The new Myth of "AI Killing McKinsey"... and What’s Really at Stake
Over the past few weeks, a viral headline has been circulating: “Sam Altman is killing McKinsey.” The claim is seductive, designed to stoke disruption anxiety. After all, if AI can analyze data faster, generate strategies instantly, and produce polished slides in seconds—what’s left for consultants to do?
But this narrative misses the deeper story. Having worked at McKinsey, I know firsthand that consulting was never about Excel models or PowerPoint decks alone. Those were the byproducts. The real value was something harder to automate: the judgment to ask the right questions, the trust to influence CEOs, and the resilience to shepherd organizations through messy, human change.
AI will not kill consulting. But it will expose what consulting really is.
For decades, the consulting model rested on two pillars:
AI is collapsing the first pillar. Knowledge is no longer scarce—it’s abundant, cheap, and on‑demand. A founder with GPT‑5 has access to analytical firepower that rivals a team of associates. That much is true.
But the second pillar—influence capital—is where the future lies. No AI can walk into a tense executive committee, navigate politics, calm egos, and rally leaders behind a bold path forward. That requires trust, judgment, and—dare I say—wisdom.
Here’s the paradox:
In this sense, AI is not killing McKinsey—it is forcing consulting to become more human. Less about producing binders, more about producing belief. Less about frameworks, more about follow‑through.
And this is where the real disruption lies. The firms (and individuals) that survive won’t be those who can out‑compute AI. They’ll be those who can out‑connect, out‑influence, and out‑lead.
So yes, AI is killing something. It’s killing the illusion that consulting was ever just about being smart. In its place, it reveals what consulting has always truly been: the art of moving people, not just moving numbers.
The consultants who understand this will thrive in the AI age. The ones who don’t will discover that it wasn’t AI that replaced them—it was irrelevance.
Criticality that has been forbidden by the top.
Fantastic take ! Whilst the focus is on “consulting”, I believe the argument extends to all roles in knowledge industry. What is considered “intelligence” in AI context is really ability to access and synthesize knowledge and content. Real value , however, is understanding your unique problem statement and identifying your unique solutions to those problems sold to a unique set of people. That’s still very much human skill ! Of course, the productivity expectation will increase 10x (or 10x reduction in cycle time)
Una bellissima riflessione Fabio Moioli. Forse il punto è se l’AI costringerà noi consulenti a smettere di nasconderci dietro numeri e slide, per tornare a ciò che conta davvero: aiutare, guidare e prendere decisioni insieme alle persone.
Interesting perspective, Fabio. I’d go one step further: AI isn’t just “exposing” what consulting has always been, it’s creating a new baseline. If influence, judgment, and follow-through were once the premium skills, they’re now the minimum ticket to play. The winners won’t just out-lead AI, they’ll reinvent what leadership and influence look like in a world where every client already has AI at their fingertips.
Fair point about consulting being more than analysis, but I’m not sure influence capital is safe forever. If AI continues advancing in persuasion and emotional intelligence, what stops executives from trusting AI-driven advisors more than humans? The line between analysis and influence may blur faster than we think.