Thursday, August 18, 2005
Tirade against consultants shows no signs of letting up...
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.
A new set of figures about spend on external advisers is released by the UK government and in no time at all we've got national newspapers bemoaning the waste of taxpayers' money and the outrageous daily rates being paid to consulting gurus.
At this point I'd like to quote Mick James from a piece he wrote defending consultants earlier this year:
"I’m appalled by the inability of a national newspaper to even consider the possibility that some of this consultancy spend might represent value-for-money"
If you missed his sterling defence of the consulting profession, you can find it here:
How much longer do consultants have to keep justifying their very existence?
Reading the latest Scotsman article and Independent article it's hard not to be equally appalled. Where's the balance in these pieces, the journalistic integrity? In one there's a quote from an MP outraged at the government spending £1,000 an hour on consulting gurus. Sorry - £1,000 an hour?!?! Which planet?!
In the other the £2,000+ daily rates of some consultants are compared with the "daily earnings" of other professionals. A top lawyer, for example, can expect to be paid £1,200 a day. The implication being how can these consultants possibly be worth £2,000+ ? The only problem is the apples & pears nature of the comparison. The lawyer actually has take home pay of £1,200 a day, whereas the figure for consultants is their daily billing rate - only a fraction of which will be their take home pay! But of course, that wouldn't fit the thrust of the article - which is to show consultants in the worst possible light. My take? Success breeds envy...
Seen any other articles that are similarly biased against the profession? Or that rare breed - an article defending consultants? Do post them here if you would... Rgds, Tony