1 - One of the dangers of "consultant communication" is the issuance of the phrase by a professional ... "Your ideas likely won't work because we are unique and we are special, and you probably don't understand our specific business model."
This is a red flag, folks.
This is a red flag, folks.
2 - This is the way a professional tells you that they aren't going to change.
3 - It means that the professional quite likely agrees with your thesis, or can't find a way to fight your thesis. Without a way to fight your thesis, the professional develops a viewpoint that discredits the thesis ... "we're unique, we're special."
4 - Almost nobody is unique or special.
Apple is unique and special.
So is Amazon.
Verizon is not unique/special, for instance.
Apple is unique and special.
So is Amazon.
Verizon is not unique/special, for instance.
5 - If the professional telling you this is a prospective client, your odds of landing the account just went down significantly.
6 - If the professional is on Twitter, it's a way for the individual to throw shade your way. It doesn't mean you are wrong. It just means you backed somebody into a corner and they're trying to dig out without the benefit of any credible data.
7 - Be ready for this line of attack ... it happens often ... and try to have some empathy for the person, because you've backed them into a corner.
P.S. to this thread.
Another form of discrediting a consultant is what I call the "7% argument". Here's how it works.
Another form of discrediting a consultant is what I call the "7% argument". Here's how it works.
9 - Say you have an argument (oh, I don't know, encouraging clients to avoid the traditional omnichannel thesis at all costs for example) ... say you have solid data to back up your thesis.
The professional will discredit your entire thesis because they disagree with 7% of it.
The professional will discredit your entire thesis because they disagree with 7% of it.
10 - This happened to me today. I shared a concept with a professional and the professional said "that's amazing", and then did a "deep dive" on why one tiny aspect of the argument wouldn't work in one specific instance, thereby discrediting the entire narrative in his opinion.
11 - It's a method used by professionals to sound smart when they don't want to accept an argument.
They just find the 7% of the argument they disagree with so they can throw out 100% of the argument ... even if they agree with 93% of the argument.
They just find the 7% of the argument they disagree with so they can throw out 100% of the argument ... even if they agree with 93% of the argument.
12 - You'll see this argument applied in two other cases.
a) When a professional wants to move slowly.
b) When a professional doesn't want to change.
In both cases, they block progress by picking on 7% of the argument.
a) When a professional wants to move slowly.
b) When a professional doesn't want to change.
In both cases, they block progress by picking on 7% of the argument.
13 - Consultants see this stuff ... every day.
The professional doesn't see this stuff, so the professional thinks they're being clever.
The consultant sees through it, and knows how to correspondingly counter-attack.
The professional doesn't see this stuff, so the professional thinks they're being clever.
The consultant sees through it, and knows how to correspondingly counter-attack.
P.P.S.: Another red flag for honest consultants?
When professionals nix your customer-driven research because they read an research piece paid for by Oracle or IBM or Microsoft and written by Forrester and the article contradicts what you said.
This happens every day.
When professionals nix your customer-driven research because they read an research piece paid for by Oracle or IBM or Microsoft and written by Forrester and the article contradicts what you said.
This happens every day.
15 - It means that the professional doesn't have original ideas and is borrowing ideas from "credible" (and "credible" is subject to interpretation) sources to look smart.
My own staff used to do this at Nordstrom.
My own staff used to do this at Nordstrom.
16 - My analysts analyzed actual Nordstrom customer behavior a professional ... maybe in IT or in the Credit Division ... would say "Yeah, but Forrester Research did a study sponsored by Oracle and they said omnichannel robotic warehouse systems will increase sales by up to 22%."
17 - You'd have to navigate those waters carefully. Remember, my own analysts analyzed our own customer data.
But the IT or Credit Division employee didn't want to be shown up, so they'd try to trump my analysts with alleged Forrester Research Credibility to look smart.
But the IT or Credit Division employee didn't want to be shown up, so they'd try to trump my analysts with alleged Forrester Research Credibility to look smart.
18 - "Do you think that a Forrester Research analyst is wrong? Do you?"
You'd get that line of thinking.
Yeah, I think the Forrester Research analyst is wrong. They're wrong constantly. They authored omnichannel nonsense that never came true.
You'd get that line of thinking.
Yeah, I think the Forrester Research analyst is wrong. They're wrong constantly. They authored omnichannel nonsense that never came true.
19 - Now as a consultant you have to tread even more carefully, you can't just tell them they're morons or you don't get paid.
But you do have to have empathy and articulate why your viewpoint is credible, and you can't get defensive because professionals feed on that stuff.
But you do have to have empathy and articulate why your viewpoint is credible, and you can't get defensive because professionals feed on that stuff.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
