Global Mobility Consulting

Deloitte, EY, and Mercer each operate established global mobility practices in the category. P&C Global emphasizes practitioner-led program governance and operational continuity across the full assignment lifecycle. Senior practitioners co-own the mobility policy design, the cost-and-tax envelope, the vendor governance, and the assignee-lifecycle design with the CHRO, tax leadership, legal, and the business lines, so the program is held against cross-border outcomes the operating plan defends — cost-per-move, compliance coverage, and assignee experience and assignment retention. P&C Global stays engaged through the first assignment-wave cycle of the new program, so the cost-per-move baseline, vendor governance, and Pillar 2 exposure read continue informing operating and workforce decisions rather than becoming static reporting artifacts.

When global mobility consulting work has to land across multiple business units, regions, and regulatory regimes, P&C Global anchors the engagement in a single diagnostic that separates where assignment patterns share root causes (common policy variants, shared host-country exposures, overlapping vendor relationships) from where the strategy genuinely diverges by business economics. Shared elements such as the Pillar 2 exposure framework, the immigration-compliance framework, and the assignee-lifecycle protocol are designed once and federated. Regulated-jurisdiction elements such as financial-services secondment policy, life-sciences cross-border clinical-trial deployment, and manufacturing engineering-fleet rotations are tailored. A cross-BU mobility council holds the named decision rights, so a policy exception in one region does not silently re-price the program in another.

Mobility programs unwind when the business unit incentive design quietly rewards behaviors the policy framework is built to constrain. P&C Global maps comp plans, business unit P&L ownership, and accountability structures against the policy tier design up front, so the engagement flags where managers are economically pushed toward exception-based assignments the new policy will deny. Where the misalignment is structural, an adjustment is staged into the calendar: mobility-policy adherence metrics for business-unit leadership, a closed-loop policy review tied to the planning cycle, and vendor-edge governance. Finance, tax, and HR sequence the moves so the change lands without breaking the assignment-cost forecast. P&C Global’s global mobility experts keep the operator’s economics aligned with realized cross-border outcomes — cost-per-move, compliance coverage, assignee-experience signal — across the first program cycle.

A short-form mobility diagnostic precedes the larger build on most engagements: a defensible cost-and-tax baseline and policy thesis first, then the multi-quarter implementation that builds the policy tiers, vendor governance, and Pillar 2 exposure read to a defined handover. Both phases are scoped against the mobility outcome the executive team wants to defend — typically cost-per-move, Pillar 2 footprint, compliance coverage, or assignment fill rate on business-critical roles. The decision the work matches is sizing the Pillar 2 footprint, sequencing the policy redesign, or holding the program under live cross-border pressure — not a pre-packaged engagement model.

Global mobility work touches cross-border employee data, tax-equalization records, immigration filings, and sanctions screening that operate under the OECD BEPS Pillar 2, GDPR, OFAC Sanctions, and Posted Workers Directive environment. The engagement is designed to align with those frameworks, not operate around them. P&C Global documents the lawful basis behind every data flow, surfaces policy-exception patterns that warrant audit review, and ensures the assignment-management model preserves the compliance trail. P&C Global itself maintains ISO 27001 and SOC 2 certifications, so cross-border data security is a discipline P&C Global lives by, not only one it designs for clients. Where AI is used in assignment-cost modeling or compliance flagging, model inputs and exception logic are governed under the same review gates as the tax-and-immigration controls themselves, with legal, tax, and HR consulted before deployment.

Published proof points speak to the durability of P&C Global’s cross-border work. The recruiting and mobilizing a global workforce for hospitality careers program describes a large operator whose cross-border workforce model had drifted out of step with the talent demands of a rapidly internationalizing business. Rebuilding the program around tiered policy design, segmented assignment types, and an assignee-experience calendar translated into sustained cross-border capacity, not a one-cycle fix that unwound. The structural logic behind cross-border deployment is developed further in the hub-and-spoke work model post-pandemic brief, whose thesis is that cross-border deployment has to carry both remote-work-anywhere employee expectations and the corporate-tax footprint that posture creates. This is one example among many; a substantial portion of P&C Global’s work is confidential and unpublished. Prospects whose situation isn’t reflected here can engage P&C Global directly.

A new global mobility engagement opens with the CHRO, tax leadership, legal, and the business unit principals in the room together; the operating-model decisions are too cross-functional to resolve through sequential stakeholder reviews. That session frames the cross-border outcome the operating plan has to defend and the tax-and-compliance dependencies the policy must carry. From day one, P&C Global addresses adjacent capabilities in parallel, not as a future engagement. Talent management work runs alongside the policy design because cross-border deployment shapes the workforce plan, and the vendor-governance build sits in the same engagement so tax, immigration, and relocation controls run on one calendar. To begin the conversation, contact P&C Global directly.