I work at the intersection of a management consultant and an IT consultant (or maybe a cross between a business architect and a management architect?). I have very consciously managed my career to ensure I can create value in exactly the sort of future it turns out we are now in.
I describe myself as a management architect both because of the work I do relating to ManageWithoutThem but also because I combine the discipline of management and the discipline of architecture into everything I do. I’ve written before about the tension between these two disciples.
Anthologic
You can now also see a more work-focused view of my world at Anthologic.com.au.
Consulting Helpers
I also maintain reusable helpers for my consulting engagement here.
Working in an industry at the cusp of disruption
As a consultant I believe I work in an industry that is on the cusp of disruption. It’s tempting to believe that the consulting industry is immune to disruption because “there will always be a market for talent” and this is in itself true. However, I believe the operating models of traditional consulting companies put them at risk.
In short, there are three trends that put traditional consulting business models at risk:
Trend #1. Market-making, capacity capture business models (I.e. Uber-isation)
If you think about it, consulting companies capture talent and then enable the discovery of that talent. A number of consulting companies – such as Internal Consulting Group (ICG) and Expert360 – are building the foundations of their business models on the premise that they are market-makers – connecting demand with supply.
In the case of ICG, the product management and commercialisation of intellectual property (IP) is also elegantly captured in the operating model (through information products and associated revenue sharing models). ICG is perhaps the most open and self-aware of the disruptive consulting models with regards to their role in this disruption.
Trend #2. Systems Integrators shift to Capability Engineering with a focus on outcome-as-a-service
When I started my career the “systems integrators” (SIs) dominated. It was all about selecting a systems integrator such as EDS or IBM and performing a “whole of IT outsourcing” initiative.
I’ve never been particularly critical of this process (though given my expertise in this area I would often comment when I see these initiatives managed poorly). Even when an organisation was seen to be “reversing” an outsourcing decision and in-sourcing capabilities, you can be sure they were in-sourcing a subtly different set of competencies than what they had originally outsourced.
The trend I see is that systems integrators are becoming true capability engineering companies. Previously, they would augment IT competencies with process, change, program management, etc. as the scale of their initiatives required additional disciplines. However, when you are truly creating hard to replicate capabilities that combine people, process, information, and technology you don’t simply run a set of work streams, you need to fundamentally change how you deliver value.
The process I see of consulting companies all moving to agile, service design, and customer oriented delivery processes is a manifestation of this trend. However, a disciplined, and indeed cross-disipline approach to true capability engineering is yet to immerge.
Trend #3. Bundled consulting plus information services offered by industry specific vendors
Perhaps the biggest threat to the consulting industry is industry-specific capabilities. Most consulting organisations offer industry-specific services. I’d also suggest that transfering knowledge that is common in one industry to another industry where it is deemed new is the simplest and most common forms of innovation.
However, in the world we live in it’s never been easier to acquire people, information, technology, and process execution. Every organisation can be a consulting organisation. So increasingly we will see software vendors, professionals, and industry leaders offering consulting services to their clients, the consulting industry’s traditional clients, and into adjacent industries.
When a company that isn’t traditionally a consulting company becomes a consulting company (and this is easy because of Trend #1 above) they bring something that a consulting company doesn’t have. That is, everything they previously did. If you are a company that sells, for example, a price optimisation solution, you can take over the whole value chain including what would traditionally be seen as consulting work.
The as-a-service trend will not stop until services include both software and consulting components delivered by the same company (or tightly integrated ecosystem).
This is enough on trends. See also other articles I publish. The key point here is that the disruption of the consulting industry is real, and that means it’s important for me to distinguish between how my industry describes what I do versus what I actually do.
What my industry thinks I do
By the terms used in the consulting industry what I do falls into the following broad categories:
- Strategic Alignment
- Due Deligence
- ICT Strategic Planning
- Customer Life-cycle Modelling
- Customer Journey Management
- Value-chain Modelling
- Information Management Strategy / Data Strategy
- Work stream Leader
- Project Manager
- Program / Portfolio Manager
- Business Architect
- Enterprise Solution Architect
- Configuration Manager
From an industry perspective, from the vantage point of IT and management consulting I’ve worked in the following industries:
- Airlines
- Fast-moving consumer good (FMCG)
- Financial Services
- Utilities
- Telecommunications
What my clients want to hear
It’s difficult to avoid esoteric language. So whether an industry is experiencing disruption or not, there are some simple assurances that clients need to hear. These are typically expressed as behaviours:
- Not focused on the technology; focused on business outcomes
- Pragmatic; using an array of approaches where appropriate rather than being dogmatic about a particular technique
- Disciplined; particularly scope management, complying with deadlines, escalating issues appropriately, and balancing both routine activities and novel activities
- Value-seeking questioning; with an ability to question ways of working when appropriate
I’m not particularly fond of the idea of people describing themselves in terms of what they’re not as opposed to making a positive statement about what they are. The idea of notfocusing on the technology certainly falls into this category. But my clients need to hear it.
My secret ingredients
It’s a misnomer that the world is divided into “technical” and “not technical” people.
One of the phases that gets me riled up is “I’m not a technical person”. It’s not the phase itself that I don’t like – it’s the way it’s used. People use it when they mean “I don’t understand”, “I think that’s below me”, or even “I’m mysteriously proud of what I don’t know even as I conceal what I do know”.
The secret to my success is that I try to integrate people, process, information, and technology without placing one above the other. That’s basically all I do. Where others might focus on technology and leave the rest to “the business” – I build an integrated view.
Equally, where others might say they are focusing on the “process” and imply that everything else (people, information, technology) is just “details” I don’t stop. I build an integrated view.
I’m fully aware that I can’t know everything as well as specialists. But that’s not the point. I always work across disciplines and I always push towards multi-discipline approaches that are specific to the task at hand – i.e. they are outside of but encompass specialised approaches.
Sometimes this means I get pegged as the “technology” guy but to be honest I don’t know any more about technology than I do about people, process, or information. Unfortunately, we live in a world where anybody who is willing to dive into the details will sometimes be called “technical”.
What my clients actually get
In broad terms this is what I do:
- Cross industry innovation – I take something I’ve learnt – usually in another industry – and I apply it to your industry. This might be pricing & yield management, scheduling disciplines, innovation & design-lead processes, etc
- Strategy deployment – I bridge the gap between your strategy and the business capabilities, competency centres, performance management, information management, and organisation change management required to implement that strategy. Sometimes I have to either work out what your strategy actually is by reverse engineering the strategy expressed by individual business units, or by converting a set of executive performance measures to a strategy; but I see this as part of a same continuum
- Capability engineering – This is my take on what is commonly called “capability-based planning”. It is the process of creating differentiating hard-to-replicate bundles on capability that combine people, process, information, and technology. Capabilities are matured towards the firm’s strategic objectives to create a lean business transformation approach.
- MWT/Transforms – This is my lean business transformation approach. It is everything I’ve learnt about managing through strategic pivots distilled into a framework.
The first few weeks with me
I have to admit my ideal engagements all have a similar “shape”. I phase my engagements in a standard way, and I have some generic objectives for each phase. This approach allows me to focus my mental attention on making it specific to my client’s objectives. I call this The power of half a plan.
The basic phasing I use is shown in the table below. The making it specific column gives some insight into what I need to turn this generic approach into something specific. As you can see in the Joy-factorcolumn I enjoy some parts of this process more than others.
| Phase | Generic Objectives | Making it specific | Duration | Joy-factor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kick-off | Confirm Critical Success Factors; Schedule Stakeholder Meetings; Agree Approach for next few weeks; Gather existing artefacts for review | Prior to the formal kick-off I’ll conduct brief sponsor interviews and do a quick scan of materials so I can present a tailored approach for the kick-off | 3 days | I enjoy pulling together an approach specific to the challenge at hand |
| Stakeholder Engagement (Top Down, Strategic) | Interview 3–4 different types of stakeholders; Combine outside-in and inside-out perspectives; Apply capability assessment techniques; Apply boundary analysis; Create strawman relationships between existing client artefacts; Apply reference architectures | I have a number of reference architecture, assessment tools, and analysis technique at my disposal and will use them both during stakeholder sessions and as behind-the-scenes analysis | 2 weeks | I love learning on the fly; and using knowledge gathered with one stakeholder group to challenge other groups |
| Analysis (Concurrent Start, Bottom-up, Fact Based) | Review existing artefacts; Generate insights for review with stakeholders; understand integrity across artefacts; Gather discussion points to work through with stakeholders | This process is pure information management. Focused effort processing the raw content within existing client artefacts will produce insights if you are patient | 3 weeks | I like working with existing artefacts and datasets to go the extra mile with my analysis. I excel in this area |
| Establish Principles | Be clear and transparent about how you will make decisions; Understand constraints and how they will impact both the deliverables and the roadmap; Get agreement in principle from stakeholders | By this stage of the engagement the principles with be based on analysis and stakeholder engagement – as well as previous experience in similar engagements | 1 week | I love working at appropriate conception levels. Once principals are established they are the oil of organisational agility |
| Finalise Deliverables | Heads down, quiet time, with reduced stakeholder contact; Disappear to create quality work products; only come up for air and Q&A; Provide early visibility of deliverables followed by final walk-through and acceptance | Deliverables are specific to the engagement. The focus is getting a results – sometimes adjusting the depth of deliverables and risk ratings to meet the required timeframes | 1 week | I like to have a set period to bring all analysis and stakeholder engagement into a set of deliverables |
| Roadmap & Closure | Create both a medium term overview of future activities and the work stream disciplines required to sustain them; Create immediate actions to ensure effective kick-off for the next steps | A good roadmap successfully makes the connection between the specific objectives that must be achieved and the competencies require to deliver those outcomes. This makes the roadmap a balance between the generic and the specific | 1 week | My deliverables set direction, but the roadmap creates momentum. I love creating a compulsion to act and a lasting legacy |