Consultancy Symbiosis I
Consultation can also take place without anything changing in the decision-making patterns of the client. This is often the case. We call such consultations ‘Consultancy Symbioses’. They come in two forms: Form I is recognisable by the fact that clients do what the consultant wants/suggests. In form II it is exactly the opposite.
For this variety I: If clients do what the consultant wants, the client-system identifies itself as incompetent from a certain viewpoint, as it sees the consultancy system as competent. The consultants usually make a diagnosis about respective deficits (often driven by bench marks). Following that, training, further development, expertise, know-how, best practice, schooling, concepts, exercises, re-organisation, change of personnel and much more are recommended. The clients become the ‘pupils’. So, client systems usually split into a part which finds this good and is willing, and into a part which rejects the suggestions and undermines them or goes into open resistance.
In summary, one or more of the following convictions rule:
The old state only had disadvantages and was not sustainable.
The competence to be acquired will only have advantages.
The problem lies on the level of new, alternative behaviour patterns ( and not decision-making premises).
The new is learnable and will also be learned (independent of the internal attitude of the people affected).
There will only be winners.
There are no alternatives to the suggestions of the consultant.
The disadvantage is that the consultancy system as well as the client system do not examine in such a symbiosis, whether the actual problem may not lie somewhere completely different to there where the consultants are experts. Many expert consultants see this and also say it, usually under the heading “Actually it would need something completely different!” or “It always fails in the implementation!”.