UNIT TITLE:
PROJECT PLANNING CONSULTANCY
(5S6Z1015_2223_9F)
UNIT LEADER: DR CLAIRE MCKENZIE
WORD COUNT:
SUMMATIVE 1: 1094
SUMMATIVE 3: 550
Contents
Summative 1: .................................................................................................................................... 2
References: ................................................................................................................................... 4
Summative 2: .................................................................................................................................... 5
Summative 3: .................................................................................................................................. 14
, Summative 1:
Consultancy and its reputation are becoming tarnished through a lack of risk and greater freedom of
information. Consultancy has been widely regarded over its lifespan as the creator and marketplace
for new knowledge (Thrift, 2005), leading way for innovation in management and dispelling
outdated mindsets (Clegg et al, 2004). However, this essay will argue that modern advancements
both inside and outside the consultant sphere have led to it becoming harder for an individual
consultant’s knowledge to be advertised to clientele. The essay hopes to shed light on this discussion
critically, and through the lens of theory.
Sturdy proposes the main concern for consultants is that management overemphasises the
criticisms placed on consultancy (Sturdy, 2011), causing distrust among them. This thinking has its
benefits, however, also has limitations which can lead to myopia that can hurt a firm’s performance.
Sturdy emphasises that historically, the benefits of consultancy have remained as such: Thrift's
account of the generator of knowledge, Clegg's perspective as the pusher of innovation, and Tisdall’s
and Mckenna’s approach of providing expertise, extra staff, and facilities used to legitimise
knowledge and decisions (Tisdall, 1982; Mckenna 2006). However Sturdy then highlights the
importance of caution when picking a consultant; Mckenna even argues that consultancy has an
enormous influence on the modern world, implying that the influence can be both good and bad.
Consultancy is argued to be at its best when it is taking the most from the client which is its main
vulnerability (Pinault, 2001). It also has been observed to forgo its impartial perspective in favour of
relationships with executives (Craig & Brooks, 2006). One could argue that managers are starting to
catch onto this and are refusing to use the practice. It must be noted that consultancy ‘results’ are
subjective. This means that it is hard to study the effectiveness of consultancy (Alvesson and
Johansson, 2002), especially considering the biases that arise from critics and supporters.
Concluding his paper; Sturdy states that since it is difficult to study the effectiveness of consultancy
in management; we don’t have enough information to make concrete claims about the field. we do
not have enough empirical data on when consultancy has/has not been used, therefore we can’t say
if the success/shortcomings of a firm were only down to the consultants used. He also emphasises
Mckenna’s point of the potential for firms to be more cautious when using consultants since they do
not have a great stake in the company and therefore lack the same accountability managers do.
From the paper, a main question can be generated for further analysis: How can a consultancy firm
dispel criticisms by reinforcing supporting arguments? Modern examples of the development of
consultancy will be discussed to better help answer. Cerruti et al argue in their paper that the more
educated a consultant is, the better they are at manipulating context (Cerruti et al, 2019). Put
simply; the better a consultant is at helping a company, the better they are at convincing the
company that it needs help in the first place which is congruent with Mckenna’s interpretation
mentioned earlier. This helps answer the question by showing that a transparent consultant, one
without manipulation, is a more trustworthy one. If they are honest with their clients and do not
misplace their trust, a consultant can build trust and rapport in their industry, outshining their
competitors.
Although some researchers such as Mckenna believe that management consultancy is ubiquitous,
meaning you could observe the same results regardless of culture or geography, Barthélemy
interestingly argues that reliance is country-specific, and the US is much more reliant on consultancy
PROJECT PLANNING CONSULTANCY
(5S6Z1015_2223_9F)
UNIT LEADER: DR CLAIRE MCKENZIE
WORD COUNT:
SUMMATIVE 1: 1094
SUMMATIVE 3: 550
Contents
Summative 1: .................................................................................................................................... 2
References: ................................................................................................................................... 4
Summative 2: .................................................................................................................................... 5
Summative 3: .................................................................................................................................. 14
, Summative 1:
Consultancy and its reputation are becoming tarnished through a lack of risk and greater freedom of
information. Consultancy has been widely regarded over its lifespan as the creator and marketplace
for new knowledge (Thrift, 2005), leading way for innovation in management and dispelling
outdated mindsets (Clegg et al, 2004). However, this essay will argue that modern advancements
both inside and outside the consultant sphere have led to it becoming harder for an individual
consultant’s knowledge to be advertised to clientele. The essay hopes to shed light on this discussion
critically, and through the lens of theory.
Sturdy proposes the main concern for consultants is that management overemphasises the
criticisms placed on consultancy (Sturdy, 2011), causing distrust among them. This thinking has its
benefits, however, also has limitations which can lead to myopia that can hurt a firm’s performance.
Sturdy emphasises that historically, the benefits of consultancy have remained as such: Thrift's
account of the generator of knowledge, Clegg's perspective as the pusher of innovation, and Tisdall’s
and Mckenna’s approach of providing expertise, extra staff, and facilities used to legitimise
knowledge and decisions (Tisdall, 1982; Mckenna 2006). However Sturdy then highlights the
importance of caution when picking a consultant; Mckenna even argues that consultancy has an
enormous influence on the modern world, implying that the influence can be both good and bad.
Consultancy is argued to be at its best when it is taking the most from the client which is its main
vulnerability (Pinault, 2001). It also has been observed to forgo its impartial perspective in favour of
relationships with executives (Craig & Brooks, 2006). One could argue that managers are starting to
catch onto this and are refusing to use the practice. It must be noted that consultancy ‘results’ are
subjective. This means that it is hard to study the effectiveness of consultancy (Alvesson and
Johansson, 2002), especially considering the biases that arise from critics and supporters.
Concluding his paper; Sturdy states that since it is difficult to study the effectiveness of consultancy
in management; we don’t have enough information to make concrete claims about the field. we do
not have enough empirical data on when consultancy has/has not been used, therefore we can’t say
if the success/shortcomings of a firm were only down to the consultants used. He also emphasises
Mckenna’s point of the potential for firms to be more cautious when using consultants since they do
not have a great stake in the company and therefore lack the same accountability managers do.
From the paper, a main question can be generated for further analysis: How can a consultancy firm
dispel criticisms by reinforcing supporting arguments? Modern examples of the development of
consultancy will be discussed to better help answer. Cerruti et al argue in their paper that the more
educated a consultant is, the better they are at manipulating context (Cerruti et al, 2019). Put
simply; the better a consultant is at helping a company, the better they are at convincing the
company that it needs help in the first place which is congruent with Mckenna’s interpretation
mentioned earlier. This helps answer the question by showing that a transparent consultant, one
without manipulation, is a more trustworthy one. If they are honest with their clients and do not
misplace their trust, a consultant can build trust and rapport in their industry, outshining their
competitors.
Although some researchers such as Mckenna believe that management consultancy is ubiquitous,
meaning you could observe the same results regardless of culture or geography, Barthélemy
interestingly argues that reliance is country-specific, and the US is much more reliant on consultancy
