The Psychology of Quality and More

The Three Is of Consulting

David Straker

Introduction | Industry | Intelligence | Integrity | Conclusion

Print-friendly one-page version

Integrity

The final 'I' is a perhaps one of the most problematic areas and is certainly the one where, when I have presented these three Is to practicing business people, there has been most concern. It is a sadly common reaction to laugh and declare that, whilst they agree that integrity is a very important thing, in practice they encounter it somewhat infrequently. A typical complaint is that consultants seem to spend excessive time (and your money) in looking for ways to extend their stay, rather than delivering the desired goods.

It is noteworthy is that, when companies do find a consultant with strong integrity, they seek to retain them and will, in future, seek that person out for their most critical engagements.

A fundamental aspect of integrity is confidentiality. Whilst with a client the consultant may have access to documents and information that could profit them or damage the client in some way. Any transgression of this trust could result in damaging lawsuits or even more damaging loss of reputation, not just for the consultant concerned but also their entire firm. Many client companies require signing of non-disclosure notices, but even without these, consultants should be scrupulous honest about sustaining client confidentiality and privacy.

The ideal position that many consultants seek is that of 'trusted advisor' whereby the client seeks and accepts their advice with little question. In such situations the consultant can deliver significant value and can charge accordingly. And herein lies the paradox: the client will not fully trust the consultant unless they believe that the consultant has their best interests at heart – yet the very fact that they are paying the consultant makes them doubt the consultant's true intent.

Trust, in the longer-term, comes with evidence. If you can show your clients an unwavering alignment of words and deeds, being reliable in your actions and delivering what you promise them, they will begin to trust you. If you are consistently honest, telling a complete and unvarnished truth -- including admission of your own limitations – then they will trust you more. And if, on top of this, you show that you truly care about them and will proactively seek to protect and support them, always having their best interests at heart, then they will trust you far more again.

It is worth noting that, although the client may consciously notice what the consultant does, trust is actually a feeling that is driven from a subconscious overall assessment. As a counteraction to our innate tendency to deceive we have an intuitive ability to detect that deception and hence are pretty good at figuring out who we can trust, especially over the longer term.

The most effective way of achieving and sustaining such intuitive trust is through an unshakable integrity of being. Faking and short-term tricks will not sustain an illusionary integrity and will only serve to deepen distrust.

A dilemma for the consultant is that in the constant pressure to sustain employment there is great temptation to stretch the time for an assignment, spending time looking for the next job or otherwise seeking to make the client dependent. Given such temptation, it is perhaps unsurprising that full integrity is so infrequently found. Yet whilst there may be some profit in outstaying the welcome for a while, the client will grow to hate the consultancy for any parasitic activity and will eventually wriggle free, never to return.

It is also not unknown for consultants to charge for development of items that were already paid for by other clients, but it is also known for clients to discover this. Milking the client may give short-term gain but it leads to long-term loss.

Dysfunctional relationships are another problem for consultant integrity. When the client wants a study done and gives very strong hints as to what they want it to conclude, does the consultant collude to produce a supporting report, despite disconfirming evidence? When the client wants someone else to blame when a high-risk project goes wrong, should the consultant willingly play the fall guy? Such tacit games of corruption are frequently played and consultants have to make deep and personal decisions as to whether or not they will be complicit in a wider organizational deception. This is seldom a straightforward or easy choice and may requires negotiation between personal and professional values.

<-- Prev | Next -->