Most consultancies won't answer the cost question directly. Ask, and you'll typically get "it depends" and a form to fill in. It does depend, but that's not an excuse to be vague about what it depends on.
If you're a COO trying to build a business case for the board, three variables actually set the price, and none of them are secret.
What actually drives the number
Programme size is the first. A single at-risk workstream costs less to stabilise than a portfolio of twelve, scope drives everything downstream. A workstream with one team, one sponsor, and one clear deliverable is a contained diagnostic exercise. A twelve-workstream portfolio with overlapping dependencies and multiple sponsors is a different order of problem entirely, because stabilising one workstream in isolation without understanding its dependencies on the other eleven risks solving the visible symptom while the underlying cause resurfaces somewhere else three months later.
Embed duration is the second: recovery engagements typically run three to six weeks, and a straightforward stabilisation, credible plan, honest reporting, a functioning team, costs less than a six-week turnaround with practitioners embedded across multiple workstreams. The difference between the two isn't really about calendar time so much as coverage, how many people need to be physically present, in the room, for how many of those weeks, before the organisation can run the plan on its own.
Seniority is the third, and the one most likely to be quietly reduced to save money. We only deploy practitioners with 15+ years of experience, never graduates running a template, and that's a deliberate cost floor, it's also why the fix tends to hold. It's worth being honest about why seniority costs more and is still worth it: a junior consultant working from a template can produce a plan that looks credible on paper. A senior practitioner who has seen a dozen versions of this specific failure pattern before knows which parts of that plan won't survive contact with the actual organisation, and can say so in week one rather than
week five.
What that seniority actually costs, in public numbers
You don't have to take a consultancy's word for what senior delivery talent costs in the UK market. The Association for Project Management's 2025 Salary and Market Trends Survey, the UK's largest annual study of the profession, puts the average project management salary at £52,500, up 10% on 2023, with practitioners in consultancy and energy/utilities sectors averaging £62,500, per the
APM Salary Survey 2025.
Embedded recovery work commands more than that average because it's compressed: fifteen-plus years of pattern recognition delivered on a timeline measured in weeks, not spread across a year.
There's a useful way to think about what's actually being purchased here. A permanent hire's salary buys a year of their time, spread across whatever the organisation needs that year. A recovery engagement's cost buys weeks of concentrated attention on one specific problem, from someone whose entire value is having seen that problem before. The hourly economics look expensive next to a permanent salary until the comparison is corrected for what's actually being delivered in that window.
The cost that never makes it onto an invoice
Every cost conversation focuses on what recovery costs. The number that's harder to see, and usually larger, is the cost of inaction. A project drifting for another quarter doesn't just slip its date, it compounds in several distinct ways.
The team burns out chasing an unrealistic plan, because nobody has told them the plan is unrealistic, so they keep trying to hit dates that were never achievable in the first place. The best people quietly start looking elsewhere, because skilled practitioners can generally tell when a programme has lost its way faster than the sponsors funding it can, and they don't wait around to find out how it ends. Stakeholder trust erodes in a way that outlasts the project itself, a sponsor burned once by an over-promised, under-delivered programme brings that scepticism into the next funding conversation, and the next, long after the specific project is closed. And the eventual fix costs more because the drift has to be unwound before recovery can even begin, every extra week of a bad plan being followed is a week of decisions made on false assumptions that now need to be found and corrected.
By the time a board asks how much it will cost to fix, the more useful question is how much it has already cost to wait.
Why nobody publishes a rate card
A three-week reporting fix and a six-week multi-team turnaround are different projects with different costs, and any headline number would be wrong for most people who read it. That's not evasion. It's the same reason a surgeon doesn't quote a price before the scan — not because the price is a secret, but because quoting it before the diagnosis would mean quoting the wrong number to almost everyone who asked.
Where to start
Cost climbs with the number of embedded practitioners, the complexity of stakeholder alignment, and how far a programme has already drifted before anyone calls for help. It does not climb because of methodology, tooling, or brand name.
Agile Minds gives every prospective client a free, two-week assessment before any number gets discussed. If you need a figure you can actually take to the board,
we should talk.
