Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 240 posts

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#51

Post by ekianjo »

ultim8k wrote: post #27

Most of the time gov, orgs and companies don't listen to their in-house engineers but will pay $$$ to some consulting firm, only to confirm the same thing or just to show that "they are taking actions towards the solution". In some cases there is distrust from management on in-house employees or in some other cases they want to show quick results without distracting their teams from their planned tasks. Of course the…

There is a simple expression for that: decision laundering. You use a third party to convey credibility to a decision you have already taken internally. Even CEOs themselves say it in private.

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#52

Post by raesene9 »

ryanjshaw wrote: post #15
oytis wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, OK, so there are actually people with real industry experience there? What happens with the young bright people when they are not young any more though? Are they expected to leave the company to gather real world experience or are they just promoted to "experts" without seeing anything outside their consultancy?

The trick is they pay the young bright people peanuts relative to what they bill them out for, so then market forces rotate the majority of them out of the consulting org automatically, often into positions at the companies they consulted for or into their own businesses. So why do the young bright people do it to begin with? They get to work with experienced people, broad learning experiences in diverse industries,…

Yep and IME it works a lot of the time. A number of people I worked with in IT/Infosec consulting are now CISOs of large orgs.

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#53

Post by reassess_blind »

oytis wrote: post #3

Can someone explain to me how and why consulting works? If a man had no real skills except giving advice left and right, he would be considered a loser. Now make it a company, and corporations and governments queue up for their advice. Wouldn't your own employees be in a better position to give you advice than people who know nothing of your business and who's only skills are googling and making presentations?

If you have to navigate an area that you aren't an expert in nor have employees who are experts in it, it's probably wise to consult an expert.

Whether they are actually an expert, or just someone with a deep, confident voice who tells you what you want to hear is another thing.

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#54

Post by sgarland »

anal_reactor wrote: post #43
ultim8k wrote: post #27

Most of the time gov, orgs and companies don't listen to their in-house engineers but will pay $$$ to some consulting firm, only to confirm the same thing or just to show that "they are taking actions towards the solution". In some cases there is distrust from management on in-house employees or in some other cases they want to show quick results without distracting their teams from their planned tasks. Of course the…

What if your in-house engineers are morons but you need to have one particular project done correctly. I don't understand the glorification of normal engineers - quite often they're normal people drawn from normal distribution, with all consequences of that.

And I don’t understand the glorification of consultancy firms like Deloitte. They’re grossly overpaid MBAs, not deep experts in your niche field.

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#55

Post by deaux »

jack_riminton wrote: post #39

As someone who did an MBA and was groomed to be a Consultant and then repented (now a software engineer) you have to understand that the customer of a consultancy project is an exec. 1. The exec has been charged with exploring a new product space, a potential M&A deal, more vertical integration etc etc 2. The exec needs a gauge on the "size of the prize", is this thing worth doing? roughly how will it be done? how lo…

This entirely depends on industry and geography. I've worked with big companies where the customers of consultants were effectively middle management, several layers removed from execs.

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#56

Post by akdor1154 »

anal_reactor wrote: post #43
ultim8k wrote: post #27

Most of the time gov, orgs and companies don't listen to their in-house engineers but will pay $$$ to some consulting firm, only to confirm the same thing or just to show that "they are taking actions towards the solution". In some cases there is distrust from management on in-house employees or in some other cases they want to show quick results without distracting their teams from their planned tasks. Of course the…

What if your in-house engineers are morons but you need to have one particular project done correctly. I don't understand the glorification of normal engineers - quite often they're normal people drawn from normal distribution, with all consequences of that.

> What if your in-house engineers are morons but you need to have one particular project done correctly.

Then you sure as fuck don't want Deloitte within miles of it.

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#57

Post by protocolture »

oytis wrote: post #3

Can someone explain to me how and why consulting works? If a man had no real skills except giving advice left and right, he would be considered a loser. Now make it a company, and corporations and governments queue up for their advice. Wouldn't your own employees be in a better position to give you advice than people who know nothing of your business and who's only skills are googling and making presentations?

You would be surprised how many companies dont have the expertise in house. And of that set, you would be surprised how many make financial and technical decisions based on no expertise and get themselves into all sorts of trouble.

You may also be surprised how many companies have 1 guy in house who pretends to be an expert and does his damned best to prevent people getting hired who might out them.

Good consultants come in, tell you how it should be done, with evidence. Better consultants then provide those services if needed on a project basis. Usually "Good Consultants" in the IT industry are absolute heavy weights. Like we carry a bunch of different skillsets where there are few other people in our country with the same experience, and no one can afford to carry that expertise on an ongoing basis, but lots of people are willing to pay for a couple hours a month.

That ofc, does not reflect the sales channel for most consultancies. Sales is focused on finding anyone they can schmooze into paying for services. Generally where large consultancy firms are involved, the decision maker is treated like royalty. Usually it involves helping them cheat on their spouse or get access to drugs. Weeklong out of town trips, usually vegas, paid for by the consultancy, with a hefty petty cash card. Smaller decision makers might only get local strippers and beer.

One time, I was involved where a company we were consulting to on X, was concerned they were being lied to by consultants on Y project, and we stepped in and sounded them out in a meeting in front of the client making it evident they were just being told to justify Dynamics CRM and Sharepoint at all costs.

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#58

Post by Intermernet »

groundzeros2015 wrote: post #46
ultim8k wrote: post #27

Most of the time gov, orgs and companies don't listen to their in-house engineers but will pay $$$ to some consulting firm, only to confirm the same thing or just to show that "they are taking actions towards the solution". In some cases there is distrust from management on in-house employees or in some other cases they want to show quick results without distracting their teams from their planned tasks. Of course the…

You are missing the role that consultancy plays in diffusing responsibility for legal and performance problems.

Ah, but by outsourcing the consultancy to AI, the consultancy firms are playing the same game! Now we just need to train a perfectly bureaucratic LLM to provide iron-clad but completely vapid conclusions and citations, and we can finally fire all of those pesky public servants!

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#59

Post by DrScientist »

While we are on the topic of listing problems with consultants/outsourcing - another potential problem is the A team/ B team switch.

During initial engagement you are often talking to somebody who appears to actually know their stuff - you hire them and find that this knowledgable person has moved on to the next big sales, and you've got the B or C team.

Re: Deloitte to refund the Australian government after using AI in $440k report

#60

Post by Intermernet »

sgarland wrote: post #54
anal_reactor wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if your in-house engineers are morons but you need to have one particular project done correctly. I don't understand the glorification of normal engineers - quite often they're normal people drawn from normal distribution, with all consequences of that.

And I don’t understand the glorification of consultancy firms like Deloitte. They’re grossly overpaid MBAs, not deep experts in your niche field.

They appeal to legal protection and have little to do with actual correctness.
Post reply on HN