"The woman in question is extremely photogenic and obviously good at self-promotion, but there is nothing strategic in the article. The big strategic error here is to regard social media and content management as a marketing issue, separate from the business model itself. This seems to suggest a lack of joined-up thinking - and ultimately a failure of organizational intelligence."
That was a trenchant observation in its own right. It was prefaced by the following, which helps place it in context:
“There is a great deal on the Internet about Kodak’s social media strategy - but it seems to be largely about Kodak marketing communications. Journalist @Ms XYZ invites us to meet the brilliant and beautiful woman behind Kodak’s social media strategy…” (September 2011).
I think about Eastman Kodak often. I will miss Kodak’s consistently high quality developing services. Even Kodak paper was better.
@richardveryard is an organizational behavior and strategic management type. He might be one of the few examples of a career management consultant, independently employed.
I don’t think too highly of many recent McKinsey-type management consultants. McKinsey, Bain, Cap-Gemini and probably Hay Group were worthwhile, as high-end experts, at varying times in the past. Some may still be. I do believe that some consultants e.g. those who work for IBM or Deloitte & Touche, continue to offer genuine value and benefit for their clients.
The highly productive management consultant?
First allow me to mention that I am eliminating the many subject matter experts that work as consultants. There is no question in my mind that these people are likely to be worth retaining by clients, if used in an appropriate project, for work that is feasible.
There ARE other consultants, not quite as purely strategic as Richard, but close, who are worth every penny. These consultants are individuals who have deep industry or process design experience, acquired over a span of years.
Some might be in their 30’s, as one can become very knowledgeable between 21 and 35 years of age, if focused. More common, among the really useful consultants, are those who have years of experience in a variety of closely related fields. They are adaptable, despite a range of client engagements. Also, such versatility compensates for the tendency for people to become less flexible and open-minded as they get older.
I am thinking of a consultant that I worked with at a company where I was an employee. We called him “Red Ted”, as he was tall, florid complected, with a lot of white hair. He seemed aloof, old-fashioned to me at first. For example, this was in Arizona, yet he often wore dark wool-blend business suits, tie, white button-down collar shirts. My boss, to whom we both directly reported, did too though. Boss was the organizational head of the Data Management and Analytics area. He had 20 programmers, data quality (DQ), and a department of 6 actuaries reporting to him. Boss was a young-ish attorney who was a wannabe-programmer. It wasn’t a good situation.
As time went on, both my group (Data Governance and DQ) and the consultant were faced with bottlenecks in accomplishing the goals for which we were brought to the company to do. Without being given any say in the matter, Red Ted, me and the two programmers who worked for me were moved out of the Data Management and Analytics Department, to the far opposite end of the building, and relocated in a windowless area between the mail room and facilities. We continued to report to the same wannabe-programmer-attorney though.