OCTOBER 2003
Back to Newsletter
Selecting a Technology Consultant
The complexity and pace of change in technology makes it impossible to know what technology is available without expert advice. Using a consultant to assist with the purchase of technology products is not only wise it is vital. Even in-house MIS and IT professionals can not be up to date in the same way as a consulting professional. In-house personnel must spend the bulk of their time on in-house issues, rather than keeping up with the latest technology. On the other hand, keeping up with technology is what consultants are supposed to do.
There are really two types of consultants. The first recommends a solution to a problem and then provides the solution. The second recommends a solution and then helps the client search for the best solution provider.
Both types have their uses. Usually smaller projects or projects in which the solution is almost a commodity, such as standard accounting systems, are appropriate for using a consultant who will also provide the solution. It is simply a matter of balancing time and effort. It is less time consuming to have a single source both recommending and providing the solution.
However, on larger projects or projects with which require applications that are not “off the shelf” or those in which the stakes of failure are high, the consultant who recommends a solution should not be permitted to also provide the solution. The reason for this is not complex. A consultant which is permitted to bid on the solution is likely to limit the proposed solution to those services or products which the consultant sells, even if that is not the best, the most cost effective or the most up to date solution. It is also likely that the bid document, the request for proposal, will be written to favor the bid of the consultant which is writing it. This destroys the value of the entire bidding process.
In fact, if a client is going to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP), it should be made clear to the consultant which is retained to help draft the RFP that the consultant may not also bid on the project. The consultant must make a choice, either help draft the RFP or bid on the solution. A consultant which can bid on the RFP it helped to create will, not surprisingly, craft an RFP solution best suited to the consultant’s qualifications and capabilities, rather than the best solution for client’s needs.
The obligations and duties of the consultant must be clearly spelled out in a consulting agreement. This protects both the consultant and the client. Since consulting services are intangible, they are not susceptible to testing after delivery, at least in the same manner as tangible products. Therefore, the extent and nature of the consultant’s responsibilities and the responsibilities of the client, must be understood and spelled out in detail.
Many professional consultants will have a standard consulting services agreement or agreements. These must be reviewed carefully. They are documents drafted for the benefit of the consultant and should be understood as such. Most consulting agreements have areas which can be negotiated and others which can not. However, the rule of thumb is “It never hurts to ask.” The consultants form agreements should be carefully reviewed by client’s legal counsel.
If there is no form agreement, it is still vital for the protection of both, that the consultant and the client enter into a consulting agreement. The very nature of consulting and proposing undefined solutions for poorly defined projects can, if not dealt with at the outset, expose client to open-ended costs and expose consultant to open ended, unrealistic client expectations, which can be difficult or impossible to meet.
From the standpoint of the client, it is desirable to spell out the nature of the consulting project in as much detail as possible and with parameters beyond which the consultant may not go without authorization. This will help to prevent the accumulation of hourly fees on matters which were not of central importance to the project. Runaway costs are often an issue in consulting. A written agreement will prevent the unobserved and unintended accumulation of unexpected billable hours. It will also describe and define the extent of the consultant’s project and expected result of the consultant’s work product.
As for the consultant, spelling out the nature of the consulting project assures that both parties will clearly understand the limits of the consultant’s obligations. A consultant hired to find the best web designer for a specialized job, may not also be obligated to survey client’s existing Internet Service Provider’s servers to assure they are adequate to the web site needs. Yet a client may not perceive the difference and assume the survey is part of the process of finding a web designer. An agreement that makes the limits of the consultant’s obligations clear, will help prevent later problems with a disgruntled client, with unrealistic expectations.
The value of clearly written parameters and project criteria extends to all issues of potential conflict, including ancillary issues such as time frames, project oversight and testing, oversight of training, both initial and ongoing, and any maintenance, support and customization responsibilities expected of the consultant.
Often, especially in a complex project, a consultant is only responsible for a discreet portion of a project. If such a case, the agreement must spell out those parameters and require cooperation among various participants in the project, whether other consultants, in-house MIS or IT personnel, service or software providers or hardware providers. In a multi-faceted project, all provider agreements must assure that each providers work fits with the work of the other providers.
In short, a well crafted agreement with technology consultants will help to avoid misunderstandings and problems later on.
Back to Top of Page
Back to Newsletter
|
