Meeting Client Expectations
Being able to measure the impact of consulting has become
something of a holy grail for clients and consultants alike. Clients want the
reassurance that, in bringing in consultants, they have made the right decision
and that their selection of a particular firm will stand up to scrutiny.
Consultants want to be able to demonstrate a track record of quantifiable
results to an increasingly sceptical client base. However, no two consulting
projects are alike and measuring them against a single standard would be highly
misleading.
The MCA Awards Survey therefore asked clients to rate the extent
to which the consulting firm had exceeded, met, partially met, or not met their
expectations in the following categories:
-
motivational (eg improvements in staff satisfaction);
-
ability to finish a project on time;
-
greater management capability;
-
improved customer satisfaction;
-
increased productivity;
-
reduced costs;
-
changes to headcount;
-
increased revenue;
-
acquisition of new customers;
-
increased market share;
-
better share price performance.
Although clients are obviously concerned that a consulting project
should be completed on time and within budget, they otherwise tend to judge the
success of consulting projects in terms of ‘softer' issues such as motivational
impact, customer satisfaction and management capability (see Figure 1.3). They are also more
likely to be concerned about productivity and cost-reduction issues than
revenue-generation ones.
Figure 1.3
looks at what proportion of clients said that their expectations had been either
met or exceeded in projects where these critical success factors were judged to
be important. Almost all the projects were completed as planned and almost 90
per cent of clients believed that consultants had met or exceeded their
expectations in motivational terms. Trilogy's work with Tesco (Case study 3.1)
and Penna Consulting's work with Evotec OAI (Case study 4.2) both involved
gauging and implementing ways of improving staff engagement. The consulting
firms performed well, too, in those softer areas important to most projects,
such as improving management capability. The work of RightCoutts with the
Harrogate Healthcare NHS Trust (Case study 6.1) was not designed to tell the
Trust's senior managers the answers to all their problems, but to improve their
ability to take the right decisions more quickly. Similarly, the success of
Edengene's work with two different areas of BT (Case studies 2.2 and 5.1)
depended on improving BT's ability to generate and evaluate new ideas.
Consultants also do well when it comes to helping clients improve productivity -
almost three quarters of the projects entered for an award met or exceeded
clients' expectations when it came to this area, and many of the following case
studies illustrate this: Kepner-Tregoe's work with Sun- Microsystems (Case study
5.4); Atos Origin's work with the Bradford Hospitals NHS Trust (Case study 7.3);
and Impact Plus's work with Aon (Case study 9.4).
But the consulting industry can not afford to rest on these
laurels: when it comes to harder, more quantifiable measures - and particularly
to those relating to growing the revenues of a business, rather than cutting its
costs - there is significant room for improvement.
Analysing client satisfaction in different types of consulting
suggests that:
-
Clients of outsourcing-related consulting projects were more
likely to be satisfied across the board than clients of other types of
consulting. In particular, their expectations for increasing market share,
increasing revenue and improving customer satisfaction were more likely to be
met. The growth of the outsourcing market, which has accelerated since the
millennium, is often attributed to macro-economic factors - falling share
prices, a focus on costs. However, these findings suggest a more positive
reason: many clients are simply pleased with the results.
-
By contrast, clients of IT-related consulting are more
likely to be dissatisfied. These were the clients who, across all the different
categories of expectations, consistently rated consultants as less likely than
average to exceed expectations. Disappointment was most apparent when it came to
rating the impact of projects in broad business terms (increased revenue and
market share, improved share price performance). Of course, it may be that
technology consulting clients simply had higher expectations than outsourcing
clients, but it does suggest that clients continue to find it difficult to
relate the immediate increases in productivity that come from using IT with
business performance overall.
-
HR consulting clients are more positive than others when it
comes to cost reduction and headcount issues - not surprisingly. Perhaps more
worryingly from the consulting firms' point of view, they are less likely to be
satisfied when it comes to improving productivity or management capability.
-
The surprise in change management consulting lies in the
extent to which projects exceeded clients' expectations when it comes to the
financial impact. Increased revenue and market share, and improved share price
performance are all areas which we do not particularly associate with something
as traditionally ‘soft' as change management. Like outsourcing-related
consulting, change management consulting may be benefiting from low expectations
- neither clients nor consulting firms have historically found it easy to
correlate its ‘soft' process with ‘hard' economic facts. That expectations are
being exceeded here may indicate that this is now changing, that clients can see
a connection between changing people's behaviour and overall performance.
-
Strategy consulting was one of the principal casualties of
the 2001-02 downturn in the consulting market and, although this type of
consulting may now be picking up speed, it still appears one of the more
vulnerable areas of consulting. There are only two areas in which strategy
clients' aims are more likely to be met, compared to other types of consulting -
headcount and cost reduction. Those measures that reflect growth rather than
retrenchment - increased revenue and market share, improved customer acquisition
rates and satisfaction - all scored particularly badly, suggesting that clients
still see strategy consultants as delivering less than they
promise.
The overall scorecard is therefore good, but consultants can do
even better. And that is the challenge for the consulting industry. As Anne
Bennett, a consultant at ER Consultants, puts it:
We need to reframe how clients see consultants. Compared to
the amount of money auditors and lawyers take out of a business, consulting
should be a net gain. Hiring consultants shouldn't be seen as an admission of
management failure or a smack in the face to your own staff. Consultants aren't
there to take over a client's business but to supplement in-house skills. We
need to overcome the predominately transactional nature of consulting at
present, and move to a more transformational agenda.