1. Freelance versus Salaried Consultants AMCF Leadership Council Meeting Amsterdam, June 14th, 2007

2. © Management Partner GmbH 2007 / 05.06. / PS1 / JGG 2 Definition of “Free lancer” ACE firms’ business models related to free lancer The consulting model based on free lancers – some theses for discussion Conclusions Content

3. © Management Partner GmbH 2007 / 05.06. / PS1 / JGG 3 Different models of “Free lancing” are being applied: Visibility to client Consulting by FL 1) : like salaried cons. Consulting by FL 1) : Sub-contracting Networking by FL 1) Not visible Reasons: Flexibility Others (e.g. tax) Reasons: ? Reasons: Lower base costs Financial attractive- ness for the person Visible Reasons: Credibility Legal Reasons Credibility Risk Reasons: Credibility Definition of “Free lancer” FL 1) = Free Lancer

4. © Management Partner GmbH 2007 / 05.06. / PS1 / JGG 4 ACE firms supply each other with consultant capacity. They make their individual “home-base” identity visible. ACE-firms have decided to make their network concept visible for the client. Each ACE firm shows the common ACE (ACE logo) on its business card as a second identity. The project governance takes place the same way independently from which ACE- firm the consultant comes from: The ACE-firm which “has opened up” the client relationship is normally also responsible for the key account management. Project leadership is taken by the party which is responsible for the project- results towards the client. Consultants are managed solely by the responsible project leader no matter from which ACE-firm they have been assigned to the project. Free lancer of one ACE-firm being assigned to a project lead and invoiced to the client by another ACE-firm are a challenge – for legal reasons. We try to avoid these constellations. ACE firms’ business models related to free lancer

5. © Management Partner GmbH 2007 / 05.06. / PS1 / JGG 5 ACE firmCountry Business model integrating Free lancer comments Abegglen Switzerland no Algoé France no Yes for HR-outplacement Consultus Sweden yes With Consultus Identity DC Vision Czech Rep. yes With DC Vision Identity ER Consultants Great Britain no GEA Italy no De jure: free lance contracts Implement Denmark no Management Partner Germany yes With Management Partner Identity Rijnconsult Netherlands yes With Rijnconsult Identity ACE firms’ business models related to free lancer

6. © Management Partner GmbH 2007 / 05.06. / PS1 / JGG 6 Some theses for discussion Don‘t agree at all Fully agree 1.Free lancers are the best solution for flexible costs in unsteady consulting business 2.Free lancers are not adding longer term value (know-how, clients) to the consulting firm 3.Through free lancers a consulting firm can add specific know-how outside of its own core competences 4.Free lancers are only easy to manage if they don’t serve multiple consulting firms 5.Free lancers bring in a more entrepreneurial spirit into the one’s consulting firm 6.Free lancers are not easy to integrate into standards of one’s consulting firm (code of ethics, quality standards, secrecy agreements, scheduling dates, reporting)

7. © Management Partner GmbH 2007 / 05.06. / PS1 / JGG 7 Some theses for discussion Don‘t agree at all Fully agree 7.The free lancer concept is the future – offering independence & flexibility for both parties 8.Senior people new in consulting don’t fit into salary concepts and need to be free lance 9.The free lance concept is good if your business is delivering free lance managers to clients 10.Clients don’t like hiring a consulting firm with a business model mainly based on free lancers. 11.Free lancers are legally not allowed to share your intranet systems like salaried people 12.Free lance consultants can’t legally be employed in the project exactly like salaried consultants 13.Free lancers make it difficult to develop your team of salaried people.

8. © Management Partner GmbH 2007 / 05.06. / PS1 / JGG 8 Some theses for discussion (optional) Don‘t agree at all Fully agree 14.……………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………… 15.……………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………… 16.……………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………… 17.……………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………… 18.……………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………… 19.……………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………... 20.……………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………

9. © Management Partner GmbH 2007 / 05.06. / PS1 / JGG 9 The discussion during the AMCF leadership counsil meeting led to following conclusions: … Conclusions