… and more importantly, when you should use them?

Joël Collin-Demers recently commented on a LinkedIn post that

Everyone in the ecosystem exists for a reason. Big consulting and analyst firms are great tools for organizations in particular contexts (e.g. a big firm is a great way to get a lot of smart people deployed on a problem quickly).

The point I’m trying to make is that we tend to over-rely on big consulting and analysts.

And he was correct. Big X consultancies, niche consultancies, implementors/integrators, analyst firms, suite vendors, best of breed vendors, etc. were all started for a reason and continue to exist for a reason. Understanding both of these helps you determine when you should use them, why, and what you should (and should not) expect. In this post on where we asked If You Really Want Success … or Just Say You Do, we made it abundantly clear that Analyst Firms, Big X, Implementors, and even Vendors (beyond a certain point) ultimately don’t care about your success because

Analyst Firms make money pushing the solutions of the vendors that pay them the most, not on making sure those solutions solve your problems. While there was a time you could always count on the best unbiased advice from an analyst firm, that was long ago. Ever since the first big vendor realized it was faster (and cheaper) to buy influence by sponsoring reports or cutting big research access POs, the end of unbiased recommendations began. (And it’s more your fault than the vendor’s because you came to expect free reports, but no one can work for free, which means the vendors had to pick up the entire cost, which means those reports say what the vendors sponsoring them want said, not what you need to hear.)

Big X need to keep their benches employed addressing your problems, and if a vendor’s solution took care of everything, what else would they do? This doesn’t mean they are going to screw you, but it does mean they are only going to address what you ask them to, that they are going to try to do it with a diamond/platinum/sycophant partner to keep their top-tier consultancy status, and assign the weakest resources they think they can get away with to keep their top tier resources free to top paying clients. Moreover, as we discussed in our article on When Should You Use Big X, the vast majority of Big X did not start out as IT consultancies or Procurement Tech shops and this is still their weakest area (as the “wild west” tech players and boutique consultancies get the majority of best talent), so even if they are doing their best, it’s only so good. (Compared to their core strengths, which, as we said in the latter post, you’d be foolish NOT to take advantage of.) The reality is, many Big X are now mostly body shops who have to keep those junior consultants employed while keeping their big software partners happy. And that’s a difficult balancing act, especially considering their overheads and the luxurious lifestyle these partners have grown accustomed to.

Implementors make money implementing solutions — if that solution solved everything for the next five to ten years, how would they keep their bench employed as well. Now, they are going to make sure it’s implemented to the best of their ability, but since they weren’t hired as a consultancy, they aren’t going to be the ones to tell you when a solution is not the best for a certain task — they are going to do what they are paid to do (so that, when you realize you need another solution in a year and then use the same Big X again to recommend it, they get that contract too).

Vendors need to keep their investors happy, which means securing sales as fast as possible, not ensuring they are the perfect fit and/or outlining where they will fall short. Now, of everyone in the ecosystem, they definitely want you to succeed, but the reality is, they can only spend so much time on you because they took too much money from investors at too high a multiple, aren’t growing at the expected rate, and the management and sales team risk being fired (and the entire company being shut down) if they don’t continually increase the rate they bring on new customers (whether they can reasonably support them or not). It’s all about “what their solution can do for you” and not about “is their solution right for you”.

And so on.

Niche Consultancies are the best IF they do not have preferred vendor partnerships (which require a certain level of business to maintain) as they know they have to perform to get their next contract, but these are few and far between. And even though it is critically important, almost no one does Project Assurance for their ProcureTech project (and then wonders why we have had Two and a Half Decades of Project Failure).

Short story, everyone in the ecosystem exists to make money off of YOU. While that’s not a bad thing IF they provide value (and heck, I’ll happily give you a dollar if I am guaranteed two dollars in return in a reasonable time frame), not all of them do … and those that do are not equal in the value they provide (primarily due to conflicting pressures, not intent). Until you understand that, your returns will be limited.

The important thing to remember is that if you’re just starting your best-in-class Procurement journey, you typically don’t need an end to end suite, and if you’re Procurement maturity is still elementary school, you don’t need a 7-figure mega suite when a low 6-figure mini suite, which can be implemented in 1/4 to 1/6 the time, can get you 80% of potential savings. Especially when this level of savings will take you 3-6 years to realize. Then, when you’re ready (and know how to get the additional ROI the mega-suite can provide), you can upgrade to the seven figure mega-suite in confidence you’ll achieve the same level of ROI. (Instead of being the next ProcureTech disaster. And while you may believe in a beautiful disaster, there is no such thing where tech is involved.)