I have spent the better part of my working life in the process improvement business working as an internal change leader, a consultant and as a salesman.
Over the years I have seen some interesting situations relating to the procurement of process improvement and CMMI services and I just thought I would put together a summary of my two personal favorites :
Consulting services are not paperclips
I bet you are thinking this is a little obvious, but believe me it isn’t to everyone. The number of times clients write up RFPs / RFQs with their approach to applying something which they do not have the right skills and experience to deliver is amazing. The requests can read something like:
“Acme company have a target to achieve CMMI ML3 we have never done this before and we lack the internal skills. Please give us a firm price for the execution of the attached project plan and by the way we would like to hold you accountable for the successful delivery of CMMI ML3.
PS the right answer is £XXXX if its more than that, its bigger than the budget we had approved for this and you will be qualified out of the procurement process”
I bet some of you are smiling now… Interesting situation this. The client clearly has failed to consult with the market and build at least a modicum of internal knowledge such that an effective procurement can be done. They will make the wrong choice. Any supplier who tells them the truth about their situation runs the real risk of being qualified out at the first hurdle. Those who say nothing or say “yes Mr Client” will be left in the process. There is only one outcome, the price will be change controlled up by the supplier…. but not on day one…. when the client is completely committed to the supplier. My policy is to be straight with clients about this and, more often than not, it gets you kicked out of the process in round one! However, we are often picking up the pieces of these poor procurements when the client feels the pain of their choice at a later date.
The mechanic problem
Why is it that when you have completed a baseline appraisal of an organisation where you clearly identify all the gaps in their capability they feel the need to tell you how to go about fixing them? Its a little bit like going to a garage with your car and saying:
“There a problem with the steering at 40 mph and it shakes can you please diagnose the problem”
and after the garage diagnoses the problem as a faulty steering rack you say:
“Actually I think the most effective way to fix this is…….”
No one feels the need to tell their mechanics how they should approach fixing the car, why do IT professionals feel that they know how to fix problems that have often been endemic in their organisation for years? The more surprising perspective on this is that their company has paid for professional advice on addressing an issue why try to undermine it?
I guess part of the problem is with a car if you look at an engine and you know you don’t know what you are looking at and you know you need help. IT professionals think they know how the engine works but they do not know the process of fixing it and for some reason they think this is easy.
Another way of thinking about this is:
If you change someone’s way of working how long will it take?
- You need to design the change
- You need to communicate the change
- You need to check that they have changed
- You need to alter the quality system to lock in the change
- Maybe some of the people need some close support as their capabilities need improving
How long is that?
July 23, 2010 at 22:43
I think this characterises a lot of procurement Andrew – not just improvement, but systems and solutions as well. As your headline says ‘Consulting services are not paperclips’.
A real problem here is the shallowness of the interactions – like trying to do high-diving into a bird bath, it will all end in blood and tears.
The client almost certainly doesn’t know what their real business drivers are, they don’t know that they are procuring a competent partner to guide them on a joint venture with considerable risk and challenge, and they don’t even come close to realising that NOBODY knows what the solution looks like for their context and needs at this point in the process.
Budgets are real, but no matter how unrealistic, they can become a sensible part of the the conversation… “We have some important business objectives which clearly require changes in how we work. This is how much we think we have to spend doing this. Can we create an initial engagement so you can help us determine if it is possible to shape a meaningful and effective change programme for our needs and culture, within this budget?”
August 3, 2010 at 10:42
Andrew I’m afraid I have to say that whilst I empathise with your paper clip analogy your car mechanic example rings rather hollow. An experienced mechanic is likely to have seen an identical model to your own and can therefore suggest a fix however even the most experienced consultant should always recognise that no two organisations are the same and that cookie cutter solutions that don’t take into account the cultural dynamics within the organisation are bound to fail. I agree with Chris’ comments that at this early point in the budding relationship that neither party has a clear understanding of the correct way forward and as such differing views are to be expected and encouraged. The group dynamic stages of Forming – Storming – Norming – Performing are equally as applicable and inevitable within process improvement as in any other setting.
August 3, 2010 at 15:31
As always when you use simple concepts you can miss the complexities of the situation. As you know I have been in this game a number of years and the other week I sat in a meeting where no-one who had been given the responsibility for an improvement challenge had any domain experience or improvement experience. This sounds like a daft situation, and it is, but it happens to me about 50% of the time. Scoping something meaningful which they can appreciate is key (and what I am employed by Lamri for)… The problem is that selling in this context is hard but can be a pleasure when you can rapidly build trust but the wrong procurement approach can quickly weaken the already poor experience within the end user organisation.