Have you ever ended a conversation agreeing to disagree? There were no hard feelings. You and the other person realize that no matter how much each of you try, the two of you will never agree. The best solution: you agree to disagree.
If the disagreement occurs as you are discussing a potential opportunity, you, the consultant, might decide the opportunity is not a fit for you. But what happens if you are working with the client and the two of you do not agree?
Below is a true story. At the time, I was providing project management office consulting services. The consultant in this story is not an independent consultant building their own business; rather the consultant worked for a software vendor.
The challenge the consultant faced is one that many independent consultants and clients encounter—the Consultant-Client Conundrum—with each person viewing the engagement from a different perspective—their own perspective. I believe the story is a great reminder of the importance of building solid and trusted client relationships.
Every project management consultant and client working together wants a successful project. However, every consultant and client view a project from their own perspective using their own terminology.
What each consultant and client might think is black and white about “the project” can actually be gray.
For many consultants and clients recognizing and accepting the gray is a conundrum. Even harder for many consultants and clients is the resolution to the conundrum because it requires aligning each other’s perspective for the good of the project; it requires flexibility and change as well as collaboration and communication.
Simply put, it requires building a trusted relationship and that relationship building starts before an engagement even starts.
The Scenario
At a networking event, a project management consultant asked me “What do you think is the ‘most important’ project constraint?”
The project management consultant worked for a software vendor and was a road warrior implementing the same application software from client to client. He wasn’t responsible for finding the business nor signing the contract, but he was responsible for ensuring project success. His implementations had always been successful receiving glowing reviews from clients. However, his current client was concerned with the project’s progress and he was struggling to understand his client’s concerns.
In response to his question, I offered a very unsatisfying textbook response: “The importance of a constraint varies project by project. I tend to focus on the triple constraints—scope, time, and cost plus quality. My experience is that if I can keep the scope, time, and cost in balance and delivery the quality expected, my chances for project success increase.”
I was surprised when the project manager adamantly said: “I disagree. The most important constraint, regardless of the project, is risk.”
An interesting and passionate conversation ensued and we finished the conversation agreeing to disagree.
Mixing of Black and White
Where was the disconnect? Why could we not see eye-to-eye? My “Aha!” moment came when I realized we were evaluating projects from different perspectives—a project management consultant that worked for a “vendor” versus a “client.”
From the project management consultant’s perspective, the project is operational in nature with a pre-defined project plan, fixed processes and controls, and a fixed price. Elements of the project plan vary by client, but the consultant has knowledge of the required work (deliverables and tasks), level of effort and duration for each task, resources, and related cost. In this scenario, the project management consultant implements the same software at a number of different clients and modifies the project template based on the client’s requirements.
From the client’s perspective, the implementation of the software is a project, a temporary initiative with a clearly defined beginning and end. The client assumes the project plan proposed by the vendor will result in a new product, in this case a new software application, but assumes the plan has flexibility. The client believes the consultant (and vendor) is interested in doing the right thing and ensuring the implemented solution meets the client’s business needs.
The Vendor’s Consultant Perspective
For the vendor’s consultant, flexibility entails risk. The starting point for creating the contract between the vendor and client is the vendor’s pre-defined plan. The vendor’s consultant assumes the client understands the contract. The scope and related work are defined, timeline set, and budget determined—the scope, time, and cost constraints—with the signing of the contract. The vendor’s consultant perceives that by using their expertise and knowledge and completing the plan as outlined in the contract, the commitment to provide a “quality” product and service is fulfilled and the client’s business needs are meet.
The vendor’s consultant is concerned with the scope, time, and cost constraints. They realize that changes to any one of the three can impact the contract and how the product or service is delivered and overall profitability. Consequentially, the vendor’s consultant carefully manages risk so that there are no, or minimal, changes to the scope of work and overall contract.
Changes to the scope and slippages to the timeline are unwelcome operational changes. Responding to client requests for change requires the vendor’s consultant to balance maintaining a “customer is always right” policy and absorbing the cost with a scope change request and the billing of additional fees to implement the change. For the vendor’s consultant to be successful, the client needs to be, at a minimum, pleased enough with the results so the invoices are paid and the project is profitable for the vendor.
The Client's Perspective
The client does not have the expertise or knowledge to perform the required work, which is why they hired the vendor and their project management consultant. However, clients do have the business expertise and knowledge to determine if the product and service supports their business needs or solves a problem. As the project progresses, the client manages the scope and work to ensure all completed work meets their quality standards and requirements.
There is concern with the overall project cost, which can result in micro-managing the work being performed by asking questions such as “isn’t that part of the project scope?” or “why does that modification require a scope change?”
Although there is a timeline in the contract, the client might find the agreed to timeline too disruptive to the day-to-day operations resulting in them imposing their own timeline. The client wants and periodically needs flexibility with the project scope, timeline, and cost.
To say a client is not concerned with risk is incorrect. However, the client thinks of risk in terms of the work and deliverables not supporting the business and not providing the expected value. To eliminate or mitigate that risk, the client continually monitors the scope, timeline, and cost.
For the client, project success means the product or service supports the mandatory features and functionality required by the business at the agreed upon cost with minimal disruption to the day-to-day operations. For clients, flexibility is necessary to ensure success.
The First Steps
To resolve the conundrum, start by working on building a strong relationship. Get to know one another. Getting to know one another can be hard if the project management consultant was not part of the negotiating process as in this story but it is doable. Additionally, there can be some challenges when a fixed price pricing model is used and relationship building was not considered during the planning process, but it to is doable.
Building the relationship starts by understanding and respecting each other’s perspective of the project. It requires understanding of each other’s business. It means collaborating and communicating; maintaining clarity and transparency; negotiating solutions; and working together recognizing and appreciating each other’s needs. It necessitates defining success for each party. It should not be a surprise if the definition of success is slightly different for the vendor’s consultant and client but clearly, success is more than a “quality product or service being delivered on-time and on-budget.”
Finally, build a relationship based on trust—trust each other to do what is right at the right time—and make joint decisions based on what is best for the project.
Conclusion
The Consultant-Client Conundrum is real. In this scenario, for the vendor’s consultant, the project is operational in nature with repetitive tasks. For the client, the project is an ad hoc undertaking. Each is viewing the project from a different perspective—their own perspective—creating a conundrum because if the perspectives are not properly managed and aligned, the project’s success can be impacted.
The solution to the conundrum is not the creation of more processes and controls.
Rather it is mixing of black and white—the creation of the right shade of gray. If the consultant or client is not careful, one can overpower the other, resulting in success for one and failure for the other. Typically, success eludes both of them.
The solution is the respecting of each other’s perspective, continual communication and negotiating, and the building of trust. The vendor and client both want a successful project and both want the best for their organization.
Until next Consulting Insight,
Laura Burford
?Laura's Consulting Guide?
Have a question? Schedule time on my calendar.
P.S. Mention you heard about Consulting Insights on LinktoEXPERT & recieve a free gift!?