PA Consulting vs Centric Consulting: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
PA Consulting (4.0/5) edges ahead of Centric Consulting (3.7/5) overall. PA Consulting is the better choice for UK public bodies wanting advice plus delivery. Centric Consulting is the stronger option for mid-size US firms writing AI usage policies. The right choice depends on how independent you need the advice to be, your regulatory exposure, and your budget.
PA Consulting vs Centric Consulting: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | PA Consulting | Centric Consulting |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1943 | 1999 |
| HQ | London, UK | Dayton, USA |
| Team size | ~3,900 | ~1,400 |
| Rating | 4.0 / 5 | 3.7 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Advice from teams that also design and build, strong in UK government | Acceptable-use policies and staff adoption programs for generative AI |
| Pricing model | Consulting fees; rates not published | Consulting fees; rates not published |
| Min. engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Primary tech stack | Azure, AWS, GDPR | Azure, Microsoft Copilot |
| Industries served | Public sector, Defense, Healthcare, Energy & utilities, Consumer | Insurance, Healthcare, Financial services, Manufacturing |
PA Consulting vs Centric Consulting: overview
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.
Centric Consulting
Centric Consulting is a remote-first firm founded in 1999, headquartered in Dayton, Ohio, with about 1,400 people in the US and India. Its AI advice centers on acceptable-use policies for generative AI, AI centers of excellence, and staff adoption. That suits mid-size US companies that need rules and training before any big program.
Services and capabilities: PA Consulting vs Centric Consulting
| Capability | PA Consulting | Centric Consulting |
|---|---|---|
| Readiness assessment | ✗ | ✗ |
| Use-case prioritization | ✓ | ✗ |
| TCO / ROI modeling | ✗ | ✗ |
| AI governance & EU AI Act | ✗ | ✓ |
| Build vs. buy advice | ✗ | ✗ |
| Independent audit or assurance | ✗ | ✗ |
| Roadmap any vendor can implement | ✗ | ✗ |
| Delivery capability after advice | ✓ | ✓ |
Frameworks and platforms: PA Consulting vs Centric Consulting
| Framework / platform | PA Consulting | Centric Consulting |
|---|---|---|
| EU AI Act | ✓ | N/A |
| GDPR | ✓ | N/A |
| DORA | N/A | N/A |
| NIST AI RMF | N/A | N/A |
| ISO/IEC 42001 | N/A | N/A |
| Azure | ✓ | ✓ |
| AWS | ✓ | N/A |
| Google Cloud | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: PA Consulting vs Centric Consulting
| Criterion | PA Consulting | Centric Consulting |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Engagement models | Multi-use-case advisory, Delivery team | Fixed-scope assessment, Delivery team |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: PA Consulting vs Centric Consulting
| Dimension | PA Consulting | Centric Consulting |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Mid-market to enterprise | Mid-market to enterprise |
| Best industries | Public sector, Defense, Healthcare | Insurance, Healthcare, Financial services |
| Best use cases | AI planning for UK government departments., Health service AI adoption. | Writing a generative AI usage policy., Copilot adoption with staff training. |
| Typical project type | Multi-use-case advisory | Fixed-scope assessment |
PA Consulting vs Centric Consulting: pros and cons
| PA Consulting | |
|---|---|
| + | Long record with UK government and health clients |
| + | Design and engineering behind the advice |
| + | Partly owned by staff |
| - | Jacobs holds 65%, and one database reports a full acquisition in 2026 that we couldn't confirm |
| - | Advice usually comes packaged with delivery |
| - | Rates not published |
| Centric Consulting | |
|---|---|
| + | Practical usage policies and training |
| + | Sized for mid-size US companies |
| + | Insurance and healthcare accelerators |
| - | Little EU regulatory work |
| - | Light on cost modeling |
| - | Mostly Microsoft-centered |
Who should choose PA Consulting?
A typical fit: AI planning for UK government departments.
Advice from teams that also design and build, strong in UK government. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Public sector, Defense, Healthcare, Energy & utilities, Consumer.
Who should choose Centric Consulting?
A typical fit: writing a generative AI usage policy.
Acceptable-use policies and staff adoption programs for generative AI. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Insurance, Healthcare, Financial services, Manufacturing.
Decision matrix: PA Consulting vs Centric Consulting
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You want advice with no build contract attached | Neither; write the build as a separate decision |
| Finance needs run costs before approving anything | Neither lists cost modeling; ask for a sample |
| Some of your use cases may be high-risk under the EU AI Act | Centric Consulting |
| You need an outside check on a system already built | Neither; use a dedicated auditor |
| You want the same firm to build what it recommends | Both can deliver |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: PA Consulting (Not disclosed) vs Centric Consulting (Not disclosed) |
| You need advisers in many countries at once | PA Consulting |
Use case fit: PA Consulting vs Centric Consulting
| Use case | PA Consulting fit | Centric Consulting fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| AI planning for UK government departments. | Strong | Limited | PA Consulting |
| Health service AI adoption. | Strong | Limited | PA Consulting |
| Writing a generative AI usage policy. | Limited | Strong | Centric Consulting |
| Copilot adoption with staff training. | Limited | Strong | Centric Consulting |
Verdict: PA Consulting vs Centric Consulting
PA Consulting (4.0/5) is the stronger overall choice for most AI Advisory projects. Advice from teams that also design and build, strong in UK government.
Centric Consulting (3.7/5) is worth a look if you need copilot adoption with staff training. If your situation matches that, Centric Consulting is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
PA Consulting vs Centric Consulting FAQ
Is PA Consulting better than Centric Consulting?
PA Consulting (4.0/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. PA Consulting's strongest advantage: long record with UK government and health clients. Centric Consulting's strongest advantage: practical usage policies and training.
How do PA Consulting and Centric Consulting differ in pricing?
PA Consulting's pricing: consulting fees; rates not published. Centric Consulting's pricing: consulting fees; rates not published. Any hourly bands shown come from Clutch, not a published rate card, so a scoping call is still needed for a project quote.
Which is better for enterprise: PA Consulting or Centric Consulting?
PA Consulting is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each firm before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between PA Consulting and Centric Consulting?
PA Consulting's primary differentiator is: advice from teams that also design and build, strong in UK government. Centric Consulting's primary differentiator is: acceptable-use policies and staff adoption programs for generative AI. They also differ in team size (~3,900 vs ~1,400), minimum engagement (Not disclosed vs Not disclosed), and primary industries served (Public sector, Defense vs Insurance, Healthcare).
Verify all details directly with each firm before making a decision.