Management consulting
Synthesis is the aspect of diagnostic work that provides the link with the next phase of the consulting process – the action-planning phase, which will be discussed in Chapter 9.
8.6Feedback to the client
We have referred a number of times to the desirability of actively involving the client in data-gathering and other diagnostic operations. The objective is to build a truly collaborative consultant–client relationship at an early stage of the assignment, and to prevent various negative attitudes and reactions on the part of the client. These are difficult to avoid if he or she is poorly informed about what is going on, and if the consultant’s findings and conclusions come as a surprise. We have mentioned, too, the need to give feedback to the client during the diagnostic phase.
What is feedback?
Giving feedback provides the client with information that can:
●tell the client something new and meaningful about his or her organization;
●make the client aware of the approach taken by the consultant and the progress made in the investigation;
●increase the client’s active contribution to the assignment;
●stimulate the client to help the consultant to stay on the right track, or reorient the investigation if necessary.
Feedback during diagnosis is itself a diagnostic method. Properly selected and presented information will provoke some reaction on the part of the client, and so the consultant should keep firmly in mind what reaction he or she wants to generate:
–Does he need more information on the topic?
–Is she seeking information on a new topic, about which the client was reluctant to speak?
–Should the client criticize the data?
–Does the consultant want to shake up a lethargic client by showing alarming data?
Giving feedback to the client is simultaneously an intervention technique used to stir up change:
●Is this what is wanted?
●Is there enough reliable information to feed back to the client with the intention of stimulating change?
208
Diagnosis
●Is there a risk of causing panic or generating premature changes?
●Should the client be warned against this risk?
When to give feedback
Feedback is more than reporting on the work performed. It should be given at moments when it can serve a specific purpose. One example is to show the client that the data collected so far indicate the existence of some new problem or opportunity, not foreseen in the negotiation and planning of the original assignment; another is when the consultant feels that he or she has enough information to eliminate certain hypotheses formed at the beginning, and wishes to discuss this with the client. A consultant who pursues the strategy of “many small steps” may give feedback each time he or she has enough information to decide on the next step to take.
To whom to give feedback
In principle, feedback should be given to those from whom the consultant expects further help, more information, or action related to the problem. It is often emphasized that if feedback is too restricted (reserved to selected individuals or small groups of senior managers), it is unrealistic to expect other people to be interested in helping the consultant. Some authors regard this as a question of consulting ethics: if people readily provide information and demonstrate their interest in the assignment, they have the right to receive feedback on what has been done with their information. In theory, all people interviewed should thus receive some feedback fairly soon after the interview. In practice there are limits to this. Some information will clearly be confidential and cannot be divulged to a large number of employees. Deciding who should be informed about the consultant’s findings, and at what stage, is also a question of consulting tactics. For example, individuals who originally refused to give information to the consultant may change their attitude if they see that the consultant is sharing information with them.
What feedback to give and how
The consultant wants to show that he or she has not been wasting time and has important information to share. But the purpose is not to impress people. The consultant should be selective, sharing information that is meaningful, about which the client is likely to be concerned, to which he will probably react, and which will activate him.
Giving feedback is not telling the client what he or she already knows. This is a general rule, to be consistently observed in reporting and communicating with the client. But when the information collected contains factors that are genuinely new to the client, or shows unsuspected links between effect and cause or hidden strengths and weaknesses, it is wise to give feedback on these issues.
209
Management consulting
Giving feedback is not evaluating the client. Therefore, the consultant should avoid value judgements; it is the client who should draw such conclusions from the information presented to him or her in an impartial manner. The purpose should always be kept in mind. For example, it is not good tactics to speak only about problems and difficulties encountered by the consultant. Feedback should also point to the client’s problem-solving potential, and suggest strong points that might be developed.
Form of feedback
The need for careful preparation of the data and of the form of feedback to be used cannot be overemphasized. Individualized oral feedback to important members of the client organization is very common. Another form is written information (e.g. interim reports or memoranda). Many consultants like to use feedback meetings with various groups in the client organization. These meetings can provide valuable additional information and help the consultant to focus the investigation on key issues. They invariably reveal attitudes to the problem at hand and to the approach taken by the consultant.
Closing the diagnostic phase
The end of the diagnostic phase provides an important opportunity for feedback. Before submitting a diagnostic report, consultants may find it useful to hold one or more feedback meetings to review the main findings; this may help them to identify remaining gaps in the analysis, and also prepare clients for the conclusions that will be formally presented to them.
Even if the assignment is to continue (i.e. if it is clear that there will be a smooth transition from the diagnostic work to action planning and then to implementation), there may be a good case for submitting a progress report at what is ostensibly the end of a predominantly diagnostic stage in an assignment. The period of obtaining and examining facts may have been lengthy, and costly to the client. Many managers may not have been involved very deeply, although they are interested in what the assignment will produce. A good progress report will certainly be welcomed. It should tell the client clearly how the work was focused, whether diagnosis has confirmed the choices made or discovered new problems and opportunities, and how the work on action proposals should be oriented.
There are, then, assignments that will have no further phase, such as management audits and comprehensive diagnostic studies of organizations. In these, the consultant is required to establish and analyse facts, but for some reason the client does not want him to go beyond this point. In such cases the diagnostic report will serve as an end-of-assignment report (see Chapter 11).
If the assignment is to continue, obtaining the client’s agreement before embarking on action planning (e.g. on designing a new information system or workshop layout and planning its application) is essential. Consulting contracts
210
Diagnosis
often specify in detail what exactly will happen at the end of the diagnostic phase, before it is decided if and how to pursue the assignment.
1This section is inspired by the discussion of the “purpose principle” in G. Nadler and S. Hibino: Breakthrough thinking: The seven principles of creative problem solving (Rocklin, CA, Prima Publishing, 1994).
2Jerome H. Fuchs addressing the Society of Professional Management Consultants in New York.
3P. Block: Flawless consulting: A guide to getting your expertise used (San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer, 2nd ed., 2000), p. 176.
4Many books on business research methods are available on the market. For various methods of representing work processes see G. Kanawaty (ed.): Introduction to work study (Geneva, ILO, 4th (revised) ed., 1992). See also S. Nagashima: 100 management charts (Tokyo, Asian Productivity Organization, 1987).
5See, e.g., Kanawaty, op. cit.
6See M. Kubr and J. Prokopenko: Diagnosing management training and development needs:
Concepts and techniques, Management Development Series No. 27 (Geneva, ILO, 1989), or J. Quay: Diagnostic interviewing for consultants and auditors (Columbus, OH, Quay Associates, 1986).
7See, e.g., T. K. Reeves and D. Harper: Surveys at work: A practitioner’s guide (London, McGraw-Hill, 1981). Useful recent guidelines on designing workplace surveys are in P. MorellSamuels: “Getting the truth into workplace surveys”, in Harvard Business Review, Feb. 2002, pp. 111–118.
8A. Toffler: The third wave (London, Pan Books, 1981), p. 141.
211