Do consultants really add value to a project? Is the end result better because of their involvement? On the other hand, do projects involving consultants take longer and cost more? Being the head of a consulting company these questions are near and dear to my heart. Unfortunately some recent research conducted by BPM Magazine seems to suggest the worst-case: projects involving consultants cost more, take longer, and don't produce better outcomes than those done without consulting help. In some cases they produce worse results. Ouch! The research was focused primarily on business performance management projects. Being experts on BPM and consulting we have been asked to discuss and debate these results. To put it another way we have been asked to defend the miserable, no good consulting industry. It should be fun. I think I know why some of the data came out the way it did. This lively discussion will take place as part of a webcast on May 23rd at 12 noon EDT. This webcast will also review BPM implementation best practices and pitfalls to avoid. If you have an opinion on why the survey produced the results it did, please chime in.
Posted May 8, 2006 11:07 AM
Permalink | 1 Comment |
Twitter 
LinkedIn 
YouTube
Hehe... The Mythical Man-Month - Fred Brooks's excellent 1975 book on software engineering said it very well: adding more people to a software project only makes it delay more, cost more. Period.
This greedy world!
I personally heard a story a consultant who charged his client USD 1000 to install a Cognos software that could be done by the installation wizard and configuration tool that comes with the install in half an hour to one hour... basically what you do is keeping clicking Next and then Finish it should be done!