Domestic consulting firms seek removal of entry barriers in govt projects that favour Big 4

‘Lower threshold of Rs 25-50 cr needed’

Domestic players argue that the current norms are skewed in favour of the Big 4, and have approached policymakers to shift the focus from revenue-based qualifications to competence-led evaluation parameters.

“Domestic firms seek a level-playing field. NICSI currently mandates that only firms with Rs 500 crore turnover and a headcount of 500 people can bid. That creates an artificial entry barrier for Indian consulting firms,” a person familiar with the development told Moneycontrol on condition of anonymity.

“We are not saying exclude the Big 4. But instead of just four firms, the government should consider 8 or 10. Lowering the threshold to Rs 25-50 crore will allow for greater competition, better price discovery, and broader access to Indian talent,” he said.

The prime minister’s office (PMO) had, on June 5, called a meeting to explore the possibility of homegrown consulting companies that can match up to the Big 4 to reduce reliance on foreign advisory firms and build global capabilities in the professional services space.

Sanjeev Sanyal, a member of the Economic Advisory Council to the Prime Minister (EAC-PM), had made a presentation to assess the feasibility and crafting a strategic roadmap for creating Indian consulting majors with global credibility.

ALSO READ: India’s own Big 4? PMO holds meeting to push for homegrown consulting firms

The changes in the empanelment norms will not only foster domestic industry but also reduce systemic risk, support innovation, and help India build its own globally competitive consulting brands, sources said.

The issue, Indian firms say, is not one of capacity but of how capacity is measured. “When you want an advisor, you don’t judge his strength by muscle size, but by intellect. Similarly, don’t measure a consulting firm by turnover alone – evaluate them by what’s in their head,” the person added.

“That comes from international standards like ISO (International Organization for Standardization) and CMMI (Capability Maturity Model Integration), the nature of work they’ve delivered, and the experience of their leadership.”

Just as India has promoted ‘Make in India’ in manufacturing, a parallel push is needed for services – especially in sectors like strategic consulting where cultural understanding, national interest, and geopolitical sensitivities are deeply embedded.

“Just as we give fiscal incentives and procurement preferences to manufacturing firms, it’s time we think similarly for services. Indian consulting has matured,” the source said.

“There are areas where sensitive national interests, like digital governance, defence, infrastructure, taxation, are involved. It is critical that such mandates are not left solely to foreign-origin firms,” the person noted. “We need an Indian consulting framework that reflects our management values, strategic thinking, and cultural nuances,” he said.

Certifications vs turnover

Indian firms argue that they are no less equipped to deliver complex advisory services, citing their credentials in global standards like ISO and CMMI.

ISO certifications, such as ISO 9001 or ISO/IEC 27001, are internationally recognised indicators of process rigour and quality assurance. Meanwhile, many Indian firms hold CMMI Level 3 to 5 certifications, which denote maturity in service delivery, particularly in consulting, digital transformation, and systems integration.

“These certifications reflect delivery excellence. Many mid-sized Indian firms are CMMI Level 5 certified, which means they’re already operating at the highest global standards. Yet, because they don’t hit the turnover mark, they are disqualified from government work,” the source said.

Industry leaders

Highlighting the limitations of the current system, Nitin Arora, Partner at accounting and consulting firm Baker Tilly ASA India, told Moneycontrol, “A Rs 500 crore turnover bar might seem like a measure of capability, but it unintentionally sidelines many experienced Indian advisory firms that bring strong domain expertise and on-ground insights. It’s important that public sector opportunities are accessible not just to the larger players, but also to credible homegrown firms that can add value. A more balanced, merit-based approach would go a long way in encouraging fair competition and strengthening the Indian consulting landscape.”

Rakesh Nangia, Founder & Managing Partner at Nangia & Co LLP, added: “With the government aiming to encourage homegrown accounting firms, a crucial area of realignment would be public sector procurement norms, which should actively promote the inclusion of Indian firms in large-scale audit, tax, and advisory mandates. A Rs 500-crore threshold looks high in that direction, as most Indian homegrown firms may fall outside this criterion. Facilitative policy reforms are imperative to build global Indian champions.”

Going a step further, Devroop Dhar, Co-Founder and MD of Primus Partners, pointed to the broader risks associated with over-reliance on foreign firms. “India’s advisory and audit markets are heavily concentrated among foreign‐rooted networks. While Indian firms have grown in many sectors, advisory remains underdeveloped due to artificial revenue-based qualification barriers. This creates a self-perpetuating cycle – firms can’t qualify for government projects because they lack big-ticket experience, and they can’t gain experience because they’re disqualified. A more holistic evaluation model – based on human resource quality, relevant outcomes, and standards – would help unlock the potential of Indian-origin firms.”

Dhar also flagged national security concerns. “As geopolitical tensions rise, the deep involvement of foreign-origin firms in critical public-sector projects – especially those handling sensitive financial, citizen, or infrastructure data – raises data sovereignty and cybersecurity risks. Without enforceable jurisdictional controls, this poses vulnerabilities India cannot afford.”