Consulting Firm Fired Employees Over Controversial Gaza Project

A major consulting firm recently terminated two employees for their involvement in a project assessing the costs related to relocating Palestinians from the Gaza Strip. This initiative was executed by a “small off-book team” that did not have the company’s approval.

The Financial Times reported that these partners were dismissed in early June. Their team had been working on a proposal aimed at transforming post-war Gaza into a regional trade center, which included cost projections for relocating approximately one-quarter of the Palestinian population.

Christoph Schweiser, the CEO of Boston Consulting Group (BCG), stated that this type of work was explicitly forbidden and emphasized that the partners acted against directives by coordinating unauthorized teams. They, unfortunately, decided to proceed with work that fell outside the company’s established protocols.

Even though the project wasn’t officially recognized as part of BCG’s operations, Schweiser expressed concern over the reputational damage it could cause. He underscored the troubling implications of such involvement.

Between October and late May 2024, it has been reported that more than 12 employees worked on this project under the code name “Aurora.” The contract escalated during its duration, exceeding $4 million in value.

The cost model developed by BCG suggested that relocating over 500,000 Gazans could involve a “relocation package” of $9,000 per individual, totaling around $5 billion. One suggested scenario included a voluntary relocation plan offering $5,000, a four-year rent grant, and a one-year financial aid option. It was projected that a quarter of Gazans would move, with an assumption that the majority would not return.

A source close to the project mentioned, “There’s no forced aspect to this; it’s not about pushing people out. The 25% figure is somewhat arbitrary. The decision rests with the Gazans.”

BCG, employing around 32,000 to 36,000 individuals globally across its numerous offices, reiterated that such engagements are not authorized. They emphasized that the lead partner responsible was directly informed to refrain from engaging in this work but did so anyway.

The firm noted that they halted the project and have initiated an independent investigation, leaving the implicated partners without compensation.

In his correspondence, Schweiser reflected on the broader implications of this work, recognizing the pain it could cause especially for those with Palestinian roots. He expressed regret regarding the lapse in standards and the subsequent impact on clients and the company’s standing within the community.

Currently, the Gaza Strip houses 2.1 million Palestinians, with about 80% classified as refugees who fled during the 1947-1948 period when Israel was established.

This controversial project had links to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), an entity that BCG had not extensively collaborated with before.

The GHF operates under significant scrutiny, as it functions in a highly monitored environment by Israeli military forces. The foundation has been criticized for utilizing private security personnel for crowd control during aid distribution.

Reports from UN officials and media have detailed instances where Israeli fire resulted in casualties among Palestinians seeking assistance at distribution locations.

In defense, the GHF labeled the reports as “inaccurate,” asserting that allegations of violence during aid distribution are part of a broader pattern of misinformation disrupting their humanitarian efforts.

After news broke about BCG’s involvement with GHF, the charity Save the Children decided to sever ties, with reports highlighting their surprise and concern regarding BCG’s modeling of the relocation strategy.

Inger Assing, the organization’s CEO, communicated that they suspended all professional engagements with BCG until they receive clarity from an external investigation. This suspension reportedly began on June 13, shortly after BCG acknowledged its work with GHF.

Save the Children emphasized their commitment to advocating for humanitarian principles and ensuring safe and dignified aid distribution in Gaza, devoid of political influences.

BCG isn’t alone in distancing itself from GHF; financial institutions like UBS and Goldman Sachs have also declined to assist with the foundation’s banking needs.

The situation remains fluid, and efforts continue to glean information from BCG, UBS, and Goldman Sachs regarding their connections and actions.