The Problem with Consultants: “We’ll Take It from Here”

In speaking to an old high school friend of mine who is now a CIO, I asked him if he and his colleagues are wary of vendors who are trying to sell them products that are misaligned with their needs. His answer surprised me. He told me he is more wary of consultants.

Since I would put myself in that Consultant camp, I was both shocked and wanted to know more. He explained to me that the presumption is that somehow consultants know more than the employees and so they are empowered to make decisions on behalf of the employees without drawing on the employees’ expertise. I sort have this vision of it unfolding like it does in a cliched way in the movies where the hero cop is just about to uncover something crucial at the crime scene and the FBI shows up and says: “We’ll take it from here.”

Let’s be clear on one thing though. Out of necessity, the consultant needs to bring some expertise to the table that the client lacks because if not, then there is no need for the consultant’s services. But this does not have to be a black and white issue.

If you are a sales consultant, you are there to help the sales team sell better. It does not mean they do not know how to sell, nor does it mean you know their business better than they do. But I would expect that you are forming a relationship with them where they explain their sales process and you can then use your expertise to tweak it and yield better results.

Or perhaps they are implementing a complex ERP system and they need your IT expertise to customize the system. But before you can start any customization you need to better understand their processes so you can deliver the goods. Maybe you can streamline processes based on prior experience, but again, you cannot be the movie version of the FBI where you shun the gold/war wounds/experience that the client and employees have to offer.

What I am getting at is that if that if the FBI paradigm is the perception people have of consultants, then we have a lot of work to do, and that “work” is created by partnering with our clients. We need to lead, but only after we follow first. Perhaps part of the disconnect is that what our clients view as something that has lasting implications we dismissively see as an engagement: something that has a defined time frame and then you move on. As grandiose as this may sound, perhaps we need to view our engagements as living legacies: something that originates with and is perpetuated by the client. That middle phase – making it work – is where we step in. And make no mistake, we make it possible, but only with client input, buy-in and ownership.