Guest Blog: The Talent Exodus: The Skills Shortage Reshaping CTRM
By Carl Vellenoweth – Commoditas Partners.
Having spent 20 years recruiting professionals in commodity trading technology, I’ve seen every shift in the market—whether it’s fluctuations in demand and supply, wage inflation, regulatory changes, or the ever-evolving nature of workplace culture. Challenges come with the territory. Right now, the industry is facing a talent drought, particularly in upskilling and the availability of new talent, especially within the market leader vendor and their leading applications.
A recent conversation with a CIO at a global energy trading firm confirmed what many of us already know. Historically, the cost of an ETRM system was straightforward: licence fees, hosting, design, implementation, and support etc. Now, you also have to factor in inflated wages and contract rates due to the limited pool of skilled talent. The cost of hiring premium talent is rising because, at the end of the day, an implementation is only as good as the people delivering it. Then there’s the cost of ongoing support, another challenge exacerbated by the shrinking talent pipeline.
The numbers tell their own story. Specialist consultancies focused on CTRM implementations have grown their workforce by an average of 64% in the last two years, while the Big 4 and leading global system integrators have significantly downsized. Ten years ago, these large firms along with global system integrators dominated the CTRM implementation space; now, they’re nowhere near as active. The shift towards professional services outsourcing is well underway, and as someone who strongly supports this model, I see the value it brings. However, the industry must address some critical challenges.
The days of software vendors training new talent before they enter the market are disappearing. Unlike larger firms, specialist consultancies deploy highly skilled professionals rather than embedding large teams to develop talent internally. For the larger consulting players, their broad, unfocused approach has cost them market share, leaving them unable to provide the same structured career development they once did.
Recent industry data supports this shift. Major consultancies, including PwC and EY, have been forced to restructure due to declining demand for traditional professional services. PwC, for example, saw 124 partner departures in the UK last year, while EY is set to cut 30 partners, marking one of the largest rounds of redundancies in its consulting division. These changes highlight the declining appeal of the partnership model and the broader move towards flexibility and specialist expertise.
The Collapse of the Traditional Consulting Model
The consulting industry is undergoing a major shift, and nowhere is this more evident than in CTRM and ETRM. The old consulting model—structured career progression, rigid hierarchies, and the dangling carrot of a partnership—no longer appeals. Professionals today want high-impact roles, flexibility, and control over their careers—immediately.
The numbers prove this. The average job tenure in the industry has plummeted from 7.6 years in 2010 to just 2.8 years today—a 63% drop. The traditional “career ladder” is being abandoned in favour of specialist firms that offer better incentives, autonomy, and more lucrative opportunities.
Decline in Job Tenure Over the Years
| Year | Average Job Tenure (Years) |
| 2010 | 7.6 |
| 2015 | 5.4 |
| 2020 | 3.8 |
| 2024 | 2.8 |
Why Specialist Consultancies Are Thriving
The Big 5 consulting firms are struggling to keep up. Their traditional hiring and retention models no longer align with the realities of today’s workforce. Meanwhile, specialist consultancies—agile, deeply focused, and built around expertise rather than hierarchy—are gaining market share by offering a better experience for both clients and professionals.
The Big 5 Have Lost Their Edge
The same “one-size-fits-all” model that made the Big 5 dominant is now their biggest weakness in CTRM and ETRM. These firms have always relied on brand recognition, vast resources, and generalist consultants to win projects. But in a world where deep technical expertise is key, that approach no longer cuts it.
- Generalists Can’t Compete – Big 5 firms recruit top graduates with broad skills, but CTRM and ETRM require specialists who understand system complexities and trading workflows.
- Cost Structures Are Out of Sync – Their multi-layered teams, excessive overheads, and lengthy project cycles make them uncompetitive compared to the lean, high-impact approach of specialist consultancies.
- Rigid Career Paths Drive People Away – Many professionals are choosing boutique consultancies or independent consulting, where they have more control, better pay, and greater flexibility.
- Slow to Adapt to Innovation – Large firms struggle to implement new technology like AI-driven trading platforms, cloud-based risk management, and blockchain settlements, while smaller consultancies adapt quickly.
Traditional vs. Specialist Consulting Models
| Factor | Traditional Big 5 Firms | Specialist Consultancies |
| Expertise | Generalists repurposed for CTRM/ETRM | Industry-specific experts |
| Hiring Model | Tenure-based, slow to adapt | Performance-driven, rapid placement |
| Overhead Costs | High due to bureaucracy | Leaner operations, cost-efficient |
| Talent Retention | Career-path-driven, slow progression | High autonomy, faster career growth |
| Delivery Model | Large, rigid teams | Agile, flexible talent pools |
| Compensation Model | Fixed salaries, delayed bonuses | Performance-based, direct profit-sharing |
The Upskilling Crisis: A Talent Pipeline Running Dry
The biggest threat to the CTRM and ETRM talent market is the near extinction of structured upskilling. The industry used to depend on vendors training junior professionals before they moved into consultancies or end-user firms. That pipeline has been cut off.
Why Upskilling Has Stalled
- Vendors Have Stopped Training – Many software vendors have scrapped structured training programmes, reducing the flow of new talent. Additionally, many vendors now opt to use delivery partners instead of building internal professional services teams, creating a new talent gridlock.
- End-Users Lack the Resources to Train People – Trading firms and commodity companies simply don’t have the internal capability to develop new CTRM specialists.
- Fierce Competition for a Shrinking Talent Pool – With fewer new professionals entering the market, consultancies are locked in a battle for a limited number of experienced experts.
- Private Equity’s Focus on Cost-Cutting – Many PE-backed firms prioritise lean operations over long-term investment in workforce development.
The High Cost of the Talent Shortage
| Issue | Consequence |
| Lack of structured training | Fewer new CTRM/ETRM experts entering the market |
| Vendors outsourcing projects | Talent development stagnates |
| Fewer young professionals | Increased competition for shrinking talent pools |
| Rising demand for experts | Inflation of salaries and recruitment costs |
Final Thoughts: The Industry Has Changed—Adapt or Be Left Behind
The decline of the traditional consulting model and the breakdown of the talent pipeline have reshaped the CTRM and ETRM landscape. Specialist consultancies are leading the way, while larger firms struggle to maintain relevance.
Key Takeaways and Actions
- The old consulting model is finished – Firms must rethink how they attract and retain talent.
- Upskilling must be prioritised – Without new talent development, the skills shortage will deepen.
- Retention strategies must evolve – Autonomy, flexibility, and competitive pay are now the biggest draws for professionals.
- Adapt or get left behind – The firms that embrace change will thrive, while those that don’t will struggle to survive.
The battle for talent in CTRM and ETRM is already in full swing. The winners will be those who stay agile, move fast, and invest in the workforce of the future.
Keep in touch and sign up to our Newsletter
