction

In recent years, PwC's business in Asia has declined due to scandals that resulted in the loss of  clients in China, prompting the firm to sell its government consulting division in Australia. The PwC tax affair in Australia has rekindled questions about the sources of government advice and heightened concerns over whether reliance on private-sector consultants compromises public services and decision-making (Lapsley et al., 2013). Historically, the relationship between governments and private consultants was built on consultants providing specialised knowledge to bridge expertise gaps within public institutions. However, recent trends suggest the emergence of a more complex and potentially problematic interdependency. Consultants have become central figures in shaping policy, advising on regulatory frameworks, and implementing administrative reforms across various sectors, including health, defence, education, taxation, and sustainability. Their increasing prominence, significantly when their advice heavily influences public policy decisions, raises questions about the accountability of consultants and prompts a critical reassessment of their operational impact and the effects of their advice on policy outcomes.

The influence of consultants extends deeply into private-sector governance, where the Big Four firms dominate large multinational corporations' auditing and advisory processes. This includes 98% of international corporations with revenues exceeding US$1 billion and most companies listed on the FTSE 100 Index in the United Kingdom, the Fortune 500 in the United States, and the ASX 300 in Australia (Guthrie et al., 2023). Given their extensive involvement with a significant portion of the global economy, questions have arisen about whether public interests - particularly in areas like tax compliance and financial reporting - are adequately safeguarded. These concerns are particularly relevant in widespread cross-border tax avoidance, where profits are shifted to low-tax jurisdictions with lenient regulations to evade taxes that would otherwise be owed in higher-tax countries. This practice costs governments an estimated US$480 billion annually (Tax Justice Network, 2023), projected to reach US$4.8 trillion over the next decade (Lucas and Guthrie, 2024). These practices raise ethical and legal concerns, challenging the legitimacy of consulting firms in facilitating, advising, or auditing corporations involved in such activities and prompting critical questions about the transparency and accountability of consultants' advisory and audit processes.

In this context,  public scrutiny of conflict-of-interest scandals involving Big Four consultants heightens  concerns about the monopoly of large consulting firms and their role in auditing major global corporations. Such incidents have impacted public perception of consultancy firms as a whole, fueling apprehension over the influence that the Big Four and other large consulting firms wield  in corporate and governmental spheres. Although consultants have become crucial intermediaries between governments, private enterprises, and the third sector, academic research on their systemic role remains limited. Most studies focus on isolated cases, leaving a significant  gap in understanding their broader societal impact.

This special issue of AAAJ aims to investigate the critical yet underexamined role of consultancy firms in governance, especially their influence on accounting, auditing, accountability, and policy development. We invite contributions that explore various dimensions of consultants and their work, including their credibility, integration into elite networks, the global consultancy market, the specific policies they address, their role in disseminating knowledge across jurisdictions, and their mediation between government agencies, private firms, and the third sector. Furthermore, the special issue welcomes insights into how community activists engage with or challenge consultants' recommendations.

Ultimately, this special issue aims to foster interdisciplinary research that comprehensively analyses consultants' expanding influence on governance processes and public accountability, moving beyond descriptive accounts to critically assess their lasting impact on contemporary governance structures. For instance, Lucas and Guthrie's (2024) case study examines the extraordinary growth  of private management consultancy involvement in Australian higher education. Through an analysis of various "thought-leadership" reports on university futures, the authors present several contemporary case studies demonstrating how consultancy firms have embedded themselves within universities, reinforcing their expertise, profitability, and influence.  By exploring  the future scenarios envisioned by these firms, the authors suggest that this trend  reflects a new phase in the evolution of academic capitalism, maked by consultancy-driven strategies focused on market-making, profitability, fiscalisation, and unbundling. Finally, they raise concerns about the implications of these consultancy interventions for the future of public higher education, questioning how such influences might reshape the sector's landscape.

This case study investigates the significant expansion of private management consultancy involvement in Australian higher education. By analysing various 'thought-leadership' reports on university futures, the article presents several contemporary case studies that illustrate  how consultancy firms have ingrained themselves within universities, solidifying their expertise, profitability, and influence. The authors examine  the future scenarios proposed by these firms, suggesting that such developments mark  a new phase in the evolution of academic capitalism – one characterised by  consultancy-driven strategies focused on market-making, profitability, fiscalisation, and unbundling. Adams and Guthrie (2024) raise concerns about  the implications of these consultancy interventions for the future of public higher education, questioning how these influences might reshape the sector's landscape.

Guest Editors

Dr. Cristiana Bernardi
The Open University Business School, The Open University - UK
Università Telematica San Raffaele Roma - Italy 

Dr Mona Nikidehaghani
University of Wollongong - Australia

Associate Professor Sharron O'Neill
UNSW - Australia

Submissions Information

Please submit your paper during the submission window of 1 May 2025 using the AAAJ ScholarOne submission system at https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/aaaj. In 'Step 5' of the submission process, select this particular issue in response to the instruction: "Please select the issue you are submitting to".

Please ensure you follow the author guidelines available at https://www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/journal/aaaj 

Submitted articles must not have been previously published, nor should they be under consideration for publication anywhere else, while under review for this journal. Author guidelines must be strictly followed.

Submit your paper!

Journal homepage

Key Dates

• Submissions open: 1 May 2025
• Submissions deadline: 1 December 2025
• Papers will be accepted when ready, with online publication for early citations available once accepted. 

AAAJ APIRA Special Issue Stream

An APIRA stream will be organised to support authors planning to submit the AAAJ Special Issue. Please note that participation in the APIRA stream is not required to submit a manuscript for consideration in the Special Issue, nor does participation guarantee acceptance. Authors interested in attending should notify the Special Issue editors via email and will be notified of the format of the APIRA stream. In due course, further details about the APIRA stream will be provided to interested authors.

Contact

If you would like to discuss the AAAJ special issue or make a potential contribution, please contact Dr Cristiana Bernardi at [email protected].