The End of Consultancy
If one does not pragmatically determine the end of consultancy formats according to the usage of the available budget or time resources, the question remains: what is the right point in time for ending a coaching, a therapy, a team- or organisational consultancy? Is there a goal, which, when reached, signifies the end?
If one sees the reasons for problems in the client system, not there where they arise (“The employee is being rebellious!”, “The quality of our products is poor!”, “I always become impatient!”) but in the fact that the reasons (for his symptoms) are so far unknown to the client (The arrogance creates rebellion, the quality problems are effects due to the exploitation by suppliers, the impatience informs one about a lack of self-perception), then the ending of consultancy basically becomes arbitrary. Why?
An external observer (i.e. a consultant, therapist, coach, self-observer) will always consider alternative (better) behaviour patterns. He can, therefore, always (!) offer interventions which confront the client with other, new alternatives and will challenge self-regulation (“I have never thought about that one!”, “We have not yet considered this possibility!”). Thus, consultants have many possibilities for generating ‘follow-up contracts and, for clients, the end of the consultancy is ultimately always arbitrary and optional.
Therefore, consultancy has no goal and no end. For different, mostly external reasons but also due to exhaustion and other possibilities of filling time coming into the foreground, it is terminated. There are no ‘end goals’ such as health, perfection, correctness. And every change brings disadvantages with it, which, usually other consultants, can then work with once more.