Good Consultant, Bad Consultant

I was recently forwarded some information about Matthew Stewart, a writer and former management consultant alleging that the industry was populated by frauds and charlatans. In fact he proposes that the industry is a house of cards delivering questionable value to nieve clients.

As a buyer of management consulting services you would be wise to listen to what Mr. Stewart writes as the industry, without a doubt, hosts consultants of questionable value. Just like lawyers that are disbarred, and doctors that are stripped of their license to practice, so too are there consultants that should be relieved of their...briefcase? Laptop? Pie charts? Cerlox binders?

And herein lies the rub. Management consultants are not licensed, not registered, not certified, not examined, or in any way required to adhere to a higher standard of ethical practice or competence.

Although you need a license to fish, apparently anyone can advise industry on strategy.

So how do you prevent yourself from being hooked by an advisory crook? I have two suggestions...

First the easy one. Look for consultants with a CMC designation (Certified Management Consultant). It is an international standard to which fewer than 1% of consultants invest the time, effort, funds, and professional-improvement to achieve. It's not common, because it is difficult to get, so when a consultant gets it, they are watched over by the other CMCs so as to not compromise the value of the designation. It is not mandatory, but it can be taken away, and is valuable and the closest thing the industry has to a "license".

Now the less obvious one - expertise. Make expertise the focus of your evaluation of a potential consultant. You can break that down into their functional expertise (what they do - HR, IT, Finance, etc.), and then their category expertise (the industry they know best - manufacturing, health care, emergency services, etc.). Try to match their expertise specifically to your challenge.

Examples of other engagements demonstrating their relevence and previous exposure to your problem are good indicators of expertise. Writing and speaking about problems like yours are a few others. Is expertise transferable across categories? Sometimes. Across functional areas? Not so much.

If expertise is not obvious consider that a red flag.

If the consultant addresses their lack of specific expertise by displaying their magical process that can address any problem in any sector consider that a second red flag (note: process is important but it does not replace or trump expertise).

If, in desperation, they try to win you over with their splendid personality, I recommend you drop the third red flag and run for the hills. You need expertise, not another name on your Christmas card list.

So at this point I should thank Mr. Stewart for bringing the frauds to light and for rightly holding them to task. It's not something any consultant is likely to relish discussing but good consultants won't fear the discussion either.

This issue must be addressed for the good of the clients, for the good of the industry, and for the good of Mr. Stewart's book sales.

To hear the CBC interview click here and scroll down.

Preserving Public Support for Procurement and Consulting

The 2009 CMC Industry Trends and Outlook report identifies that management consultants are concerned with the controversy about the profession's image, value-for-money, and ethical standards. Controversies have been fueled in the public arena by recent media stories that infer that less than rigorous standards were used in the selection of consultants. Obviously these accusations defame the procurement as well as the consulting profession, demonstrating again that the reputation of both buyers and vendors are inextricably connected.

It only makes sense then, that the best solution to the challenge of consultant procurement processes will come from collaboration between the two entities.

CMC Canada 2009 Industry Study Highlights Procurement

The 2009 Canadian Management Consulting industry study was released by CMC Canada recently and it identified "the professionalization of procurement" as one of four industry challenges (the other three challenges were talent scarcity, low barriers to entry and preserving public confidence/demonstrating value. Offshoring was declared both a challenge and an opportunity.).

Comments from the consulting industry reflect a frustration with the RFP process as a costly and time-consuming process for both vendors and buyers - "a tick the box exercise, more focussed on price than value".

The complete study can be purchased from CMC Canada (www.cmc-canada.ca) for $300 CDN (non-members) and $150 (members).

This very informative research project was completed by Carolyn Vose and Associates and based on the response of over 400 management consultants to an online survey as well as select executive interviews and other data.

One ironic twist - CMC Canada selected Carolyn Vose and Associates to complete the study via an RFP process.

Feedback on "How to Buy Professional Services" Speaking Gigs

The two most recent "How to Buy..." events that I have done are the procurement/consultant event in Winnipeg and the American Public Works Association national conference in Columbus Ohio. The written feedback on these events confirm their value to the procurement professional.

In September at the Winnipeg event, 100% of the procurement professionals that completed an evaluation (about 60%) indicated that the event would either cause them to change the way they bought professional services, or recommend to their organization that they change their process when buying professional services.

In Columbus, 83% indicated that as a result of attending the session they were now better able to "differentiate between seemingly similar professional services providers and make selections that are more project-relevant."

Canadian Business Press Awards

UPDATE: The CA Magazine feature article on the RFP process for professional services A Decent Proposal written by Cal Harrison was selected as one of Canada's Top 5 best marketing articles at the 2009 Kenneth R. Wilson Awards, produced by the Canadian Business Press. The award goes to a feature article describing the application of a new technology, method, equipment, technique or practice that facilitates improved communication between buyers and sellers in any sector.

Click here to read the article.

The RFP Discussion Continues Around The Globe

On May 14th I announced that I had agreed to publicly debate my RFP philosophies during a US e-broadcast. Since that time I have had several dates deferred, then cancelled because two different debate opponents have dropped out of site. Is this evidence of limited support for the RFP even from advocates of its use? I'm not sure but I am sure that I will announce the availability of this podcast once it does finally happen.

On other consulting RFP fronts you can expect some lively debate in Columbus Ohio on Sunday September 13th as I present "A Decent Proposal: How to Buy Professional Services" to the American Public Works Association (APWA) conference.

Based on that upcoming presentation, an international peer reviewed journal has solicited an article on the subject from Beyond Referrals and we hope to see it published in early 2010.

And finally, if you have any interest in the consulting or consulting procurement business in Manitoba we are hosting another Consulting RFP Round Table Discussion at The Manitoba Club Friday September 25th in the morning. We'd love to see you there - it's almost at capacity but feel free to contact us about a "place at the table".

We Ran Out of Time Before We Ran Out of Steam

When 20+ consultants and 20+ procurement specialists get in a room together to discuss the use of the RFP to select professional services providers there is bound to be great discussion.

This past Thursday at The Manitoba Club in Winnipeg, Canada the discussion was inspiring. It seems there is in fact hope for improving the way the RFP is used in professional services.

Moderated by Cal Harrison the opening question asked "Why did you make the time to come here today?"

The first consultant to answer indicated he was there to gain a broader perspective on the process.

The first procurement person to respond was there to improve the process for all parties involved.

And in the interests of professional collaboration, the discussion just got better from there.

After an hour of great and healthy debate it was obvious a second session would be required. Watch the Beyond Referrals website for the next session in the fall of 2009. A brief summary of the observations and learnings from the first session will also be posted here soon.