PA Consulting
London consultancy, majority-owned by Jacobs, mixing strategy, design, and engineering
What is PA Consulting?
PA Consulting started in 1943 as Personnel Administration and is now a London-based firm with about 3,900 employees and £753 million in 2024 revenue. Jacobs has owned 65% since 2021, with staff holding the rest. Its AI advice tends to come from teams that also design and build products, especially for government, defense, and health clients in the UK and Nordics. That makes the advice practical, though rarely independent of a build.
PA Consulting works primarily with clients in Public sector, Defense, Healthcare, Energy & utilities, Consumer sectors. Its primary differentiator is: Advice from teams that also design and build, strong in UK government.
PA Consulting tech stack and services
| Service area |
|---|
| AI Strategy & Roadmap |
| Use-Case Prioritization |
| Change Management |
| Implementation After Advice |
PA Consulting pricing
Short answer: PA Consulting prices its work as follows: consulting fees; rates not published. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed; a discovery call is required.
| Engagement model | Typical range | Best for |
|---|---|---|
| Multi-use-case advisory | Quoted per scope | Several use cases, teams, or systems |
| Delivery team | Team rate; see pricing model above | Building what the advice recommends |
PA Consulting pros and cons
| Advantages | Things to consider |
|---|---|
| +Long record with UK government and health clients | -Jacobs holds 65%, and one database reports a full acquisition in 2026 that we couldn't confirm |
| +Design and engineering behind the advice | -Advice usually comes packaged with delivery |
| +Partly owned by staff | -Rates not published |
PA Consulting vs alternatives
How PA Consulting compares to the other top AI Advisory firms.
| Company | Best for | Key difference | Rating | Compare |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| KPMG | Regulated firms needing audit-grade AI governance. | Governance and assurance depth, backed by its own ISO/IEC 42001-certified AI management system | 4.6 | Full comparison |
| Tensorway | COOs and CFOs wanting a vendor-neutral AI plan. | Two-interview method per use case, a written drop list, and a roadmap another vendor can implement | 4.5 | Full comparison |
| PwC | Multinationals mapping AI Act duties with other EU... | EU AI Act compliance planned alongside DORA, GDPR, and NIS2 in one program | 4.4 | Full comparison |
| appliedAI | German industrial firms seeking neutral AI guidance. | Advice from a German AI ecosystem with a non-profit institute focused on AI Act practice | 4.4 | Full comparison |
| Deloitte | Large regulated groups needing documented AI controls. | Regulatory and audit teams beside the AI advisers, with global reach | 4.3 | Full comparison |
| Trilateral Research | Public bodies needing rights and ethics assessments. | Fundamental rights and ethics impact assessments from a research-led firm | 4.3 | Full comparison |
| EY | Enterprises building AI risk into existing controls. | AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs | 4.2 | Full comparison |
| DAIN Studios | Nordic and DACH firms wanting governance they own. | Governance and readiness work designed to be run by the client's own team | 4.2 | Full comparison |
| Artefact | Large consumer brands across European markets. | Data governance and AI planning with engineers in the same firm | 4.2 | Full comparison |
| Gartner | CIOs and CDOs choosing AI vendors. | Analyst advice on AI vendors and governance with no implementation work to sell | 4.2 | Full comparison |
| TÜV SÜD | Firms wanting an independent AI Act assessment. | Independent testing and certification of AI systems against EU AI Act requirements | 4.1 | Full comparison |
| BABL AI | Companies needing an independent third-party AI audit. | Criteria-based third-party AI audits, separate from any design or build work | 4.1 | Full comparison |
| Sia Partners | Utilities and insurers wanting regulatory-minded advice. | Sector regulatory practices applied to AI governance, plus its own Heka.ai tools | 4.1 | Full comparison |
| BearingPoint | European banks pairing AI with regulatory reporting. | European consulting with regulatory technology products from the same group | 4.1 | Full comparison |
| Zühlke | Swiss and European health and finance firms. | Partner-owned advisory and engineering for regulated health and finance work | 4.0 | Full comparison |
| ML6 | Benelux firms wanting advice from builders. | Use-case discovery from engineers who also handle EU AI Act requirements | 4.0 | Full comparison |
| Eticas | Public bodies auditing deployed algorithms. | Independent algorithmic audits that measure bias and accuracy in real use | 4.0 | Full comparison |
| Advai | UK financial firms testing AI before launch. | Technical robustness testing, chosen by the FCA as partner for its AI Live Testing pilot | 3.9 | Full comparison |
| Futurice | Nordic firms redesigning services around AI. | AI strategy combined with service design and operating-model work | 3.9 | Full comparison |
| Knowit | Nordic public authorities wanting a local partner. | Nordic public-sector reach with data governance and AI under one roof | 3.9 | Full comparison |
| Saidot | Teams wanting AI inventory software with setup help. | Governance software for AI inventories and risk tracking, integrated with Azure AI | 3.9 | Full comparison |
| West Monroe | US COOs targeting operating-cost gains. | Operations and cost-led AI advice from a partly employee-owned firm | 3.8 | Full comparison |
| Elder Research | US agencies wanting a data feasibility check. | Feasibility calls grounded in three decades of hands-on modeling | 3.8 | Full comparison |
| Ekimetrics | CFOs who want AI tied to measured returns. | Return-on-investment measurement for marketing and sustainability AI | 3.8 | Full comparison |
| Slalom | North American firms wanting local consultants. | Local-office consultants for AI governance and operating models | 3.8 | Full comparison |
| Thoughtworks | CTOs judging build-or-buy on AI tooling. | Public Technology Radar and engineering-led build-or-buy advice | 3.8 | Full comparison |
| Centric Consulting | Mid-size US firms writing AI usage policies. | Acceptable-use policies and staff adoption programs for generative AI | 3.7 | Full comparison |
| RTS Labs | Small US firms testing one idea cheaply. | The cheapest entry point here, with feasibility tests in place of strategy decks | 3.7 | Full comparison |
| Future Processing | European mid-size firms on a modest budget. | AI readiness checks at published Central European rates | 3.7 | Full comparison |
PA Consulting FAQ
What is PA Consulting?
London consultancy, majority-owned by Jacobs, mixing strategy, design, and engineering
How much does PA Consulting charge?
Pricing model: consulting fees; rates not published. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. A discovery call is required to get project-specific quotes.
What tech stack does PA Consulting use?
PA Consulting works with Azure, AWS, GDPR, EU AI Act. Primary industries served include Public sector, Defense, Healthcare, Energy & utilities, Consumer.
Is PA Consulting right for enterprise?
Best for: UK public bodies wanting advice plus delivery. Team size: ~3,900. Key consideration: Jacobs holds 65%, and one database reports a full acquisition in 2026 that we couldn't confirm.
What are the best PA Consulting alternatives?
The best alternatives to PA Consulting depend on your use case. Top options are:
- KPMG: governance and assurance depth, backed by its own ISO/IEC 42001-certified AI management system
- Tensorway: two-interview method per use case, a written drop list, and a roadmap another vendor can implement
- PwC: EU AI Act compliance planned alongside DORA, GDPR, and NIS2 in one program
Compare PA Consulting with other AI Advisory firms
Verify all details directly with PA Consulting before making a decision.