Do McKinsey and other consultants do anything useful?

[Navy_Pete]

Any decent consultant will always include talking to the people with the problems to understand the context. The whole point of hiring a consultant is to get another set of eyes on the project. Often the manager has got too many competing demands from within the organization and is having difficulty meeting all of them. They then start asking themselves "Am I seeing this right? Is there something I am missing?" And then, if their reality is confirmed and a course of action created and decided they then need ammunition to sell that course of action to the organization.

People moan about politicians and use the word politician as an epithet about their bosses. Reality is that everything is political. Everything is a transaction. As a salesman I spent as much time selling my clients to my company as I did selling my company to my clients. As a manager it was a case of selling my department's people to the company while selling the company to the department.

In military terms it comes down to that bit at the end of the Ops O when you ask for questions and dread somebody asking "Do you believe this will work?"

Sure, but the reality is that frequently consultants are brought where they have a general familiarity, but the actual SMEs are internal to the CAF, who know what needs done and how to do it. The issue isn't usually that we don't know what to do, it's that the big giant heads don't trust their internal team of SMEs.

Nothing more frustrating than being a legitimate SME in a niche field, and having to walk some generalist through the details so that they will put together a report to the big giant heads that says the same thing as your BN/email whatever, but actually gets things moving. It's a waste of time and resources.

I've learned a lot from some consultants, when they are plugging a gap we don't have, and use 3rd parties a lot to bring in extra hands when we don't have enough people, but there are a lot of things we do where it's essentially a fancy letterhead and big invoice to confirm something we already know.

 

[captloadie]

Sure, but the reality is that frequently consultants are brought where they have a general familiarity, but the actual SMEs are internal to the CAF, who know what needs done and how to do it. The issue isn't usually that we don't know what to do, it's that the big giant heads don't trust their internal team of SMEs.

Nothing more frustrating than being a legitimate SME in a niche field, and having to walk some generalist through the details so that they will put together a report to the big giant heads that says the same thing as your BN/email whatever, but actually gets things moving. It's a waste of time and resources.

I've learned a lot from some consultants, when they are plugging a gap we don't have, and use 3rd parties a lot to bring in extra hands when we don't have enough people, but there are a lot of things we do where it's essentially a fancy letterhead and big invoice to confirm something we already know.

In general I think that there are two reasons why Consultants are hired in situations like you state here.

Its either senior personnel don't trust what their teams are telling them, or senior personnel must prove to higher that yes, their teams were correct, can we please move on.

In the first instance, you have to ask yourself why does that distrust exist. Is it particular individuals being risk adverse in general. Is it a past experience, maybe in another position, that burned them and has tainted their ability to trust what they are told from internal assets. Are they getting differing advice from multiple internal team members (be it official or otherwise), that causes them to distrust the official response. Or were they part of the same team at a lower rank, and know they are being fed BS. Answering these questions might better position you to understand where senior management is coming from.

In the second instance, it is probably due to a general distrust by elected officials and senior public servants that DND can't be trusted to not choose the platinum plated solution. This "unbiased" second opinion acts as a means to show we are playing by the rules.

 

[daftandbarmy]

In general I think that there are two reasons why Consultants are hired in situations like you state here.

Its either senior personnel don't trust what their teams are telling them, or senior personnel must prove to higher that yes, their teams were correct, can we please move on.

In the first instance, you have to ask yourself why does that distrust exist. Is it particular individuals being risk adverse in general. Is it a past experience, maybe in another position, that burned them and has tainted their ability to trust what they are told from internal assets. Are they getting differing advice from multiple internal team members (be it official or otherwise), that causes them to distrust the official response. Or were they part of the same team at a lower rank, and know they are being fed BS. Answering these questions might better position you to understand where senior management is coming from.

In the second instance, it is probably due to a general distrust by elected officials and senior public servants that DND can't be trusted to not choose the platinum plated solution. This "unbiased" second opinion acts as a means to show we are playing by the rules.

A nice little summary of what management consultants can bring to organizations.

You will probably read these and think that any competent manager should be able to do all of these things, without external help, and you would be correct.

Sadly, widespread underinvestment in the development of leaders in almost all occupations, and all sectors of the economy, will ensure that the role of the consultants is secure for the foreseeable future (thinks back to the time where he helped two Admirals build a simple Venn diagram on PowerPoint)

Consulting is More Than Giving Advice​

Management consulting includes a broad range of activities, and the many firms and their members often define these practices quite differently. One way to categorize the activities is in terms of the professional’s area of expertise (such as competitive analysis, corporate strategy, operations management, or human resources). But in practice, as many differences exist within these categories as between them.

Another approach is to view the process as a sequence of phases—entry, contracting, diagnosis, data collection, feedback, implementation, and so on. However, these phases are usually less discrete than most consultants admit.

Perhaps a more useful way of analyzing the process is to consider its purposes; clarity about goals certainly influences an engagement’s success. Here are consulting’s eight fundamental objectives, arranged hierarchically:

Providing Information
Perhaps the most common reason for seeking assistance is to obtain information. Compiling it may involve attitude surveys, cost studies, feasibility studies, market surveys, or analyses of the competitive structure of an industry or business. The company may want a consultant’s special expertise or the more accurate, up-to-date information the firm can provide. Or the company may be unable to spare the time and resources to develop the data internally.

Solving Problems
Managers often give consultants difficult problems to solve. For example, a client might wish to know whether to make or buy a component, acquire or divest a line of business, or change a marketing strategy. Or management may ask how to restructure the organization to be able to adapt more readily to change; which financial policies to adopt; or what the most practical solution is for a problem in compensation, morale, efficiency, internal communication, control, management succession, or whatever.

Effective Diagnosis
Much of management consultants’ value lies in their expertise as diagnosticians. Nevertheless, the process by which an accurate diagnosis is formed sometimes strains the consultant-client relationship, since managers are often fearful of uncovering difficult situations for which they might be blamed. Competent diagnosis requires more than an examination of the external environment, the technology and economics of the business, and the behavior of nonmanagerial members of the organization. The consultant must also ask why executives made certain choices that now appear to be mistakes or ignored certain factors that now seem important.

Recommending Actions
The engagement characteristically concludes with a written report or oral presentation that summarizes what the consultant has learned and that recommends in some detail what the client should do. Firms devote a great deal of effort to designing their reports so that the information and analysis are clearly presented and the recommendations are convincingly related to the diagnosis on which they are based. Many people would probably say that the purpose of the engagement is fulfilled when the professional presents a consistent, logical action plan of steps designed to improve the diagnosed problem. The consultant recommends, and the client decides whether and how to implement.

Implementing Changes
The consultant’s proper role in implementation is a matter of considerable debate in the profession. Some argue that one who helps put recommendations into effect takes on the role of manager and thus exceeds consulting’s legitimate bounds. Others believe that those who regard implementation solely as the client’s responsibility lack a professional attitude, since recommendations that are not implemented (or are implemented badly) are a waste of money and time. And just as the client may participate in diagnosis without diminishing the value of the consultant’s role, so there are many ways in which the consultant may assist in implementation without usurping the manager’s job.

Building Consensus & Commitment
Any engagement’s usefulness to an organization depends on the degree to which members reach accord on the nature of problems and opportunities and on appropriate corrective actions. Otherwise, the diagnosis won’t be accepted, recommendations won’t be implemented, and valid data may be withheld. To provide sound and convincing recommendations, a consultant must be persuasive and have finely tuned analytic skills. But more important is the ability to design and conduct a process for (1) building an agreement about what steps are necessary and (2) establishing the momentum to see these steps through. An observation by one consultant summarizes this well.

Facilitating Client Learning
Management consultants like to leave behind something of lasting value. This means not only enhancing clients’ ability to deal with immediate issues but also helping them learn methods needed to cope with future challenges. This does not imply that effective professionals work themselves out of a job. Satisfied clients will recommend them to others and will invite them back the next time there is a need.

Organizational Effectiveness
Sometimes successful implementation requires not only new management concepts and techniques but also different attitudes regarding management functions and prerogatives or even changes in how the basic purpose of the organization is defined and carried out. The term organizational effectiveness is used to imply the ability to adapt future strategy and behavior to environmental change and to optimize the contribution of the organization’s human resources.

Consulting is More Than Giving Advice

By Arthur N. Turner | Harvard Business Review September 1982 Issue Management consulting includes a broad range of activities, and the many firms and their members often define these practices quit…

careercenter.bauer.uh.edu

 

[Kirkhill]

In general I think that there are two reasons why Consultants are hired in situations like you state here.

Its either senior personnel don't trust what their teams are telling them, or senior personnel must prove to higher that yes, their teams were correct, can we please move on.

In the first instance, you have to ask yourself why does that distrust exist. Is it particular individuals being risk adverse in general. Is it a past experience, maybe in another position, that burned them and has tainted their ability to trust what they are told from internal assets. Are they getting differing advice from multiple internal team members (be it official or otherwise), that causes them to distrust the official response. Or were they part of the same team at a lower rank, and know they are being fed BS. Answering these questions might better position you to understand where senior management is coming from.

In the second instance, it is probably due to a general distrust by elected officials and senior public servants that DND can't be trusted to not choose the platinum plated solution. This "unbiased" second opinion acts as a means to show we are playing by the rules.

Part of it also is that translators are often needed.

SMEs talk to other SMEs in shorthand. Words and acronyms are understood to have specific meanings that even when not fully accepted have limits of debate that are clearly understood. Outsiders refer to that vocabulary as jargon. When SMEs try to make their case to outsiders with jargon they fail.

The problem compounds when one group of SMEs (engineers) tries to talk to another group of SMEs (accountants) who have their own jargon.
The proverbial dialogue of the deaf occurs.

A good consultant, with a working knowledge of both vocabularies and a bit of commonly understood plain language can arbitrate the discussion and get both parties on to the same page.

 

[Kirkhill]

A nice little summary of what management consultants can bring to organizations.

You will probably read these and think that any competent manager should be able to do all of these things, without external help, and you would be correct.

Sadly, widespread underinvestment in the development of leaders in almost all occupations, and all sectors of the economy, will ensure that the role of the consultants is secure for the foreseeable future (thinks back to the time where he helped two Admirals build a simple Venn diagram on PowerPoint)

Consulting is More Than Giving Advice​

Management consulting includes a broad range of activities, and the many firms and their members often define these practices quite differently. One way to categorize the activities is in terms of the professional’s area of expertise (such as competitive analysis, corporate strategy, operations management, or human resources). But in practice, as many differences exist within these categories as between them.

Another approach is to view the process as a sequence of phases—entry, contracting, diagnosis, data collection, feedback, implementation, and so on. However, these phases are usually less discrete than most consultants admit.

Perhaps a more useful way of analyzing the process is to consider its purposes; clarity about goals certainly influences an engagement’s success. Here are consulting’s eight fundamental objectives, arranged hierarchically:

1. Providing Information

Perhaps the most common reason for seeking assistance is to obtain information. Compiling it may involve attitude surveys, cost studies, feasibility studies, market surveys, or analyses of the competitive structure of an industry or business. The company may want a consultant’s special expertise or the more accurate, up-to-date information the firm can provide. Or the company may be unable to spare the time and resources to develop the data internally.

1. Solving Problems

Managers often give consultants difficult problems to solve. For example, a client might wish to know whether to make or buy a component, acquire or divest a line of business, or change a marketing strategy. Or management may ask how to restructure the organization to be able to adapt more readily to change; which financial policies to adopt; or what the most practical solution is for a problem in compensation, morale, efficiency, internal communication, control, management succession, or whatever.

1. Effective Diagnosis

Much of management consultants’ value lies in their expertise as diagnosticians. Nevertheless, the process by which an accurate diagnosis is formed sometimes strains the consultant-client relationship, since managers are often fearful of uncovering difficult situations for which they might be blamed. Competent diagnosis requires more than an examination of the external environment, the technology and economics of the business, and the behavior of nonmanagerial members of the organization. The consultant must also ask why executives made certain choices that now appear to be mistakes or ignored certain factors that now seem important.

1. Recommending Actions

The engagement characteristically concludes with a written report or oral presentation that summarizes what the consultant has learned and that recommends in some detail what the client should do. Firms devote a great deal of effort to designing their reports so that the information and analysis are clearly presented and the recommendations are convincingly related to the diagnosis on which they are based. Many people would probably say that the purpose of the engagement is fulfilled when the professional presents a consistent, logical action plan of steps designed to improve the diagnosed problem. The consultant recommends, and the client decides whether and how to implement.

1. Implementing Changes

The consultant’s proper role in implementation is a matter of considerable debate in the profession. Some argue that one who helps put recommendations into effect takes on the role of manager and thus exceeds consulting’s legitimate bounds. Others believe that those who regard implementation solely as the client’s responsibility lack a professional attitude, since recommendations that are not implemented (or are implemented badly) are a waste of money and time. And just as the client may participate in diagnosis without diminishing the value of the consultant’s role, so there are many ways in which the consultant may assist in implementation without usurping the manager’s job.

1. Building Consensus & Commitment

Any engagement’s usefulness to an organization depends on the degree to which members reach accord on the nature of problems and opportunities and on appropriate corrective actions. Otherwise, the diagnosis won’t be accepted, recommendations won’t be implemented, and valid data may be withheld. To provide sound and convincing recommendations, a consultant must be persuasive and have finely tuned analytic skills. But more important is the ability to design and conduct a process for (1) building an agreement about what steps are necessary and (2) establishing the momentum to see these steps through. An observation by one consultant summarizes this well.

1. Facilitating Client Learning

Management consultants like to leave behind something of lasting value. This means not only enhancing clients’ ability to deal with immediate issues but also helping them learn methods needed to cope with future challenges. This does not imply that effective professionals work themselves out of a job. Satisfied clients will recommend them to others and will invite them back the next time there is a need.

1. Organizational Effectiveness

Sometimes successful implementation requires not only new management concepts and techniques but also different attitudes regarding management functions and prerogatives or even changes in how the basic purpose of the organization is defined and carried out. The term organizational effectiveness is used to imply the ability to adapt future strategy and behavior to environmental change and to optimize the contribution of the organization’s human resources.

Consulting is More Than Giving Advice

By Arthur N. Turner | Harvard Business Review September 1982 Issue Management consulting includes a broad range of activities, and the many firms and their members often define these practices quit…

careercenter.bauer.uh.edu

Damn, you're fast.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Damn, you're fast.

Wait until you see my invoicing speed

 

[Biomans]

I have experience seeing how E&Y and Deloitte shill their services and perform recommendations around strategic direction and M&A in emerging industries. They essentially take whatever research is readily available and combine it with their personal flavor of financial modeling to make recommendations. The most import thing to remember is that the vast majority of people working as consultants have a background in finance (occasionally with a complementary specialty). Their models are only as good as the quality of data they can put into them. If they start with assumptions they don't fully understand, those assumptions contaminate the model and make the output useless. Garbage in, garbage out. I personally don't hold a lot of stock in their recommendations because I've seen many times how their linear approach to consulting falls flat.

My experience with consulting firms is likely different from how they're implemented in the CAF. However, I'm sure some areas have the same issues I've outlined.

 

[Navy_Pete]

In general I think that there are two reasons why Consultants are hired in situations like you state here.

Its either senior personnel don't trust what their teams are telling them, or senior personnel must prove to higher that yes, their teams were correct, can we please move on.

In the first instance, you have to ask yourself why does that distrust exist. Is it particular individuals being risk adverse in general. Is it a past experience, maybe in another position, that burned them and has tainted their ability to trust what they are told from internal assets. Are they getting differing advice from multiple internal team members (be it official or otherwise), that causes them to distrust the official response. Or were they part of the same team at a lower rank, and know they are being fed BS. Answering these questions might better position you to understand where senior management is coming from.

In the second instance, it is probably due to a general distrust by elected officials and senior public servants that DND can't be trusted to not choose the platinum plated solution. This "unbiased" second opinion acts as a means to show we are playing by the rules.

Or in the third instance, senior management wants to do something stupid, their SMEs tell them it's stupid and they shouldn't do it, so they try and bring in outside SMEs to give them a yes.

The RCN did this to ignore facial hair with fire fighting masks. CAF policy from the fire marshall says 'thou shalt be clean shaven on the sealing area'. OEM guidance says the same. NFPA standard ditto. Every fire safety organization on the planet; ditto. Internal Navy SMEs says the same (and also did a study to prove it). Finally they found some sucker at FSE to give them a maybe and have been playing loose and lazy with CAF safety orders on life safety equipment since, while completely ignoring that our rate of fires in the RCN is about 1500 times higher than commercial shipping in Canada, and 30-50 times higher than the USN.

Expecting it to continue until someone gets hurt and a CO, XO, OOD etc catches a charge for criminal negligence, disobeying orders etc, which will only happen if it hits the paper. Otherwise they will slap a confidential or higher on the BOI and bury it (just like all other RCN BOIs that we learn nothing from).

But if that does happen, I'm sure the CRCN will come out as totally against the whole thing, berate people for not following orders etc instead of accepting any responsibility for ignoring orders signed by the CDS in the name of QoL.