Why anti-consultancy sentiment isn't always a bad thing

Yep, you heard right - a consultant saying it's OK to be anti-consultancy. 

Why? 

I've worked with and for a number of businesses whose beliefs were naturally formed through bad experiences. Complex methodologies, lengthy engagements, over-engineered solutions, and crazy price points all contribute to anti-consultant sentiment. 

So why bother? 

Whilst poor outcomes can be mitigated by researching and selecting the right consultant for your unique needs, attitudes formed through experience can be hard to shift. If one project goes badly, all consultants might be tarred with the same brush. This is where anti-consultancy sentiment requires challenging.

It's fairly common knowledge that a high percentage of change efforts fail due to a lack of buy-in or resistance from staff. Responsible businesses who possess the desire to empower their own people and leverage their valuable skills and experiences during change and transformation should be congratulated, but with one caveat:

The motivation is matched by a thorough analysis of justifications, available skill-sets, expertise, workload, and capability to manage ongoing agile planning and execution.

Small and mid-size businesses are often resource-constrained. Forming a dedicated change team consisting of people with full-time jobs can be a risky move when considering individual impact, people spread too thinly, lack of formal leadership, and employee burnout. What happens when the day job (AKA the job a person is employed and paid to do) takes priority? Change efforts can slow, slip, or fall over completely depending on the importance of the employee to the project effort. Stress and anxiety increase for the individuals involved, and before you know it, a great idea for empowerment becomes a significant blocker to progress and damaging to employee well-being. And that's just in the short-term - change is a continual process, and the transition from an "as-is" to a "to-be" state can be years of work, constantly facing unexpected change and potential redirection. 

So what's the answer?

At Phronesis we advocate for a blended approach. Empowering your teams to be involved and understand the change effort required is critical to any successful project. The level of involvement is entirely dependent on your unique situation. Whether you're employing dedicated personnel or leading with existing employees, bringing in external guidance can be invaluable in unlocking potential, leveraging wider experience and perspective, and challenging "inside thinking." 

You don't need to outsource an entire project straight away (although we're happy to take these on!). Start with a small piece of advisory to test the approach, gather feedback, and ensure a good fit between your culture and our way of working. This could be early on to explore the initial problem statement, complete a force analysis, conduct market research, or map out organisational impact from leadership to individual teams. You could use us to gather and analyse customer and employee insights, support as-is to to-be planning and resourcing, or examine and map internal processes to support your understanding of change impact.

Whatever you decide, there's a blended approach out there that works best for your organisation's success and health. Be it a small piece of work to stress-test your thinking or a larger engagement programme to guide change in partnership with your teams and customers, we're flexible enough to adapt our services to most situations. 

It's OK to be anti-consultancy for the right reasons. Just don't let one bad experience put you off partnering with the right advisory who can help you accelerate your plans and ensure your people are bought-in to well-managed and thoughtful change.