Great article as usual. I’ve been pondering the same thing.
One thought is that consultancies are used to design “great plans and strategies, as long as they’re implemented” because their current staff/partner structure requires extremely high prices per hour. Conservatively, implementation lasts 3-5x longer than design. So a full project…
Great article as usual. I’ve been pondering the same thing.
One thought is that consultancies are used to design “great plans and strategies, as long as they’re implemented” because their current staff/partner structure requires extremely high prices per hour. Conservatively, implementation lasts 3-5x longer than design. So a full project might cost 4-6x under this structure, which would be prohibitive except in very specific situations (I’ve been in some).
Creating alternative structures for design and implementation is no help, as the Big 4 know and McKinsey is discovering. Different people, even if in the same company, no skin in the game either.
So far, one idea I had is to focus on the immediate impacts of good plans and strategies rather than the long-term ripple effects.
For example, good strategies aim to create long-term sustainable competitive advantage. But they also need to immediately inspire focused and aligned decisions. If this doesn’t happen, the long-term will never happen either.
Agree on the analysis, I've had pretty much the same experience.
When you say "good strategies aim to create long-term sustainable competitive advantage. But they also need to immediately inspire focused and aligned decisions. If this doesn’t happen, the long-term will never happen either" are you referring to some sort of benefits realization metric in the short term?
How to evaluate value realized?
I've seen a few frameworks over the years, but I feel they end up in the same bucket... More numbers and PowerPoints, but what is the client left with ultimately?
Great article as usual. I’ve been pondering the same thing.
One thought is that consultancies are used to design “great plans and strategies, as long as they’re implemented” because their current staff/partner structure requires extremely high prices per hour. Conservatively, implementation lasts 3-5x longer than design. So a full project might cost 4-6x under this structure, which would be prohibitive except in very specific situations (I’ve been in some).
Creating alternative structures for design and implementation is no help, as the Big 4 know and McKinsey is discovering. Different people, even if in the same company, no skin in the game either.
So far, one idea I had is to focus on the immediate impacts of good plans and strategies rather than the long-term ripple effects.
For example, good strategies aim to create long-term sustainable competitive advantage. But they also need to immediately inspire focused and aligned decisions. If this doesn’t happen, the long-term will never happen either.
Just an idea. Lots more where this came from! 😁
Agree on the analysis, I've had pretty much the same experience.
When you say "good strategies aim to create long-term sustainable competitive advantage. But they also need to immediately inspire focused and aligned decisions. If this doesn’t happen, the long-term will never happen either" are you referring to some sort of benefits realization metric in the short term?
How to evaluate value realized?
I've seen a few frameworks over the years, but I feel they end up in the same bucket... More numbers and PowerPoints, but what is the client left with ultimately?
My reply kept growing, and growing, and growing... So I decided to make an article out of it:
https://makestrategy.substack.com/p/the-future-of-strategy-consulting
Cheers!
I enjoyed this post!! Thanks for your thoughts!