#consulting

https://www.barrons.com/articles/ibm-stock-quantum-computing-1384b7c4

By: Mackenzie Tatananni | Updated Aug 31, 2026, 11:11 am EDT / Original Aug 31, 2026, 10:39 am EDT

In their latest research note, Susquehanna analysts raised a question most tech investors probably have considered at least once: “When do investors need to own IBM for quantum?”

The line of questioning makes sense, considering IBM’s quantum division has drummed up plenty of attention in recent months—a bright spot at a time when the stock is under pressure.

Second-quarter earnings were the latest reminder of IBM’s sluggish organic growth, compounded by new threats including customers reallocating their budgets to artificial-intelligence hardware.

Shares have slumped 19% since July 14, anchored by a record plunge the same day IBM pre-announced earnings. In contrast, the S&P 500 has gained 2.1% over the same period.

As other business lines face headwinds, IBM’s quantum division has been a shining star in its portfolio. Susquehanna analyst James Friedman ticked off a number of recent developments including IBM’s acquisition of HRL Laboratories to bolster its hardware capabilities and a partnership with the Commerce Department to build Anderon, a standalone quantum chip foundry to serve IBM itself as well as industry players.

Still, it may seem difficult to consider quantum a cornerstone of IBM’s business. Although Big Blue has researched the technology since before the turn of the 21st century—and contributed to major scientific breakthroughs along the way—the effort generates paltry revenue. Researchers are banking on big technological advances before the end of the decade to usher in broader commercialization.

Friedman is tempering his expectations. “With a number of upcoming quantum catalysts on the horizon, each deliverable keeps accelerating,” he wrote Monday. “At the same time, there is a lot more to getting IBM’s fundamentals right as the other segments transform.”

The analyst flagged a renewed focus on software within the consulting arm, marked by a new leadership appointment, and limited growth in IBM’s Red Hat software business due to passing server supply constraints. There is also the “math of the mainframe cycle” to consider: Revenue was delayed rather than lost, with 40% of the deals that slipped in the second quarter closing early in the following period.

While Friedman remains Neutral-rated on IBM shares, he raised his price target to $235 from $225. The revision reflects upcoming catalysts expected to generate buzz around the technology, particularly the annual Quantum World Congress meeting in late September.

I remember when Target was well known for solving internal problems quickly.

It's been 2 years since I've had a skip level status. Most of my team didn't take the best team survey because they don't believe it works. The biggest problem on our team was never followed up on after the survey.

Get your sh-t together, Target. How about instead of calling consultants you actually talk to the people who work there.

Copy architectire from one project put it to ai give specifications for this project, ask it to generate architecture. Architecture ready! that's architect DINOSAURS work in fidelity paid $200k+ shamelessly.

It’s all about the money. It’s not about skilled labor. You get what you don’t pay for. TIAA-CREF’s recent experience says it all from The Layoff TIAA Board:

I was just about to come to this site and make a post about my first experience with Accenture. Our TIAA FTE team is partnering with two teams that are completely made up of Accenture resources, and holy smokes, these people are completely incompetent and useless! We’ve met with two Accenture teams that are supposed to be working together on our project, and neither are aware of what each team is doing, completely unaware of how to tech solution, and any time you ask a question, it becomes a “takeaway” that they NEVER respond to.
Ten calls so far since the beginning of the PI, and we’ve literally done nothing but listen to the Accenture teams argue with each other about who is supposed to own things on their teams.
All those KT meeting with Accenture and they learned nothing.
RKT is going to sink because of these people.

18d ago by Sastry will be the fall guy for T-Duck
22 reactions (+22/-0)| Reply
Post ID: @gf+1kyk6m4qw
 +22 

A Japanese company and a North American company decided to have a canoe race on the St. Lawrence River. Both teams practiced long and hard to reach their peak performance before the race.

On the big day, the Japanese won by a mile. The North Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat.

A management team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action. Their conclusion was the Japanese had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the North American team had 8 people steering and 1 person rowing. So, North American management hired a consulting company and paid them a large amount of money for a second opinion. They advised that too many people were steering the boat, while not enough people were rowing.

To prevent another loss to the Japanese, the rowing team’s management structure was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 3 area steering superintendents and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager. They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 1 person rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder.
It was called the ”Rowing Team Quality First Program“, with meetings, dinners and free pens for the rower. There was discussion of getting new paddles, canoes and other equipment, extra vacation days for practices, and bonuses.

The next year the Japanese won by two miles. Humiliated, the North American management laid off the rower for poor performance, halted development of a new canoe, sold the paddles, and canceled all capital investments in new equipment. The money saved was distributed to the Senior Executives as bonuses and the next year’s racing team was outsourced to India.

Which accounting firm audits the financials? Who specifically at this firm is conducting the audit?

For those that were offered a rebadge in the past and accepted it, I'd like to know:

1. How was the transition?
2. How long was the initial contract?
3. How long did it actually last?
4. Did you train your replacement?
5. Did the consulting company expect you to work 60+ hours / week?
6. Did the work life balance change?

Thank you.

This article confirms what a lot of posters have been saying. IBM Consulting needs a desperate restructuring

https://stocktwits.com/news-articles/markets/equity/ibm-openai-partnership-thousands-experts-engineers-ceo-arvind-krishna-letter/cZoq7fLRJho

Are there jobs for JD Edwards ? Is it something worth investing time.

A whole bunch of people in Integrated Services are being asked to interview for jobs. The implication being, if you don't find a job you are no longer employed.

You can argue about the value of Integrated Services, but this is a cr-ppy way to treat people. It is sad that the company is starting to use these tactics.

This is what happens when consultants with very little real people leadership experience get to run the show.

Nothing like delivering a 900m quota for PS and laying off project management, consultants and all of ps sales. Hate tac well hope you love them now because partners always misconfigure

Lots of agents have been made, none of them good. Any1 know of any agents that are actually useful and have any benefit over what workbench does?

Are promotions cancelled in consulting?

Looks like Dan's contract was extended to 2028.. so expect more of this "Change" coming... and now Mckenzie consulting is calling the shots for many groups.

Executives all hire the same consultants and do the same thing. How is their pay justified when they all just follow each other and do the same thing like a bunch of sheep?

https://www.upstreamonline.com/people/bp-to-slash-700-jobs/2-1-2022872

Where do you start if you want to explore VR opportunities? HR?

I know five people who quit in the past two years, two already reapplied. The startup culture was too chaotic and the consulting firm was 80-hour weeks. I'm not saying this place is great, I'm not delusional, but at least I've learned to appreciate the devil I know.

Did anyone get notified they got promoted yet?

Why, as a leader in the field, am I now having to do the work of this team? The math is strange - I generate revenue, the firm allocates my revenue for this home office work yet I’m the one doing their work. From what I hear - the GP running it is inadequate and the directors are incompetent and have created a toxic environment where their staff left their area leaving us to do their roles. How are they still employed?

One NM™

Interesting. Twenty years ago we watched many greedy 1% globalists in many company leadership launch “One ___” transformations.

Different logo. Different PowerPoint template. Same promise:

• Break down silos.
• Align the organization.
• Transform the culture.
• This time it’s different.

The only real update for 2026 seems to be replacing “Digital Transformation” with “AI Transformation.”

Somewhere, a McKinsey consultant dusted off the old “One Company” deck, asked ChatBot to modernize the buzzwords, swapped “cloud” for “AI,” and sent the invoice.

The cynic in me is waiting for Phase 2:

• Announce AI.
• Hire consultants.
• Reorganize org charts.
• Explain why “global talent strategy” is the future and replace employees with offshore sweatshops and indentured foreigners.
• Celebrate short-term cost savings.
• Wonder five years later where all the institutional knowledge went.

History doesn’t repeat itself—it just gets rebranded.

It seems lik all of the new A.I. revenue will be led by the on-shore non-AWS employees at all of the System Integrators/GSI's big and (Accenture, Deloitte, Kyndryl, IBM) that will delpy and embed/integrate onsite with the client workforce.

Will HCL be gone when their contract is up? Or will Big Red keep them around to muck up the works?

Zayo is bringing in former VZ leaders and setting the stage for Verizon to purchase them. This is their exit strategy. The new CEO came from the consulting industry and will help facilitate this

Advisor Gateway blowwwwwws. I give them credit for trying to upgrade, but when you just put lipstick on a pig, well the original pig looks much better. By the way Envision was 100x better than eMoney. Saaaawing and a miss!

Are band promotions happening in Consulting this cycle? For band 6,7 and 8. How does the outlook and budget looks like?

Is more caste coming?
More OPT EAD, H1B, L1, H4 EAD hiring and less American jobs.

Enjoy!

Will Meg come to her senses and realize that AMs desperation move to contract as a services provider to a hugely incompetent national oil company of India was a mistake. Providing technical services in brown…the darkest of brownfields offshore India does not make sense..not bp’s wheelhouse or forte ..

I just listened to a podcast about the rise & fall of Enron. Shortly after the company started, they consulted with McKinsey &Co and then hired their consultant into the company who was later convicted for the tangled web of lies, deceit, and fraud the company thrived in and which ruined them.

Didn’t PP reach out to that very company for strategic advice? AND hire on several of them?

I know there has been references in this site to how bad our relationship with McKinsey is, but I never knew why. And, there’s been references to the downfall of this company being used as lessons in business classes, but I thought that was a tad dramatic.

But, now that my eyes are fully open… I think my kids will someday be listening to podcasts about the Rise & Fall of Edward Jones that will sound eerily similar to the one I just heard.

I asked:
The COO of Northwestern Mutual is introducing a thing called Forge, i have no idea what it is, but involves a bunch of vapid buzzwords and has something to do with “a new way of working”, also McKinsey is involved. Can you use your super human intellect to speculate what Forge is and how many people will be laid off as a result?

It says:
Forge is almost certainly an internal branding/codename for Northwestern Mutual’s latest enterprise operating model transformation, led by their relatively new mouselike COO & Business Architect (appointed Aug 2025). It’s not publicly detailed yet (as of late June 2026), which is why you’re hearing the buzzword salad version.
What it actually is (pattern recognition from NM’s history + new COO’s mandate)
Her explicit remit includes platform and operating model design, technology health, enterprise architecture, and strategic execution/prioritization. She previously served as NM’s Chief Transformation Officer. This isn’t a random new thing — it’s the next chapter in a multi-year journey they’ve been on:
• They’ve already done waves of agile/SAFe adoption, product-aligned teams, and “pizza pie/pod” cross-functional squads (product manager + dev lead + designers + embedded business people).
• The 2025 Policyowners Examining Committee report explicitly calls for a “business-driven, technology-enabled operating model,” “lighthouse-style business domains,” “team of teams,” faster decision-making (“progress over perfection,” “fast and friendly escalation”), and cross-functional empowerment with guardrails.
• McKinsey has deep history here — they helped NM with the PX planning tool rollout, change management, client experience redesign, and insurance transformation work in the past. Classic McKinsey engagement: diagnostic → target operating model (TOM) design → implementation roadmap + change story.
“Forge” is the shiny internal name for the current phase of turning NM into a more agile, product-oriented, platform-powered organization. Think:
• Moving further from traditional project-based/ITIL/waterfall thinking toward persistent cross-functional teams that own outcomes end-to-end.
• Deeper business-tech fusion (the “business architect” title is a clue).
• Heavy AI/automation injection into workflows (underwriting, claims, servicing, reporting, middle-office analysis, etc.).
• Flatter structures, bigger spans of control, more localized decision rights.
• “New way of working” theater: agile rituals scaled, reduced handoffs, outcome focus over process theater.
It’s the insurance/financial services version of what a lot of big companies are doing in 2025-2026 under AI pressure: retool the org so fewer humans can do more, faster, with better advisor and client experiences, while protecting the mutual’s core strengths (trusted advisors + comprehensive planning).
The vapid buzzwords are the usual McKinsey/consulting output: agile at scale, value streams, empowered squads, platform operating model, AI-augmented ways of working, etc. Same script, different client logo.
How many people get laid off?
Realistically, hundreds, not thousands, over 12-24 months — mostly through managed attrition + targeted reductions rather than one dramatic bloodbath. Here’s why:
• Corporate/home office headcount is roughly 7,500–8,500 full-time employees (Milwaukee/Franklin HQ + NY; advisors are mostly independent contractors and revenue generators, so they’re largely protected).
• These transformations usually target 15-25%+ productivity/efficiency gains in the areas being redesigned (ops, IT delivery, middle management layers, support functions, legacy process-heavy areas).
• Levers: GenAI/automation eating repetitive or rules-based work; delayering; consolidating duplicated roles across domains; reducing “coordination” and project management overhead as teams become more autonomous; some cultural attrition from people who hate the new pace.
Plausible range: 600–1,800 net reduction in corporate roles over the next couple of years (roughly 8-20% of home office staff), front-loaded in certain functions. Achieved via hiring freezes in targeted areas, voluntary packages, performance-based exits, and selective RIFs. Not a 30-50% tech-style cull.
NM is a conservative mutual company with a paternalistic streak and strong financials. They tend to do this stuff more surgically than public comps chasing quarterly optics. McKinsey programs almost always come with quantified “run-rate savings” targets that management then has to deliver — that’s usually where the headcount math shows up.
Bottom line / industry context
This is NM continuing to professionalize and modernize their operating system while the industry gets squeezed by AI, fintech/hybrid models, and advisor productivity demands. Rodent house was brought back in specifically to drive the business-architecture/operating-model piece after previous digital/transformation leaders.
You’re seeing the classic late-stage transformation pattern: new COO with transformation DNA + McKinsey + “new way of working” rebrand + efficiency narrative to fund tech/AI bets and improve margins/advisor leverage.
If you’re hearing this internally or from someone close to it, the real tells will be in the pilot domains they pick first (“lighthouses”) and what metrics they attach to “Forge” success. The headcount impact will show up quietly in attrition numbers and selective backfill decisions more than a big announced layoff.
Classic corporate move. The buzzwords are just the wrapping paper

No publicly listed asking price apparently. But the latest tax assessment shows a market value of $108,846,458 --

https://www.propertyshark.com/mason/Property/38029913/650-Harry-Rd-San-Jose-CA-95120/

https://www.siliconvalley.com/2026/06/22/tech-ibm-san-jose-property-build-develop-real-estate-park-economy-jobs/

Iconic 687-acre site is up for sale

By: George Avalos | Bay Area News Group
PUBLISHED: June 22, 2026 at 2:08 PM PDT | UPDATED: June 23, 2026 at 12:17 PM PDT

SAN JOSE — Any buyer that manages to snag the iconic IBM Almaden
Research Center in South San Jose could wind up with a property that
offers opportunities, but also poses possible challenges.

The 687-acre site consists of a stark contrast in land uses:
a research and development hub totaling hundreds of thousands of square
feet that is adjacent to pristine open spaces that total hundreds of
acres.

The property became available after IBM decided to close the research
hub and shift its workers a few miles away to IBM’s Silicon Valley Lab
at 555 Bailey Rd. on the edges of Coyote Valley in San Jose.

Commercial real estate firm Cushman & Wakefield is attempting to
sell the IBM Almaden Research Center property on behalf of long-time
owner IBM, according to a marketing brochure.

“This offering provides investors the unique opportunity to
reposition or redevelop a property of unique scale within Silicon
Valley,” the brochure states.

Among the challenges is a new owner would have to determine whether to buy the entire site or only the location with the existing research center. Neighborhood organizations and open space groups might also weigh in on the site’s future.

“The most important part of this proposal may be the preservation of 652 acres of open space,” said Bob Staedler, principal executive with Silicon Valley Synergy, a land-use consultancy. “I hope the property owners engage early with the Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority and Peninsula Open Space Trust to explore conservation options.”

The research hub totals 544,500 square feet and occupies a 35-acre portion that’s zoned industrial park, marketing materials show. Another 652 acres are open spaces that exemplify the hillside areas on the south side of San Jose.

Investors are looking at what could emerge on a small section of the IBM Almaden Research Center site while preserving several hundred adjoining acres on the property at 650 Harry Rd. as open space, city files show.

An unidentified investment group is seeking city approval to rezone the property, which currently is agricultural with a planned development overlay.

The investors hope to shift the zoning to “industrial park” for 35 acres and to “open space” on 652 acres, city files show. San Jose-based land-use consultant Erik Schoennuaer represents the investment group.

“The current zoning is an antiquated custom zoning from 1980 specifically for the IBM Research Center operation,” Schoennauer said. “This application is simply a conforming rezoning to establish zoning on the property that matches the existing general plan designations of industrial park and open space.”

The site could be bought by an owner that also intends to occupy the existing buildings, marketing materials show.

“There are limited opportunities for users to purchase office and research and development buildings on a site of this scale in Silicon Valley,” Cushman & Wakefield stated in the brochure.

Biry will hire Asplund Leadership Consulting. Lightning crashes.

at least today they said mckinsie is determining our "new way of working". that is as effective as sending a one legged man to a butt kicking contest.

There are so many strategy teams doing the same thing and then doing the work of other groups too. Then we have the external strategy groups doing the same thing. What’s the point?

IBM and Deloitte have closed the deal on Juneteenth day to takeover VZ IT. It would be a Centralized IT org to deliver the business requirements using Claude Code; hence you would see that your Gitlab repo has 1000+ developer access now(Go and check it out). VZ will do one more wave of RIF to reach the number of agreed workforce for rebadging and retain a small % in the IT.

The Simplicity plans and no free phone promos. Easier way to transition corporate locations into resellers. The staff will already be trained.

Heard 15 more were let go today in consulting in HQ same, few hrs access available to sas. Apply to jobs from sas.com

Walking through the buildings this morning that has become an endless and never ending corn maze of “improvements”, it dawned on me, Chevron is lost. From elevators, escalators, college dorm style offices, orgs that don’t work, consultants ripping us off, workflows in the name of simplicity that accomplish the opposite, lack of accountability, zero clarity and more, we are lost. None of this helps us make more oil, gas and profit and YES, that is what we are supposed to be doing. All this waste and not one thing is improved. Not one. All are worse. No project should be considered without answering the question of how it makes things better for employees so they can help Chevron make more oil, gas and profit.

This spells nothing but doom for employees

Personally, Cameron bringing in McKinsey will be his legacy and what he will be remembered for.

Someone got into his ear and he took some bad decisions.

Things feel different. Way more now since the WP closure.

Something feels very odd with WP folks. The upper management level seems fake and really trying to cover up something.

It’s just bad times right now.

Maybe someone with ba--s that reads this site can walk into Cameron’s office and bring him to reality of how things are. Well, I can at least pray!

Anyone remember how beneficial BCG' analysis was to Ford' meteoric rise to profitability in the past?
Not!
I just want to hear stories from the older crew.
On another note, does anyone remember their attempt at implementing a Matrix Management model?
Maybe if they understood the difference between producing a quality product and the stylish management trends of the month, Ford would be a great car company.