Thread by @swardley

X : What are your thoughts?
Me : Thoughts? The last people in the world I would ask advice on reducing management consultants in Government are ... management consultants. There's all the skill and capability that you could need within the civil service to answer that question ->

https://twitter.com/paulcconnell/status/1329491447226228736

... the problem is that management consultants are used as a comfort blanket, a "shield" against risk i.e. someone else to blame. You'd have to change not only the attitude to risk within the Civil service but reintroduce the concept of "Good enough for Government" i.e. ...

... the idea that only the exceptional is "good enough" for Gov rather than a phrase meaning "any old tat".

Back in 2010-14, when I was involved in "Better for Less" etc then I was keen on a blanket ban on management consultants once Spend Control was up and functioning ...

... with the creation of internal consultancy capability. My view hasn't changed. I'd reinforce Spend Control, turn it into the intelligence function it should have been and put a future date 12 months from now at which a blanket ban on all management consultants would start.

Anyway, this was my big fear in 2015 when @MTBracken "left" ... that we would fall back into the bad old ways of using the parasites -

https://twitter.com/swardley/status/628294238606721025

... unfortunately, I've watched in horror as we've gone down those bad old paths once again and we've diminished spend control, diminished challenge, diminished the civil service and have McMuppets on the rampage handing out "strategic advice" ... arghhh.

X : I'm not sure internal consultancy is the best term.
Me : Fair point. As long as we keep the "internal" and have a blanket ban for a period of time and introduce a process of real challenge on why Gov would use external advice.

X : Would you ever consider being involved in a review of Gov's use of management consultants?
Me : Can I bring a chainsaw?

My loathing of what I consider to be mostly a parasitical field with little benefit is very well known. The entire imperative of mapping is to "rebel against the consultants that enslave us" by giving people the ability to communicate, learn and challenge effectively.

If you want a metric, one I'd like to use is "Number of days since last incident of the use of management consultants". We should celebrate those who achieve 10, 100 and 1,000 days.

X : You're a bit biased?
Me : I loathe them. The old wheeze of one group of consultants giving terrible advice to a Dept at great cost whilst another group from the same firm advises Gov on how terrible the Dept is and why it should be outsourced. Nothing is beneath them.

X : A bit rabid?
Me : Yes. I was @liammax rottweiller. He is a complete sweetie and is much missed by Government in my view. He had the right balance whereas I'm Old Labour ... more red than red, more blue than blue ... so yes, I have a pathological hatred of waste etc.

There you are, there's a solution. Make @liammax a Conservative Lord, put him in charge of Cab Office and give me a chainsaw to "manage" the "management consultancy" problem.

X : Do you dislike all management consultants?
Me : No. But I want to see challenge to why we use it, evidenced learning from it and value for money. The current industry is mostly woeful as far as I am concerned.

i.e. £500k on defining a "purpose" ... twice ... and that's the tip of the iceberg - independent.co.uk/news/health/nh… ... I'd hate to see what has been wasted on COVID.

X : So why a blanket ban?
Me : Shock treatement to an addiction for risk avoidance to enable systems of challenge, learning and value for money to be put in place. It wouldn't have to be permanent.