Corporate judo question

Post #328,488 by drook 6/23/10 8:18:25 PM Reply	Corporate judo question Anyone ever done high-end consulting, or worked with them? I'm probably going to be starting a consulting gig real soon. The people doing the hiring might be looking for a consultant so they can present a plan to the board as "what the consultant recommends" ... ie: they want political cover. Or they may genuinely want an outside opinion, and haven't already decided what they want to do. Assuming I get the gig, do I ask them directly which is the case, or am I expected to figure that out once I start? -- Drew
Post #328,497 by scoenye 6/23/10 9:30:40 PM Reply	I think you're not supposed to care... I doubt you'll be invited to the final presentation regardless of which scenario holds. You'll be able to pick up some pieces from the folks you interact with, but unless you base your acceptance of the job on the scenarion, it'll be too late. (Never done any consulting work, but dealt with them in both scenarios. Upstairs will tell everyone whatever, regardless of the scenario.)
Post #328,501 by beepster 6/23/10 10:00:41 PM Reply	Re: Corporate judo question You should assume that they really want your opinion. However, you should also assume that your opinion is being sought to validate the thoughts of the person hiring for the engagement. Most all consulting is done to have an outside 3rd party validating the internal thoughts of a group that feels that, in order to sell this opinion, it will need to be validated by someone outside of the organization. And no, its not a question you should ask directly. It will become obvious very quickly. I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #328,505 by boxley 6/23/10 10:20:34 PM Reply	been there you are a hired gun to pin blame on when either an unpopular or political decision needs to be made, perhaps. You will do diligence, ensure that all interviews and deliverables have been met, issue an unbiased report and get paid. Dont get locked into the politics, stay above it, that gathers reputation. "That drook guy was a complete dick but he called it right down the middle" is the reputation that you want to accrue not "hire drook and tell him which way you want him to lean, he is a schmoo" that doesnt do well in the long term which is what you want to do. Be completely independent and stress that when you go for an interview.
Post #328,530 by crazy 6/24/10 10:01:04 AM Reply	Close but no cigar What is YOUR long term desire as far as employment with THIS company with THIS particular person who has hired you? Is the project under the umbrella of the guy bringing you in, is he directly responsible for it or is looking to fire the underling who fucked it up? Or is he competing with it, wants it tanked and then brought under his umbrella, or simply wants it killed? Is the project good or bad for the company? If good, what are the risks/downsides and how do you mitigate them. If bad, you need to determine HOW bad? Will it kill the company or just a division? How much $$ lost / how many jobs lost / how does it affect the competitive position? How much $$ can you extract while being helpful? Other than that, you are at the will/mercy of the guy who brought you in, unless you can cut him out, a DANGEROUS game. General attitude: You are the guy for the job because you will point out all downsides in PRIVATE, and brainstorm on how to avoid/fix them. The moment the brainstorming is shut down you know you have a MAJOR problem, since the guy wants to avoid bringing something to the light. On paper: Note all things that were considered. If there is a gaping logical hole that will get you torpedoed later, make damn sure you note it as a possibility, and here are the comments that the various players have noted concerning it. If this report is to simply be passed to the next level, be CAREFUL. If not, then be a bit more plainspoken so the guy who receives it can file it aside, and draw upon it for his report, but not be forced to restate everything you say.
Post #328,532 by beepster 6/24/10 10:05:55 AM Reply	He is consulting his interest has to be with the single engagement, and possibility of perhaps future engagements. With that, he has to stay impartial. You are couching this in terms of "good/bad". If the COMPANY is more profitable, then that is the path you recommend, regardless of its impact on division x or y, employee x or y. Certainly you don't want these findings to be shared outside of the hiring manager before they go to more senior management...but, simply put, if your findings say X, then you report X. Thats how you get more work as a consultant. I will choose a path that's clear. I will choose freewill.
Post #328,544 by drook 6/24/10 3:00:03 PM Reply	Your second point is where my thinking was going Is the project under the umbrella of the guy bringing you in, is he directly responsible for it or is looking to fire the underling who fucked it up? They told me in the interview that they've recently "added through subtraction" ... though it was in hushed tones, so I think people just outside the office didn't know their services were about to be negatively added. The group started out as a three-man department, plus an executive sponsor. That sponsor has been promoted three times, to C-level, and brought the department along with him, adding people along the way. The most-senior person in it is now a division director. They've been a victim of their own success, as they now have more work coming to them than they can handle with current staff. Some of the new people they've brought in don't have the "sense of ownership" that the older hands do -- meaning they aren't as concerned when defects make it to production. They've realized they're at a size they need a formal QA function, and want me to build it. This will mean not just changes within the division, but how other divisions interface with them. Meaning they have to start telling people not every project can be the top priority. The way I see it, my ultimate recommendation will be the same regardless of the political situation. The question is, will I present the recommendation, taking the heat from other divisions so that the people hiring me can wash their hands of it; or do they present it and manage the fallout. In the first case, I'm there for a relatively short time, but then have the kind of resume that makes me a better candidate for the high-dollar straight consulting type of work. In the second case, I find a home there and run what I've built. I don't know that I have a preference between those options. And if I'm not clear on what I want, it's much less likely that I'll get what I want. -- Drew
Post #328,545 by boxley 6/24/10 3:05:17 PM Reply	that second bit I have pissed off people with "the current method appears to have a retirement plan for the consultant built in" during competing proposal offerings
Post #328,553 by crazy 6/24/10 6:26:42 PM Reply	Actually, you are better long term if you present and run the interference. That way when the argumentative hassle shows up, you can explain in direct terms what the issue is and WHY this more formal process is coming into play. If you are not the one to present, then the person who IS presenting won't have enough specifics, so we will simply say: Because the consultant said so, which then poisons the relationship later. I had a GREAT department meeting today. Not my department, my brother's, and the people in on the meeting are at a remote location. My brother presents a project plan, which include the max spend on consulting, ie: me. And he presents it to people who do not like me since anything I do may automate (and/or screwup) something are are responsible for. And the guy in charge of them wanted to know just exactly what we were getting for XXXXX dollars (dammit!). Oh, and they don't like working for my brother, either , so if they catch him blowing money it's a BIG deal. The explanation went quite smoothly, as did the list of deliverables. If I was not in that meeting, that guy would have had unanswered questions,or at least fuzzy answers that were unacceptable. Instead, all future issues will be run by me, so either the system is modified accordingly or there is a good reason it works a certain way. No marketing/management speak allowed. So anyway, it looks like a good gig to do good, and make out at the same time. Feel free to email me more specifics if you want to.
Post #328,559 by drook 6/24/10 8:47:42 PM Reply	I suspect it's better for them, too And I'll keep you on speed dial for when I'm inside and getting a better feel for things. Thanks for the offer. -- Drew
Post #328,510 by folkert 6/23/10 11:47:27 PM Reply	Wow... all three aspects covered... Nothing more I can add, other than make sure you get the SPEC triaged well. If you can't get the scope and end result wanted out of the people... walk away, explaining why. Pretty much being "the Dick" Box mentions.

Welcome to IWETHEY!