Index - Major Sections
Home
Site Map
Health Economic and Reform
Product and Services
References
Team
_______________
Index - Same Level Subject
Index - Child Subjects
Introduction
Change is changing now faster than at any other time in history. One individual cannot possibility keep up with all the changes that are occurring. Information overload is creating the need for specialization.
Consultants are in the business to make money.
Reasons for using Consultants
Perform a temporary function
An organization may only need an employee temporary, such as only for a two to three month project.
Another temporary function, is that of hiring a consultant until a full time staff position can be filled. This gives the organization time to fill a position with a qualified person without being pressured into hiring the first person that comes along.
It may also be necessary to hire a consultant to help out with a project due to time constraints.
Expertise
The consultant can bring bring expertise to the organization. One organization cannot possibility hire enough employees to be experts in every field. It is far cheaper to hire an consultant for the short time that he may be needed than to hire a person with the same knowledge full time.
Political
In the long history of consulting by this Web Site's author, the majority of his consulting contracts were for political reasons. There are several different versions on this.
The first is the use of consultants to "authenticate" a hard decision that needs to be made, yet the administration wants to appear as if it was "the choice of the experts." If the high priced expert recommends that a certain path should be followed, who can fault the administration. An example of this is then changes are made in employee policies, either benefits or work conditions.
The second political use of a consultant is that when the consultant is used to made a choice between two or more opposing parties in the organization.
The third political use of a consultant is that a donor "demands" it (see more about this below).
Getting the most out of the Consultant
The organization must first do their homework. If consultants are not
given clear guidelines, the organization may only receive standard
recommendations that could have been easily obtained from any first year
business textbook. To get the most
benefit from consultants, give them a choice of two or three options. Do the
groundwork yourself and let them put on the finishing touches.
The exception to this is when a consultant is hired to determine the problem. Again, the organization should do as much as possible before the consultant is hire to solve their own problems or at least eliminate the choices that can safely be eliminated.
Hire a local consultant whenever possible. Local consultants have a deeper and more realistic understanding of the working environment.
Have consultants work directly with the staff in order to develop their skills and lessen the need for consultants in the future.
Hire consultants that have expertise or specialization in the area under study. For instant, in one health care organization a donor country suggested that a consultant be hired to "look at ways to reorganized" the organization to made it more efficient. What was really needed was suggestions on how to reduce the staff. The consultant arrived, stayed a week, and made a suggestion that the staff policies should be reviewed. It was a waste of time and money even through the donor country paid.
Be prepared to act on the consultant's recommendations.
Risks of Using Consultants
One of the greatest dangers in using consultants is when there are clear cultural different between the consultant and the organization under study. It is hard enough for consultants to understand the culture of an organization within the country, much less for them to understand cultures across different countries. Nothing else need be said about this.
Just as there are advantages to hiring a consultant that specialized, it is also a disadvantage when the consultant has his own favor products. These consultants tend to made recommendations based on that which they feel most comfortable instead of that which may be "new and better." This is especially true in regards to "processes." An example is from the field of nursing. Nurses in the U.S. are trained and act under different rules than those in, for example, Bangladesh or even in Great Britain.
In many cases, consultants pass on their own inefficient systems. A consultant, for example from the U.S., will pass on what ever system is being used in his or her own country. Even though Cuba may have a better health care system, that system will never be recommended by a consultant from the U.S.
Consultants may also make recommendations based on what is presently "popular" instead of what may be in the best interest of the organization. Today, all the top consulting firms are developing teams to help clients go into the e-commerce business.
Consultants will only made money if they make their clients happy and get repeat business. Watch out for the "yes" type consultant that will say or do anything just to keep their client happy.
Consultants stay in business by relying on fact that organizations need their help. Consultants will generally never make recommendations that will "educate" an organizations employees so they are no longer needed. Consultants will generally may recommendations for the need for more consulting.
There is a believe in the some research
organizations that if a donor gives it something, then that is good and they
should take everything that the donor wants to give. That attitude should stop.
Even when a donor gives money to pay a consultant to tell the
organization what to do, the organization has to evaluate the overall costs. In
many cases, the organization may find that the funding may not cover what the
organization has to spend to get that the donor wants. As an example, does the
funding cover the complete cost of that consultant? What about the time that it
takes away from the organization staff to provide for the consultant? What about
the recommendations of the report; will the donor get mad if the organization do
not do what the consultant tells them to do? What about the validity of the
study? Can a consultant come into the organization for a week or less and really
know what is happening? He hears
only what is told to him by self-interest parties. He has no time to observe the
actual workings of the organization, which may be very different. What happens
if the report is based on wrong beliefs and the organization then goes ahead and
follow the recommendations? How much will that cost the organization? An
organization can not afford to hire self-serving consultants who’s recommendations only enriches their own pockets. In summary, what a donor dictates can be destructive in the long run.
There are generally always less costly methods of obtaining information than by using a consultant.
Hiring the Consultant
We are not saying that an organization should never use a consultant, only that the organization must prepare for the consultant and evaluation their outcomes.
A letter of agreement must be prepared that clearly sets the scope of the consultants. This agreement must provide the description of both the work to be performed and the outcomes in a way that can be measured.
Example
A new financial director of a large NGO was acted what
he thought was the most important task that was needed within the financial
department. He stated that it was to develop a Financial Policy Manual
(since the organization did not have one, that was indeed a very important
task). Example copies of financial policies were provided for him to
evaluate. After several weeks, the copies were in actually the same place as
where they had been placed. When he was asked about the financial manuals, he
replied "We will let a consultant do it."
Although this individual thought that having a manual was his most important
priority, he did nothing about it.
A consultant was hire
by a DONOR to product a report for BNGO. Unknown to BNGO the consultant was to
product two reports, one that went to the organization and the other that went
back to Donor reporting on the "quality" of management. The
consultant said that the private report that she sent to the Donor implied
that the management at BNGO was the worse that she had ever seem. In the
consultant's report to the BNGO she stress strongly that they hire more
consultants [in this case, I do not believe that the consultant was just
trying to generate work]. The reason being, the consultant stated that
there was no one found at the Organization that was capable of caring out the
suggestions.
Discussion
Does a Donor have a right to "spy" on an organization without their knowledge? It would be assumed that a NGO, from experience, would know that this was happening. It is correct for a consultant to discover data that was not made know to the organization? Probably not. There would be no chance for the organization to defend themselves or to take the suggestions and make improvements.
A final consideration, is to determine why an organization does not want to implement a recommended procedure.
Many examples can be taken from the area of accounting and finance. When a clearly sound procedure is recommended and the organization turns it down, you must ask yourself "what is going on here."
Another example is when a "manager" clearly doesn't want anyone knowing what he or she is doing. They cannot afford to have a consultant pass judgment on what they are doing.
...Self Reliance versus "Consultancy"
...Education versus Dependency