Month: February 2017

Peter Block, in his seminal consulting book, Flawless Consulting, writes, “There is a set of skills that is an essential part of consulting over and above technical expertise and interpersonal skills – and these are consulting skills” (Jossey-Bass, 2000, p. 6). Yet, the myth continues that technical and people skills are sufficient for successful consulting. Perhaps that is why so many consulting projects fail.

Technical expertise can be very powerful for improving certain technical functions, such as finances, marketing and computer systems. However, complex problems require more than that. They need consultants who can carefully analyze the problems, and can guide and support their clients through the frustrations, conflicts and resistance of changing their organizations – and often themselves.

Interpersonal skills can be very powerful cultivating the wisdom, expertise and participation of people. However, expecting them to use those to solve complex problems is a bit like expecting them to use those to fix their automobiles, with little knowledge of how their automobiles work or the procedures needed to fix them. They also need skills in analyzing and solving problems – sometimes during rapid change.

Today’s organizational consultants need strong technical, interpersonal and problem-solving skills. They need proven and adaptable methods to combine all of these skills to fix the car’s engine – while the confused and frustrated client is driving the car along unsigned and winding roads. Those methods and the skills to use them are called consulting skills.

What do you think?

Carter McNamara, MBA, PhD, faculty member of the Consultants Development Institute.

Here’s an Example of a Disconnected Conversation

A couple of weeks ago, a friend of mine and I were talking about a particular consulting project. We just weren’t connecting in our conversation somehow — I kept repeating my points and he kept repeating his. It felt like we were disagreeing somehow, but neither of us were actually saying that we disagreed with the other. Still, we felt increasingly frustrated.

He kept asserting that the client’s CEO needed to show stronger leadership, including by being more participative.

I kept agreeing. I suggested one-on-one with his managers, ensuring time in staff meetings to hear from each manager, and using a technique for consensus when making decisions.

My friend didn’t seem convinced — and seemed even more frustrated. He asserted that the CEO needs to read “Servant Leadership” by Robert Greenleaf. I agreed.

My friend asserted that the CEO needs to do a better job of bringing out the best in his people. I agreed.

Results Versus Methods — We Should Talk About Both

Finally, it hit me — my friend was talking about overall outcomes, and I was talking about activities to achieve those outcomes. Although we both wanted the same thing, we were focusing on different aspects of that result.

I find this type of disconnected conversation occurs more than we realize, especially about grand topics, such as leadership, accountability, transparency and performance.

It’s most powerful and poignant to talk about outcomes. It can be boring and even tedious to talk about methods to achieve those outcomes.

But we owe it to our clients and ourselves to go beyond preaching at them about outcomes. They can get that from reading a book. We owe it to them to produce some relevant and realistic ideas about how to achieve those outcomes.

What do you think?

Carter McNamara, MBA, PhD, is a faculty member of the Consultants Development Institute.