Hi Jim.
Responding to both of your earlier posts of today, I think they are closely related, since, in a way, a stock exchange is very much like the incumbent gas or electric (or communications) utility . Both classes of organization are for-profits, when in fact they could be seen more appropriately as services that support the conveniences and necessities of the common good of the members and subscribers that depend on them. Profitability isn't in itself the fly in this ointment, but veering into areas that forsake the public good is. Indeed, profitability (even when not reported as such, but instead shows up as a "surplus" or some other asset class) is an essential quality that every firm or municipal organization or utility must maintain. A similar parallel exists in my field, where going back a couple of decades, or so, the role of a "consultant", which many of us still maintain, suddenly assumed the added license by the Big Six types, in particular, to begin aligning with vendors on a rivalrous, for-profit basis, under the guise of "consulting".
Many a new meme has made its way into enterprise in this fashion that would have been anathema to knowledgeable-but-suddenly-defrocked practitioners of the core businesses they invaded. The need to supply "total solutions" was an outgrowth of the drive to outsource anything that wasn't core competence, or say those who head up IT departments today. But by inference, FUD and other less than desirable traits, many in the field of IT have become parrots of their favored powerhouse vendors, who have unceasingly been adding "consultants" to their ranks for years.
Where did organization executives expect to find such talent after laying off millions of cradle-to-crypt career folk? The kicker here is that even clients today don't know the difference between a for-profit integrator and a dyed in the wool consultant. You should see some of the looks I get when I try to explain the distinction. It all boils down to ethics, language and the manner in which organizations represent themselves and their charges, and the fact that many of qualities that define ethics have a tendency to morph with time.
All of which reminds me of a point I was compelled to make on the Silk Road thread some eleven years ago in #msg-10060419:
The following Ten Commandments of Consulting were developed several
years ago on the Compuserve Telecommunications Forum by an associate
of mine, Brad Buxton, and myself. He compiled these guidelines during a
lengthy and rather exhaustive thread having to do with business practices in
Telecomms and consulting ethics. He has since gone on to incorporate
these principles into his consulting charter, as I have, mine. I have a copy of
them on my office wall. Read them and learn what consulting should be all
about, if you don't already know.
----------------------------------
The Ten Commandments of Consulting,
by Brad Buxton
I. You have to have an opinion, and preferably should arrive at it on your
own.
II. Don't take bribes, lunches, advice, or anything else from a vendor.
Otherwise, you'll just be a distributor of their product, and you will no longer
be a consultant.
III. Don't even maintain a dialogue with a vendor that offers you a bribe.
Your reputation is damaged just as badly by the appearance, as if you
had taken it.
IV. Take risks, when the reward exceeds the risks. Arrange contingencies
in the event of error, and learn from the your mistakes and the mistakes of
others.
V. No matter how different your clients' ideas are, or how obstinate their
position, never disparage their ideas.
VI. If you are in a situation where you don't have any options, and have
only one vendor to rely on for a solution, it's better to fold than to play the
hand.
VII. Always be up front with your client. Even when things don't look
great, let them know exactly where they stand. That way, they will be
there with you, and will appreciate it if you pull off a miracle. If things go
badly, they'll understand why.
VIII. When a client speaks, listen. Nothing is so important as
understanding their needs and outlook. You'll have plenty of opportunity to
render your opinion later.
IX. Treat the vendors fairly. They don't need to make a steak, but they
should be able to make a sandwich. Everyone needs to win and be
appreciated.
X. If you get a vendor with a bad attitude, pitch them out immediately.
There are too many good ones waiting out there that will do a great job if
you let them.
--
FAC
------ |
