How Does the Identity of Consultants Impact Their Work - Coursework Example

How does the identity of consultants impact their work? BY YOU YOUR SCHOOL DATA HERE HERE How does the identity of consultants impact their work? Introduction Empirical literature describes the role of consultant as both challenging and also a construct of whether an individual in this field develops a positive sense of self that is viable for the external client. Consultancy has a very broad theme to describe its fundamental principles and activities, ranging from management consulting linked with organisational change to public relations consulting that involves improving one’s corporate or celebrity image. Because of the dynamically-different roles of consulting, the notion of identity becomes an interesting topic of study to determine whether identity formation in such a diverse field maintains a positive or negative impact on work attitudes. This paper explores identity formation in multiple fields of consultancy work to determine how identity impedes job role or whether elements of identity have the potential to enhance relationships internally or with external clients. The nature of consultancy According to Alvesson & Robertson (2006, p.220), consultancy firms “are highly people dependent and rely heavily upon safe-guarding loyalty through identification”. The consultancy industry relies on organisational culture and structure that facilitates allegiance and dependability through various social systems that guide control behaviour through management and demand reliability in all aspects of client relationships. In psychological theory, the nature of organisational culture or group membership defines team-based hierarchies as being highly contributory to self-esteem development and the sustainment of affiliation needs in order to achieve the pinnacle of total self-development and productivity (Chow, 2009; Gambrel & Cianci, 2003). Affiliation needs are necessary in group-based environments that are people dependent in order to sustain higher self-esteem development and be able to link identity with organisational culture. A study utilizing a sample of 79 representatives from four distinctly different consulting firms identified that the role of consultant requires four key dimensions. These include knowledge work, management and membership, personal orientation and external interface (Alvesson & Empson, 2008). Knowledge work is the active sharing of data between key members of the organisation and promoting knowledge as a regular business practice. Membership ties closely with the psychological principles previously identified as they are related to finding a sense of identity in terms of the organisation and its mission or structure, as well as related to personal orientation, in support of the literature provided by Chow (2009) and Gambrel & Cianci (2003). For the sake of this analysis, the spotlight will be on external interface which deals with how the organisation or the individual is seen by others in the external environment. Kipping & Armbruster (2002) recognise that consultants have a difficult time legitimizing their profession to the outside world and clients. There is a general misconception about consultancy work that exists in the external community and external marketplace that is build on scepticism of its validity with perceptions that the field is borne less of expertise and knowledge, but more as “masters of persuasion” (Kitay & Wright, 2007, p.1619). This pervading professional and social attitude regarding consultancy work maintains the potential to have negative impact on the self-confidence development of consultant workers that could have ramifications for their practice activities and general attitude. “A deficient sense of the self has a profound impact on psychological functioning as well as interpersonal behaviour” (Reasoner, 2009, p.2). Much to the disadvantage of the consultant, the majority of their dealings are with the external environment in the form of client relationships. When consultants are put into the position of having to continuously work against these prevailing attitudes in order to gain new clients or simply build a stronger foundation for their consultancy expertise, self-esteem development is likely to be stunted. This notion is supported by Peirano-Vejo & Stablein (2010) who conducted a research study which identified that many consultants actually refuse to label themselves, publicly, as consultants due to the negative social perceptions related to this field of study. For reasons unknown concretely, the term consultant has been linked with unemployed individuals who are in-between careers and attempting to utilize their experiences in the form of independent consulting work online or in very small-scale private practice. Peirano-Vejo & Stablein again indicate that one of the most prevailing attitudes in a sample of consultants was to be differentiated from poorly-trained advice advisors and have their role as serious consultants be clarified in the professional and social environment. It is difficult for consultants to develop or maintain a sense of affiliation internally with these prevailing attitudes, however likely misconstrued, creating tension and conflict about the nature of the consultancy field. The likely impact of this stigma placed on consultancy work is lowered self-confidence that will have considerable impacts on the quality of their service or knowledge delivery to clients in the long-term. Why is this? Consulting work requires individuals to be more extroverted, this being easily adjustable in a variety of diverse social scenarios. This is the nature of consultancy work that is people dependent and client dependent in order to be considered a success, regardless of the type of consultancy work being conducted. Isidro (2009, p.1) indicates “as a consultant, you need to aggressively sell your product…never believe it can sell itself on auto-pilot and you can sit and wait for work”. This means that consultants are constantly exposed to the general public or client interventions with a focus on self-marketing and self-advertisement in order to build a positive reputation on the market. Identity, then, is a major selling point for success in this field that requires ongoing interaction through various public relations channels. If the individual is feeling psychological problems stemming from improper social stigmas about the profession, the likelihood of successful marketing of the self or the organisation would be reduced based on theory of affiliation and psychology. In the role of management consulting, it is common for an expert consultant to assess the organisation through a variety of needs analyses to determine the best course of action for improving the organisational structure or cultural environment. Sewell (2004) compares the role of management consultant as that of a parasite that digs through the organisation to identify failures or weaknesses and then create a climate of change through consultancy efforts with corporate leadership. It is commonplace for the consultant to be very visible as an advisor and observer during these periods where change is required, thus making them interactive with senior leadership or other lower-level members of the organisational staff. Therefore, as responsible consultants dedicated and loyal to their organisation of employment, they must consistently reinforce the integrity of their experience and knowledge in order to gain support from the organisational client. Identity, then, is a significant part of the consultancy role in management consultant work and will definitely impact client relationships, especially if improper labels exist about the integrity of such work. Clark & Salaman (1998) describe the concept of the management guru, an individual that absorbs and reveres the published work of others as it relates to their knowledge base and experience-based expertise. These individuals consider themselves the pinnacle of knowledge and generally manage an organisation on these elitism principles. Offers the authors, gurus are “dominant, initiating partners, exploiting the naiveté vulnerability of their client managers, selling them glib promises, fads, empty slogans; confusing them with their rhetoric…” (Clark & Salaman, p.146). Because consultancy work is dependent on internal expertise, the profile of the management guru is commonplace within the organisational environment. This type of individual is considered to be somewhat infantile who can become quite easily distracted and uninterested unless divulging their guru methodologies or absorbing the methodologies of other published gurus with similar personality traits. When this type of leader with a distorted self-view bordering on egotism runs the organisation and maintains control, issues of autonomy and self-respect can be diminished, thus impacting the quality of positive identity development. The management guru was identified since this seems to be more common in the consultancy group where expert advice is heralded by clients or other professionals in consultancy. It has already been established that individuals require a sense of positive affiliation and belonging in order to achieve self-esteem development and feel as though they belong to the group dynamic. Guru beliefs, regardless of how they might be distorted from actual reality, creates a sort of paradox or absurdity when such a leader compares themselves to other lower-level consultant experts on the team and would therefore negate the psychologically-based need of group harmony. Impact on clients, in this case, would be obvious. Conclusion It is clear from the analyzed literature that identity plays a significant role in the quality of identity development in consultants, based largely on social misconceptions about the integrity of the field. Coupled with tensions internally from management guru leaders and the potential difficulty of establishing a sense of group loyalty, identity formation would absolutely impact client relationship or the general quality of work in the organisation. Since consultancy requires ongoing self-marketing in order to find success in their field of expertise, identity has a multi-complex role that will likely serve as a predictor of success in this industry. References Alvesson, M. & Robertson, M. (2006), “The best and the brightest: The construction, significance, and effects of elite identifies in consulting firms”, JOURNAL NAME, 13(2), pp.195-224. Alvesson, M. & Empson, L. (2008), “The construction of organizational identity: Comparative case studies of consulting firms”, Scandinavian Journal of Management, vol. 24, pp.1-16. Chow, I. (2009), “The relationship between social capital, organizational citizenship behaviour, and performance outcomes: an empirical study from China”, Advanced Management Journal, vo.74, no.3, pp.44-55. Clark, T. & Salaman, G. (1998), “Telling tales: management gurus’ narratives and the construction of managerial identity”, Journal of Management Studies, vol.35, no.2. Gambrel, P. & Cianci, R. (2003), “Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs: Does it Apply in a Collectivist Culture”, Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, vol.8, no.2, pp.143-162. Isidro, I.M. (2009), [internet] Seven keys to building a profitable consulting business, [accessed June 18, 2011 at http://www.powerhomebiz.com/vol5/consulting.htm] Kipping, M. & Armbruster, T. “The burden of otherness: limits of consultancy interventions in historical case studies. In M. Kipping & L. Engwall (eds), Management Consulting: Emergence and dynamics of a knowledge industry, Oxford University Press (2002), pp.203-221. In Kitay, J. & Wright, C. (2007), “From prophets to profits: the occupational rhetoric of management consultants”, Human Relations, 60(11), pp.1613-1640. Peirano-Vejo, M. & Stablein, R. (2010), “Do consultants in corporate governance share a community? An empirical study on their practice”, Journal of Management and Organization, vol.16, no.2, pp.299-313. Reasoner, R.W. (2009), [internet] Extending self-esteem theory and research. [accessed June 18, 2011 at http://www.self-esteem-international.org/research/extending%20research.htm] Sewell, G. (2004), “Exploring the moral consequences of management communication theory and practice”, Management Communication Quarterly, vol.1, pp.97-114. Read More