I’ve been asking people for advice about consulting recently. I’ve been told the following:
- “Beware of scope creep, the client will always want a little more without realising how complex it is”
- “We had a horrible experience once, the contractor kept running into unexpected problems and it ended up costing way more than we initially planned”
This advice was given by two different people and represents two sides to the same problem.
What we have here is a problem of blame and trust. The client and the consultant are a ship at sea, the client navigates while the consultant steers. When a sea monster turns up, the consultant spends time battling the monster and this means they arrive at the next port later than expected. Is it the client’s fault for navigating towards a sea monster, or is it the consultant’s fault for failing to steer around the monster? The answer is (obviously) both.
To solve this problem we need to come up with ways to shift perspective from “client vs consultant” to “client and consultant vs the problem”. To perform their best, the client needs information from the consultant and vice versa. At spreadsheet surgeons we tackle this doing the following:
- We work with clients that have existing spreadsheets. This gives them a high level overview of what monsters await them at sea.
- We work in as small installments as possible. These act as stable rest points (small islands) where the navigator can get their bearings and communication can take place.
- We use Functional Programming to create flexibility in our code. This means the client can change direction with minimal negative impact.
Conclusion
By embracing a mindset of mutual understanding and utilizing strategies like working with existing resources and implementing incremental approaches, consulting engagements can navigate challenges more effectively and achieve successful outcomes.