A few things I have seen recently that must be blamed on the economy because they would not have made much sense two years ago-
- Big firms (those beginning with A, D, P, etc.) appear to be morphing into staffing firms. The evidence? I personally have been contacted five times this year for leading roles as a subcontractor. Smart business or vicious cost cutting showing its ugly head?
- Roles are reappearing. One comical example I can think of is a role that I have been contacted for 15 times over the last 2 years on 5 separate occasions. Please do not tell me that means a 4 consultant burn only to return to the original senior (read qualified) consultants.
- Open and shut and open again and repeat, contracts and roles. I like to keep an eye on posted positions and stay connected to recruiters because, wise or not, that is where a lot of change management resourcing begins. The last two years has had a whole lot of trolling.
- Internal change management positions at higher levels. Dare I say even VP? The internal roles almost always appear at the same time as the requisitions for the sub contractor. In other words the cart is standing alone well in front of the horse.
So what’s all this about?
It is an interesting combination of client missteps that occur in any environment thanks to a low level of understanding about the change management big picture and an economy that has put tremendous pressure on pricing (with, at times, a forgetfulness about value). Some strange circles have appeared-
Client looks for consultants at extremely adjusted prices, client gets what they pay for or cannot get what they need, client uses third party (and erodes prices further for the consultant which exacerbates the clients original problem), client gives up on change management, giving up turns out to not be a good option, finally client goes back to original consultant with a more reasonable rate. Side note- original consultant is now faced with a drop in the middle change engagement, the most difficult.
Another loop. Big firm needs to charge exceptionally high prices (literally and compared to value). Client thinks there may be an individual or boutique firm they could use, but fear wins out (and those big firms are excellent scapegoats). Economy hits. Now difference in price is especially noticeable. Client contracts with third parties or posts requisitions while big firm takes huge hit in revenue. Big firm strips ranks. Look inside the loop now- client is requisitioning the people, through third parties, who would have come through the big firms. As the loop closes the big firms begin to contact outside consultants (that would be those laid off from the other firms and the senior independent consultants that were part of the mix in the first place). Big firm has effectively become an expensive staffing agency. Client has added an extra layer (because believe it or not the big firm uses a fourth party) in a price/budget sensitive environment.
I throw all this out because it is important and comical at the same time.
Part of the reason these loops appear (in bad times and good) is that CM roles are often thrown into the middle of the organization. For the contracting process, for leading large initiatives and for timing that throw is a bad fit for CM. In the middle lies price sensitivity. Price sensitivity is not where the senior, experienced, whole picture (people and business) sit.
Excellent consultants, priced reasonably and loaded with potential value, are a search and click away. The smart ones, in this price sensitive environment wrapped up extra value in their existing price structures. Smart clients realized that and capitalized on the extras (instead of trolling in the shallows). Smart client into the future means eliminating the supply chain and contracting directly with the resource that will guide the project (in fairness that could actually be a big firm- a couple of years ago). Those resources may even have the exact same network as the third parties (with much stronger relationships) for the supplementary implementation roles.
This explanation (OK maybe my first official rant) looks a lot like the process that takes place with change initiatives. Everything too late, everything narrow focused.
As a practitioner I often stand back and think, “doesn’t anyone notice how silly these dances are?”
