The
ratio of management consultants to business
and industry in India is a very poor one, as
compared to that of most developed countries.
Attitudes to management consultants are not
particularly positive either, with the catalytic
role of a consultant yet to be fully understood
or appreciated.
This
is equally prevalent in the various areas of
Indian business and industry, whether it is
the family-owned business segment, vis-a-vis
the professional technocrat turned businessman,
or in the multinational business arena.
Management
consultancy, nevertheless, is an exciting and
creative professional activity for well educated
and experienced business managers. And while
the actual process of setting up an individual
consultancy practice may be an arduous one,
the challenges involved are not without their
rewards. These rewards may be counted not only
in financial terms, but also in terms of the
exposure and experience gained across the spectrum
of business and industry that consultants also
benefit from a sense of independence and flexibility,
and can simultaneously pursue other related
activities, such as writing or teaching.
What
are the areas then that need to be considered
in the process of setting up a management consultancy
practice?
Individual
consultancy versus a firm
The
very first question that arises is whether to
operate individually, or set up a consultancy
firm offering a range of services. This decision
depends on the educational and professional
background of the prospective consultant, as
well as his/her level of specialisation and
financial standing.
Operating
independently means that one can run the practice
from home, but this option has limitations both
in terms of scope and credibility. Setting up
a firm, on the other hand, requires office space,
rented or bought, and other infrastructural
facilities, which mean investment. In large
cities like Bombay, which have maximum potential
on the client front, the investment for space
and infrastructure is also the highest.
Generalisation
versus Specialisation
If
one is setting up a firm, then having located
the space and established the infrastructure,
the decision is to be made whether to work in
a range of areas in business and industry or
whether to specialise in one field.
Identity,
image and name
Given
the route selected, individual or organisational
and the nature of consultancy proposed, general
or specialised, the name and logo follow together
with the requisite stationery.
Developing
the practice
Here
one is faced with a bit of a dilemma in the
case of offering a range of services. To offer
such a range, one needs a team of persons and
to have a team of persons, one needs to establish
a practice. The team has to be paid, after all,
and a regular flow of work needs to be ensured
as well, so as to generate the revenue to pay
the team. The only solution here is to build
up both the practice and the team gradually.
Having
taken the plunge into management consultancy
oneself, so to speak, does not mean that it
is not easy to get other professionals to share
the risks of a consulting practice. The team-building
process is therefore a slow and laborious one,
unless one has the fortune at the outset to
get together with a team of persons who have
both the requisite professional backgrounds
and the necessary financial standing.
Clients
also expect consultants to have previous experience
in the field. Attempting to get clients who
are completely unknown to one is difficult until
one has gained a certain degree of market standing
based on success. The best source of clients
for a fledgling consultancy practice, therefore,
is people in industry or business previously
known to the aspiring consultant.
Dealing
with client business cultures
A
variety of cultures, as mentioned above, typify
the Indian business scene. For management consultants,
each pose problems peculiar to their own type,
over and above the difficulties all categories
have in common.
In
dealing with multinationals, for example, management
consultants are often faced with having to play
an ego game. Managers in multinational corporations
are usually professionally well-qualified both
in-terms of education and experience, and tend
to perceive that inputs from a consultant implies
that the consultant is in some way superior.
If someone 'superior' is to be accepted, therefore,
it is necessary that their qualifications and
experience follow suit, which is not always
the case.
What
is not understood is that a management consultant,
(even one with a lower education and experience)
being an agent from the outside, brings in a
different, and more objective view, thus playing
the role of an external catalyst. In practice,
easing this situation sometimes means that the
consultant has to declare loud and clear, that
should the roles be reversed, the managers concerned
may well be better consultants than the consultant
in question!
The
other problem faced by management consultants
in the area of interaction with multinationals,
is that the higher echelons in the corporate
hierarchy need to be convinced of the need for
consultancy, particularly since the appointment
of a consultant is generally made at these levels.
Senior managers often perceive that the need
for the services of a consultant is an acknowledgement
of inadequacy, inefficiency and incompetence
on their part, resulting in resistance.
In
the cultural environment that typifies the Indian
family-owned business segment, the services
of a consultant, not being tangible in nature,
are often viewed with suspicion. What a management
consultant is able to contribute, particularly
in the apparently nebulous realm of say marketing
strategy or human resource development, is not
comprehended. Such businessmen often feel that
they can manage everything themselves. And what
they cannot should be taken care of by the managers
they have in their employ. There is no perceived
contributory role, therefore, that a consultant
may play over and above the existent management
infrastructure.
Of
the broad business categories under consideration,
the technocrat businessman is most likely to
be appreciative of the professional services
of a consultant. However, the technocrat's very
background often precludes him from understanding
or acknowledging his own limitations. Having
turned a successful businessman, he is at a
loss to understand that he may lack not only
in the professional objectivity that is the
consultant's strength, but also that his basic
functional knowledge in non-technical areas
may need supplementing.
In
fact, in the Indian context, the very concept
of management consultancy as an input in business
over and above the traditional four Ms of Men,
Materials, Machines and Money remains to be
understood, particularly in the categories of
family/technocrat owned business.