Introduction
The author in the first case used himself as a consultant in several ways. From this case, the author comes out as a consultant from various instances. The first case begins with the author’s description of his client. He describes this client as directly inaccessible, whom he can only access through his deputy. For success in the consultant business, the professionals (or the consultants) should develop good communication mechanisms with their clients. One of the means to do so is to enhance direct contact. In this case, therefore the author strives to achieve this contact. Secondly, the case describes a construction design on which the author is working on. Consultation is all about the provision of technical expertise and advice to clients.
The design, therefore, illustrates the author as technically supportive to the client on the project, which characterizes him as a consultant. Thirdly, by noting that the foundation of the project of this client is weak, it depicts the author as a consultant. How does the author comprehend this weakness? It is clear from the case that the author conclusively makes this judgment. This reasoning shows that the author competently understands the project, hence a consultant. Finally, the author feels constrained during the board meeting. Although the author feels the urge to intervene, at some point, into the executive’s discussion, he just keeps quiet which truly illustrates a practical relationship between a client and a consultant.
Consultant example
Consultants should carefully deal with their clients even whenever their arguments are professionally wrong. As this article illustrates, the author is aware of the consequences of being an intervener. Consequently, he carefully uses himself as an intervener. First, the author is an intervener to his client. Although the client is inaccessible, the author presses to meet him even if it is through the deputy. The author also uses himself as an intervener when he agrees to work on a project, which another consultant has started. He aims to build a good relationship with the client for larger projects. In this case, the author views himself as an intervener into the rules of the organization, and to maintain a good relationship with the client, he does not speak during the board meetings.
The second case illustrates the author as both a consultant and an intervener. The story begins with a “major intervention program” which the author has developed. In this case, the author is a developer, innovator, and inventor. These three features characterize a consultant. As the case illustrates, the author develops such programs for a specific client. As the narrator notes, the sponsoring client has charged the author with the responsibility to lead the program launch. In fact, in any project it is the role of the developer, the consultant, in this case, to lead and demonstrate the important details to the executives during the project launch. Therefore, the author is a consultant. Consultation is a business and consultants’ behaviors should march those of the business world. In this case, the author comes out as an excellent businessperson based on the way he handles the annoying client.
The author keenly conceals the discontent caused by his client on taking his role. The author wants to maintain a strong and good business relationship with the client. As the adage goes, “a client is always right”; the author does not want to disapprove of the client to maintain business. In this way, the case illustrates the author as a consultant. The program, which the author developed, is the first of its kind for the organization. Therefore, the author is an intervener. Since the organization has never used this program, the author’s introduction of this program is an intervention into the programs of the similar functions existing in this organization. The author is also an intervener to improving the programs of the organization. The author also uses himself as an intervener when he is offered an opportunity to address the participants of the program. The author tries to bring the discussion back to the design of the program. By doing so, he intervenes in the unnecessary information given by the sponsoring client.
From the third case, the author uses himself as a financial consultant. He works in a financial services organization. Again, the story illustrates the author as a management consultant as evidenced by his involvement with the bureaucratic manager, whom the author describes as “old-school, command and control” (Carlson & Kolodny, 2011, p.13). The author also does team building whereby he provides managers with technical management advice. In his encounter with the harsh manager, the author identifies his managerial and financial loopholes. He is indeed both a financial and managerial consultant. The author uses himself as a managerial consultant when he identifies the leadership characters of this manager, such as self-confidence, commanding, and decisive (Carlson & Kolodny, 2011, p.12). The author uses himself as an intervener to change the leadership style of this manager. Again, the author uses himself as an intervener when he proposes a series of meetings with this manager. By making such a proposal to this commanding manager, he stepped into the decision-making process.
Reference
Carlson, C., & Kolodny, R. (2011). Have we been missing something fundamental to Our work? New York: Gestalt Journal Press.