Barclays drafts in McKinsey to find savings in investment banking arm
Barclays has enlisted the services of global consultancy giant McKinsey to identify potential areas for cost-saving within its investment banking division.
The FTSE 100 bank is aiming to streamline its investment bank, with consultants scrutinising the front office, finance, risk and technology divisions, as reported by City AM.
Consultants will be investigating any duplication of work and the possibility of automating tasks, according to sources who spoke to Bloomberg.
READ MORE: Black Sheep Brewery to share in £2m investment from owners
READ MORE: Sizewell C nuclear plant supplier reports rise in first-half profits
It's already been reported that Barclays is considering cutting up to 200 jobs in this division as it seeks to enhance returns in the business.
The investment bank division is the company's largest and saw a 16 per cent increase in revenue in the first quarter of the year, reaching over £3.9bn. This was driven by increased transactional activity in global markets following numerous share sell-offs ahead of President Donald Trump's extensive tariffs on trading partners.
Barclays recorded a pre-tax profit of £2.7bn for the quarter, surpassing the £2.5bn predicted by analysts.
McKinsey has been collaborating with Barclays on this project for six months and will pinpoint target areas before proceeding to execution.
However, the consultancy firm emphasised that these cost-cutting measures do not indicate any reduction in market activity.
Chief executive C. S Venkatakrishnan, also known as Venkat, unveiled a new strategy in February 2024 to save nearly £2bn across the bank by 2026.
Barclays has announced: "In line with the strategy we announced in February of 2024, we are focused on simplifying our processes to better serve our clients."
This comes after competitor HSBC commenced job cuts within its investment bank division, aligning with CEO Georges Elhedery's restructuring plans for the bank.
The division is poised to shed various segments of its operations in the UK, US, and Europe, as the company shifts its focus towards a new growth strategy centred on Asia.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Aston Martin sues Italian supplier for freezing deliveries
Aston Martin has sued a key supplier that halted deliveries fearing that the carmaker would not pay its bills. Warwickshire-based Aston Martin has been forced to take legal action against IMR Industries after the Italian manufacturer stopped deliveries of vital components. IMR, which also supplies the likes of Ferrari and Maserati, is understood to have ceased shipments because of concerns that Aston Martin's financial troubles would leave it unable to pay for the parts delivered. A source close to Aston Martin insisted the company always paid its suppliers on time. It comes as Aston Martin, which is overseen by billionaire Lawrence Stroll, battles to stem years of losses and get debts under control. Like other carmakers, the luxury marque has also been buffeted by Donald Trump's tariffs on vehicle imports, which prompted the company to temporarily suspend deliveries to the US this year. IMR is understood to have stopped delivering parts to Aston Martin around a fortnight ago. Production has so far been unaffected by the disruption thanks to sufficient stockpiles. However, Aston Martin has now taken legal action against IMR, filing a lawsuit for breach of contract in the UK's High Court on June 19. An initial hearing was held last Thursday, where the case was adjourned while IMR builds its defence. But a High Court judge issued a temporary injunction ordering IMR Industries to restart deliveries. Aston Martin has received supplies in the days since. The carmaker is now seeking a permanent injunction to force IMR Industries to continue making deliveries for the remaining period of the contract. Aston Martin has enlisted lawyers from City firm Gowling WLG to make its case. A spokesman for Aston Martin said: 'In keeping with Aston Martin policy, we do not comment on ongoing litigation.' IMR Industries and Gowling WLG were contacted for comment. IMR was founded 60 years ago and has two sites based near Milan and Pescara in southern Italy. The manufacturer, which employs around 1,300 staff across six plants, makes exterior parts used on luxury cars as well as interior leather trims. Clients include Bentley, Ferrari, Maserati, BMW and Porsche. Aston Martin has a multi-year contract with IMR to supply components, including both body and interior parts. The clash comes as Aston Martin struggles to find a firm footing for its business. Shares have lost more than 90pc of their value since the company first listed on the London Stock Exchange in 2018 and Aston Martin has been through a succession of chief executives, each of whom has struggled to find a path to profitability. Aston Martin issued back-to-back profits last year, blamed on issues with its supply chains and an economic slowdown in China. The company lost £289m last year and saw its debts jump by 43pc to £1.1bn. It has also been severely affected by Mr Trump's 25pc tariffs on all cars and car parts imported into the US. The levies caused Aston Martin to temporarily pause all shipments to America, a key market, for a month. In February, Aston Martin outlined plans to cut 170 jobs in a bid to reduce its costs by £25m a year. It has also outlined plans to sell its stake in the Aston Martin Aramco Formula One Team for £125m to help reduce its debts. The British carmaker, which was founded in 1913 and is known for its association with James Bond, is aiming to turn around its performance by ironing out issues with production that have dogged the business. Adrian Hallmark, the chief executive who formerly ran Bentley, said this year his focus was on 'operational execution and delivering financial sustainability'. Mr Hallmark was appointed last year by Mr Stroll, the Canadian tycoon who seized control of Aston Martin in 2020 through a bailout. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Goldman Sachs warns tariffs won't help the U.S. boost manufacturing productivity as tech in American factories continues to lag
U.S. manufacturing has decelerated recently, both as a result of increased competition from China and as part of a broader manufacturing productivity slowdown. Goldman Sachs analysts argue tariffs will not lower supply chain and labor costs enough to boost reshoring, and instead, increased automation will be the most likely driver of a manufacturing productivity boost. As China continues to best the United States in manufacturing capabilities, tariffs may not be America's best bet to boost factory productivity. Instead, the U.S. should look to AI and automation to gain an edge in manufacturing, Goldman Sachs analysts argue. President Donald Trump aspires to return factory jobs to American shores by imposing steep tariffs on U.S. manufacturing rivals, but the taxes can only incentivize reshoring so much, analysts said in a note published Thursday. Instead, manufacturers should look to automation and the ever-more-accessible artificial intelligence as their best chance for boosting domestic manufacturing. 'A pickup in the pace of innovation—potentially from recent advances in robotics and generative AI—therefore remains the catalyst most likely to reverse the long-run stagnation in manufacturing productivity,' analyst Joseph Briggs and colleagues said in the note. As China capitalizes on automation and cheaper labor to grow its export footprint, the Bank of America Institute has found mounting evidence of a recent U.S. manufacturing slowdown, including U.S. Census Bureau data showing new orders for manufactured durable goods decreasing 6.3% in April. The Institute of Supply Management Manufacturing Purchasing Managers' Index (PMI) has fallen since March, also indicating a contraction. The U.S.'s productivity woes are part of a larger manufacturing productivity slowdown happening over the last two decades as a result of investment pullback following the global financial crisis, as well as a slowdown in the burst of technological advancements of the early 2000s, according to Goldman Sachs. Trump's tariff plans for China—which the president has not disclosed, despite touting a new trade deal—aim to help the U.S. claw back manufacturing opportunities from its economic rival. But while they make consumers' lives more expensive, they are not a panacea for manufacturers, the bank argued in its note. 'Tariffs are unlikely to result in much reshoring because production costs in other countries are well below the U.S.' for most products (even after accounting for tariffs), and China will likely continue to grow its exports on the back of cost advantages and industrial policy support,' the note said. Instead, analyst Briggs said, the U.S. should focus on another area in which it's lagging: automation. The U.S. has trailed other manufacturing giants in implementing AI into factory operations, according to a Boston Consulting Group (BCG) Henderson Institute report released earlier this month. Only 46% of U.S. respondents of BCG's Global Manufacturing Survey of 1,000 manufacturers reported multiple use cases of AI in their plants, falling short of the 62% average and lagging behind China's 77%. 'This is one of the key technologies that I think could drive productivity growth in a cost-competitive manner,' Briggs told Fortune. 'And we just haven't seen that occur on a meaningful scale yet.' The U.S. did not previously invest in factory automation as a result of a 'hangover' from the global financial crisis, Briggs said, but the U.S. now has a real shot at prioritizing factory technology updates, given the growing ubiquity and therefore affordability of automation and AI. Companies such as aviation precision parts-maker MSP Manufacturing have already begun to adapt accordingly. MSP president and chief operating officer Johnny Goode recently learned of an AI-powered software able to program the machine building the precision parts, reducing production time from an hour and a half to seven minutes per part—plus 15 minutes necessary for a human operator to refine it. 'I was like, holy snap, this is going to be a game changer,' Goode told Fortune's Jeremy Kahn this week. 'Going from 90 minutes to 22 minutes is a big deal, and we've seen that get even better as we've learned to use the software more.' Goldman Sachs analysts conceded that while automation provides the largest area for growth in manufacturing productivity in the U.S., it is unlikely to solve the broader manufacturing slowdown, which is global. The slowdown is 'historically unusual,' Briggs said, with the maturation of the tech sector the likely culprit. Any hope for a global uptick in productivity would come from mass advancement and adoption of AI and robotics on a large scale. 'The main thing that would drive a large pickup in manufacturing productivity and manufacturing growth would be a sharp increase in the pace of innovation,' Briggs said. 'And this type of inflection upwards and technological progress are very hard to predict.' Advancement in tech could have a two-fold benefit for domestic manufacturing productivity, both in driving factory investments and in bettering technology to be installed in factories to automate tasks. But with the specifics of the future of AI and automation applications still unknown, it's difficult to predict whether a reversal of a domestic manufacturing slowdown is truly possible. 'We just need to see it happen before we have a lot of confidence in that dynamic being a big driver,' Briggs said. This story was originally featured on
Yahoo
39 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Starmer says fixing welfare is a 'moral imperative'
Sir Keir Starmer has said the UK's benefits system is broken and fixing it is a "moral imperative", a day after a backbench Labour revolt saw him forced into a U-turn on welfare cuts. The prime minister told the Welsh Labour Party conference in Llandudno that the government would not take away the welfare "safety net that vulnerable people rely on". But he said he could not let benefits "become a snare for those who can and want to work". Despite the government's concession on its plans to reform welfare, some Labour MPs want further changes, while the Unite union has called for the proposal to be dropped altogether ahead of a vote on Tuesday. PM's benefit cuts U-turn leaves backbenchers feeling bruised We've got the right balance, says PM after benefits U-turn Faisal Islam: How much will U-turn on disability benefits cost? The BBC understands whips and cabinet ministers - including Wes Streeting, Angela Rayner and Rachel Reeves - have been phoning or texting Labour MPs over the weekend, going through the names of the initial rebels in a bid to get an accurate assessment of potential voting. Some MPs are saying they have yet to make their mind up on how to vote and are awaiting a statement on Monday from Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall that will spell out government concessions. Speaking at the conference in north Wales on Saturday, Sir Keir said fixing the "broken" benefits system needed to be done because it was "failing people every day", leaving "a generation of young people written off for good and the cost spiralling out of control". "Fixing it is a moral imperative, but we need to do it in a Labour way," he added. The government's initial plans, aimed at bringing down the welfare bill, would have made it harder for people to claim personal independence payment (Pip), a benefit paid to 3.7 million people with long-term physical or mental health conditions. But following a rebellion among Labour MPs and the likelihood the government would be defeated in the Commons, the government announced the stricter criteria would only apply to new claimants. It reversed its plans to freeze the health-related component of universal credit, and the payment will now rise in line with inflation for existing recipients. Ministers will also carry out a review of the Pip assessment process, with input from disability organisations. A £1bn support package to help people into work, originally scheduled for 2029, will be fast-tracked. A new "reasoned amendment" to the bill will be put down on Monday by rebel MPs, which will reflect government concessions but is expected to be similar to the now-withdrawn earlier amendment that sought to block changes to the benefits system. The BBC understands that around 50 Labour MPs currently back that new amendment. That number is likely to increase but the expectation is it will not reach the 80-plus needed to put the government in danger of defeat. However it would still represent a significant rebellion. Rebel MPs are also expected to hold a briefing on Monday night at Westminster with various disability charities. Labour MP Diane Abbott earlier told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that she thought the result of a vote on the new plans would be tight, partly because backbenchers are still "upset about the lack of consultation" and because of "the notion of a two-tier benefit system". But former Labour justice secretary Lord Falconer told the programme that "sensible" changes to the welfare reforms were "pretty significant", and that he believed opposition among Labour MPs was "shrinking and shrinking". Debbie Abrahams, the Labour MP who chairs the Work and Pensions Select Committee, told the BBC on Friday: "The concessions are a good start, they are very good concessions and they will protect existing claimants. "However there are still concerns about new claimants. It would not be right for me not to do anything just to spare the prime minister an inconvenience." Ahead of Sir Keir's conference speech, Unite called for the "entire welfare bill to be dropped and for the government to start again", with general secretary Sharon Graham accusing Labour of "attacking the most vulnerable in our society". "The government's latest plans for disabled benefits cuts are divisive and sinister," she said. "Creating a two-tier system where younger disabled people and those who become disabled in the future will be disadvantaged and denied access to work and education, is morally wrong."
