Consult THIS: Consulting Careers, News and Views

View all blogs

The softer side of consulting

Yesterday's WSJ reported on a new initiative taking place at Deloitte, which is aiming to stir up social responsibility among its employees and make corporate social responsibility a firmwide priority—as if there was actually a choice in the matter … Global Managing Partner Ainar Aijala stated, “When you look at what clients expect of an organization like ours, there is actually not a choice,” adding that corporate responsibility is no longer being sidelined. “If you want to be successful it requires placing [social initiatives] right at the core.”

Well, if they must … the first project on the docket, set to start in March 2010, is a program called Deloitte21, where firm representatives go into high schools and help students build skills like ethics, innovative thinking and global awareness. Participants will also lead a local education project through an existing nonprofit in their area, in addition to taking a monthly online course and a three-day executive education program.

On top of doing good, Deloitte is hoping that the program, and others like it, will help recruit top candidates and boost retention rates. Aijala also explains that the project increases the firm's brand awareness around the world and builds a strong network of future hires. So much for ethics for ethics' sake, but nonetheless, some good should come of this.

Fueling sustainability

Wondering where the action's at in consulting these days? Sure, there's still plenty of activity in HR, health care and the financial markets, but I cannot overstate how much consulting activity there is going on in the sustainability/climate change area. This week alone has been a hotbed of activity on that front:

A.T. Kearney was selected to analyze and write the "CDP Supply Chain Report 2010." The CDP (Carbon Disclosure Project) is an independent nonprofit that holds the largest database of corporate climate change information in the world. The objectives of the report are to raise awareness of the importance of carbon disclosure and to provide "actionable strategies" for implementing low-carbon supply chains.

A.T. Kearney has a standup reputation in the sustainability field, having announced in September 2007 that it would attempt to become a carbon-neutral operation within a few years. To that end, it has made changes to the levels and modes of employee travel, made more environmentally friendly choices in hotels and rental car companies, and increased its use of public transportation. In December 2008, its Cambridge, Mass., office became LEED certified due to its implementation of a range of green practices, such as reducing lighting power and introducing more efficient water fixtures.

Also this week, IBMlaunched a consulting service—coined "sustainable asset analytics"—aimed at reducing the costs and environmental impact associated with managing property, equipment and business activities. By monitoring their resources more effectively, the goal is for clients to reduce energy and water use, lower greenhouse gas emissions and waste, and improve efficiency.

And why stop there? Earlier this week, The Economist recognized Logica's emission-monitoring solution—EMO—as one of "ten game-changing solutions to combat climate change." Basically, EMO monitors emissions from every vehicle and transmits those values to the central office, which can then tailor fuel prices to the individual driver. The aim is to incentivize more environmentally friendly driving behavior.

And that's just a sampling of what's going on this week. Keep your eyes open and stay on top of this booming area.

Demystifying the mystique?

I came across this McKinsey Quarterly article today, after reading a piece in Forbes on the increased need for reputation management since the recession hit. Indeed, the recession has escalated the public's distrust of corporations, in addition to corporations being more exposed to nitpicking by legislators and regulators alike.

"As governments respond to the financial crisis and its reverberations in the real economy, a company’s reputation has begun to matter more now than it has in decades," McKinsey states. With greater levels of exposure, it's up to companies to manage their reputation in the marketplace and protect their valuable brand, and also to reassure clients that they're in good hands. Ways to do that, the firm says, are by focusing more on stakeholders and issues that matter to them, and by boosting transparency. The firm went on to say that "in today's world, there are dialogues relevant to the long term success of any business taking place on mobiles, Web sites and blogs. You can either opt in, or opt out, but you can't control the message any longer." In short, people are going to talk about you regardless—so you can either jump into the conversation to try to steer their attitudes, or just sit back and hope for the best.

This is an interesting bit of advice from McKinsey, considering its primary tenet is confidentiality—and it goes to great pains to safeguard that. It never publicizes the names of its clients, nor does it tout successful engagements, leading many to cite the "McKinsey mystique," referring to the shroud of secrecy that surrounds the firm and its dealings. The advice is all the more interesting, of course, in light of the latest "scandal" surrounding the firm. I'm referring to the events of last month, when a senior McKinsey employee, Anil Kumar, was arrested by federal authorities for securities fraud and conspiracy, in conjunction with the Galleon/Raj Rajaratnam insider trading scheme. That Kumar was caught leaking information about one of McKinsey's clients shakes the firm's foundations and could lead to questions regarding its overall integrity.

If McKinsey were another firm, it would probably follow McKinsey's advice, as espoused in the McKinsey Quarterly piece. But the fact is, McKinsey is McKinsey, and I don’t' really see it throwing the whole confidentiality thing by the wayside very easily. I doubt we'll start seeing the firm send out press releases about its client engagements, nor will we see a new wave of media contact from company insiders. The firm practically lives and breathes secrecy, and prides itself on that fact. The way I see this all shaking down is that McKinsey will sail along on its good name, assuming that its longstanding reputation of being on top of the heap will carry it along. In the past, this likely would have been enough. But, as we have seen over and over again, what worked in the past doesn't always fly in these unprecedented times. Resting on its laurels may turn out to be a riskier course for McKinsey, but maybe the firm will surprise us all and take a taste of its own medicine.

For our part, we're certainly going to do our best to help McKinsey lift that veil. Forbes reported on Friday that Rupert Murdoch has hired McKinsey to work its magic at the WSJ, in hopes of making the institution more profitable. While the WSJ claims that it's not bringing in consultants to cut costs—"Our emphasis is on building and growing our products," a company spokesman said—if this engagement is anything like the experience at Conde Nast, Dow Jones should be ready for some reshuffling and box-packing.

Consultants vs. bankers

People (primarily consultants and bankers), love to talk about the difference between consultants and bankers. "From the consultants side, I think what we can learn is the concept of materiality," this consultant-blogger says. "Bankers are concerned with money on the table, and they realize that small differences typically have little effect on the big picture. Consultants on the other hand care about literally every little thing." He goes on to say that, while bankers give clients bottom-line recommendations, consultants draw clients in and take them on a "journey" from Point A to Point B. Any thoughts on this assessment?

For my part, I think the primary difference is that many consultants like to laugh at themselves, whereas everyone else likes to laugh at bankers.

News for veterans

G.I. Jobs has just put out its annual list of the Top 100 Military Friendly Employers. The publication found that, while jobs are slow to return to the rest of the economy, companies are still willing to bring veterans onto their team. The companies included on the list represent the top two percent of veteran-friendly companies in the US, and generate at least $500 million in revenue per year. The publishers of the list note that it's not mere patriotism that drives companies to look to the veteran pool for candidates, but rather the qualities ingrained in those individuals through their years in the military: leadership, discipline, integrity and a can-do attitude.

For the fourth year in a row, Booz Allen Hamilton has been named to the list, and this year came in at No. 14. The firm garners specific praise for its Armed Services Forum and efforts to reintegrate veterans back into the workplace. Booz Allen also honors veterans through the sponsorship of a US Air Force Band concert called America’s Veterans: A Musical Tribute.

Not too many other consulting firms on the list, but you will find Deloitte at No. 26 and CSC at 52.

View all entries