Peter Block is a bestselling author, and on the subjects of empowerment, stewardship and chosen accountability. In his book, Flawless Consulting, Peter writes that, “The task of the consultant is increasingly to build the capacity of clients to make their own assessments and answer their own questions.” Nowhere is this issue more difficult that in the world of staff augmentation.
For decades, clients have solicited the
design and construction industry seeking “consultants to provide on-call or as
needed professional services.” While such solicitations are often true consulting assignments, many are often calls for staff augmentation. Staff
augmentation may be defined as the ability of a company to provide prescreened
professionals that meet the client’s criteria for a project and duration. While
there may be a specific assignment, the staff member's employment agreement is with his or her own company; however, they are assigned to work on-site usually under the direct supervision of the contracting company. By all outward indicators, the staff person would appear to be an employee. This model works well for the contracting company as issues relating to poor or underperformance can simply be met with a call to the staff person's own company and the individual may be replaced.
This is vastly different than true consulting. Like staff augmentation, consultants may be hired per project or for duration. However, unlike staff augmentation, consultants do not work under the direction or instruction of a client in a supervisory role. Rather, they provide similar or complementary services to more than one company thereby offering the hiring entity the benefit of many perspectives and points of view on a subject or project. So, why is this so important to understand?
True consulting is thoughtful and advisory in nature. It is intended to foster an innate ability to assess and resolve problems in the absence of on-going advice or counsel. However, those in the role of providing augmentative assistance under the guise of a consulting agreement may often find themselves in the difficult situation of just taking orders. How then do we, as design and construction professionals, bridge this gap in the face of augmentation?
Recall that on the face of it, the staff you select to assume an augmentative role is arguably the best qualified and most talented for the position(s) required. But, looking deeper, they are a representation of you and your company’s management. To that end, when faced with a situation that is contradictory to your company’s philosophy (not the hiring agent) or best business practice, your employee must have an “open door” to your firm to resolve complex and conflicting issues. Without such a “loop,” your firm may be found diluting the real and valuable role that your consultancy provides, and at worst, be culpable for actions taken by your employee, but at the direction of another.
This is vastly different than true consulting. Like staff augmentation, consultants may be hired per project or for duration. However, unlike staff augmentation, consultants do not work under the direction or instruction of a client in a supervisory role. Rather, they provide similar or complementary services to more than one company thereby offering the hiring entity the benefit of many perspectives and points of view on a subject or project. So, why is this so important to understand?
True consulting is thoughtful and advisory in nature. It is intended to foster an innate ability to assess and resolve problems in the absence of on-going advice or counsel. However, those in the role of providing augmentative assistance under the guise of a consulting agreement may often find themselves in the difficult situation of just taking orders. How then do we, as design and construction professionals, bridge this gap in the face of augmentation?
Recall that on the face of it, the staff you select to assume an augmentative role is arguably the best qualified and most talented for the position(s) required. But, looking deeper, they are a representation of you and your company’s management. To that end, when faced with a situation that is contradictory to your company’s philosophy (not the hiring agent) or best business practice, your employee must have an “open door” to your firm to resolve complex and conflicting issues. Without such a “loop,” your firm may be found diluting the real and valuable role that your consultancy provides, and at worst, be culpable for actions taken by your employee, but at the direction of another.
No comments:
Post a Comment