Consulting's Template Trap

Don’t let templates kill your transformation.  

Frameworks should guide thinking, not replace it. 

In this episode of Beyond the Billable Hour, Fionn O’Toole is joined by emagine’s Aires Noronha, Industry Lead for Banking, and Zeeshan Ahmad, Industry Lead for Energy and Utilities, to explore the consulting template trap. 

“We have a framework for that” can sound reassuring. But too often, it hides a one-size-fits-all approach that ignores the reality of the work: context, regulation, customers, operations and the constraints teams face every day. 

This isn’t a conversation against frameworks. It’s about knowing when a framework helps change happen, and when it becomes a cage that stops people thinking. 

Using banking and energy as practical examples, Aires and Zeeshan discuss why principles can travel across industries, but context can’t. They also explain why hybrid teams perform better when they combine external expertise, internal knowledge, shared accountability, and a clear focus on outcomes. 

Listen to the full episode to hear the questions clients should ask before buying certainty in a slide deck. 

Chapters: 

• Intro (00:00) 
• Why “We Have a Framework” Feels Reassuring (01:36) 
• Scaffolding or Cage? (04:29) 
• Reality Checks from Energy and Banking (05:14) 
• False Progress and Generic Delivery (08:18) 
• When Numbers Look Good on Slides (15:01) 
• What Actually Transfers Across Industries (21:17) 
• Why Hybrid Teams Outperform (24:45) 
• Questions Clients Should Ask (27:30) 
• What great consulting looks like (33:40) 

Transcript

Fionn:  

We have a template for that. It sounds like reassurance, like reduced risk, like a framework for progress. But sometimes it's not a framework at all. It's a cage in disguise, and all it can do is turn transformation into theater.  

Welcome to Beyond the Billable Hour by emagine, the podcast where we explore what really happens in the consulting industry and how behind all the slides, poor industry practices lead to an erosion of client’s trust. In this episode, we'll be exploring how templated thinking kills transformation, what that actually costs organizations, and why hybrid teams outperform. Now this episode isn't anti framework, it's about the difference between frameworks that help deliver change and the kind of templates that just stop you thinking. 

I'm your host Fionn O'Toole. And this week joining me to break the mold are two of emagine’s sharpest minds: Aires Noronha, industry lead in banking, and Zeeshan Ahmad, our industry lead in energy and utilities. We won't be doing deep dives into their respective industries, but we will use each sector as a reality check. Because if something only works in a deck, it doesn't work at all.  
 
Gentlemen, it's wonderful to have you both here. 

Aires: 

Likewise 

 
Zeeshan: 

Likewise, happy to be here.  
 

Fionn: 
Let's talk about templates and templated first approaches. And I think the question that comes to my mind is this often can be something that clients can be happy to hear: “We have a framework for that, we have a template for that”. So why does this land so well? I know frameworks can feel comforting. They can promise certainty. They suggest something has been done already. But what do you think leaders are really buying when they buy into a consultancy framework?  
 

Zeeshan: 
I can, I can give it a crack first. Right. So I think the idea that you have some sort of method to the madness where you have done this before, you've got a bit of an experience on this where you know the pitfalls, you know what to look out for. Just like, have you driven before or is this you being on the road for the first time? Right, it's the level of comfort for the passenger.  

So it's the same. I think where you might be leading to is when you just stay on one track and you say, this is what my Bible says, and I'm going to stick to that, right? Your script needs to be nuanced. You need to understand your environment, and you need to adapt your template to the environment you are in. That's where the pitfall maybe is. But, uh, the level of comfort that you've done this before, you know, the pitfalls. You understand the risk elements. Uh, you know what to look for. Uh, there is a bit of a method that you're coming in with that, that is important, right? That brings that level of comfort.  

Aires: 

Yeah, I totally agree. So basically, um, if you look at what a framework brings, I would say probably it brings you a lot of the pre-work or the cumbersome work that sometimes we need to repeat in every single project. More on the technology side, as we say, uh, it gives you a North Star. But having said this, my main concerns about using frameworks, okay, I'm all for it. And I think that we need to have them is if they bound what you are doing. Because when we are really talking about business transformation, there is no one size fits all. Okay, so we really need to understand what are we really trying to achieve. And based on that, yes, frameworks can help. Frameworks can be a good way to reduce the time to market. Perfect. That can be a good way to reassure, our, uh, our customers that, yes, we've done it and we know how to do it. And above all, we know what not to do because most of the lessons learned from the past is exactly what not to do and where things fail. Um, and based on that, yes, frameworks are good, and they should be used, as long as they are flexible and nimble enough for us to adapt to what we are really listening from our customers and really implementing after. 

Fionn: 

So I think that's the distinction maybe that we're exploring on this episode. We talked a lot about the word building. And so a framework can be like scaffolding, right? If you're building a building, building a house. Um, in this case it's supporting thinking maybe rather than a worker's boots, but it's helping you build. And the difference maybe is sometimes “best practice” can be deciding the answer before you've really understood the problem. Would that be right?  

Aires: 

Yes,  

Zeeshan: 

Yes.  

Fionn: 

And I was wondering, Zeeshan, in the energy sector, you know, this is an industry with a lot of operational realities. Is that something that you see popping up in specific ways?  

Zeeshan: 

Absolutely. And to some degree, it's, uh, a little bit of, uh, agnostic to just energy or utilities, right. But, uh, what if you go back to that nuanced side of things, right. Uh, different environments have different regulations, taking things from one set of environment and plugging it into another and saying, well, it works in this one, it should work in that one. It doesn't work like that, right? Uh, you take your different value streams, uh, your order to cash process or your procure to pay or whatever. Everything is nuanced.  

Everything has its own attributes and dynamics. So, uh, taking one template or taking one framework and say our client collects their cash a certain way from their customers, be it the client, a business or a or a normal consumer. It's not repeatable unless you nuance it, unless you sort of make it friendly to the house that you are in. That's that's at least how I see it in utilities and energy.  

Aires: 

Well, on the finance sector, especially in banking, as we all know, it's a highly regulated market.  

Fionn:  
Of course. 
 

Aires: 
Okay. So there are of course a lot of things that you cannot really change the way that you do it or I cannot innovate saying, I will not report this kind of data to my specific regulator because I don't want to I want to do it in a different way. No, you will need to do it. It's there. You do it according to the regulations.  

Uh, one of the main things here is that I'm also a bit wary when we start using these kind of frameworks and these kind of restrictions. Is the financial market right now is really, really changing. Okay. The requirements, the speed of change is huge, with the entries of new players, with everything that is fintech and blockchain and all these kind of things. And if you adhere to those kind of frameworks and if you are really bounded by what we are receiving, sometimes we kill the innovation and killing the innovation at this moment.  

Um, I think that, um, the real challenge is for banks in particular at the moment is how can I still be relevant in my customers, in my customers day to day life? And the only way to do it is through innovation. And you can only achieve that innovation. Really having a good sense of my business, what my customers need. How can I be relevant for them and then have the capability and the infrastructure internally and infrastructure? When I talk about infrastructure, I talk about people. I'm talking about processes. The processes inside the financial institutions need to be aligned with these kind of needs need to be automated. We need agentic AI on top of that.  

And of course then we need the technology as leverage for that. Okay. If you just invest in technology, technology is a shiny tool that we have inside the house that will not do anything for us. We need to have technology, people and process fully aligned in order to be able to, um, be that element of change and really innovate in what we are doing, even though we are in a highly regulated market where we need to comply with a lot of rules and a lot of regulations.  

Fionn: 

I think something you mentioned there, which was maybe especially interesting, was, you know, if you just stick necessarily with, with the template in some of these innovations, you, you kind of you quash that.  

And maybe one of the pitfalls in this kind of template-first thinking is that often what we see is maybe false progress. We're following a map, but what we're maybe seeing in reality is that our dot is moving on the screen at Google Maps, but we're not actually making much progress on the street.  

Aires: 

Definitely. The main question there is, um, what was done with my competitor or what was done in the next door? Does that really work for me? That does really work for my customers. Okay. So just repeating what has been done. Uh, it's a major jump to to failure. Okay. So we really need to understand, we really need - I'm a big fan of customer experience, so this is one of my major passions. Um, if you are not aligned with what your customers want, desire, and if you are not aligned in their day to day lives, you will fail. So you can be replicating the story of success, of a competitor, of someone that is next to you, that is. And you will fail because your customers are different. Your customers choose you because of who you are and how you can differentiate yourself and what you can provide and put in their day to day lives. So replicating just a known solution, it doesn't work. We at emagine when we bring in, and we usually say we bring always the A-Team. Okay, so, uh, this means that we are able to mix the business knowledge, knowledge, the innovation part of the of the business, but we don't have, uh, pre-built teams or pre-built solutions where we come in and say one size fits all. We will always find the right person for the right job, regardless of the the, challenge or regardless of the difficulty of that job. And that is, in fact, I think, what differentiates emagine in this landscape. 

Fionn: 

I think that's really interesting. And I think when we think about the delivery model that you just talked about and not having those pre-made teams, of course, the the headline, right, is that you're getting the A-Team. You're getting something that's very customized or specialized towards, uh, the challenge that you're having. But I think what's interesting to me is also like, what is the kind of second order effects of when you don't have that? And obviously there's there's top line effects, right? You're maybe getting somebody who is on a bench and is pushed into a project. But I think when, when it, when it's, it's not a kind of made to order solution. You get quite generic deliverables, and those often really ignore real constraints and risk involved, because there's always going to be some kind of risk involved, it doesn't disappear, it just kind of moves.  

In finance, in in energy, what kind of risks actually get pushed downstream uh, when an approach is is too generic? 
 

Zeeshan: 
I would like to combine both what he was talking about in a way.  
 

Fionn: 
Please do 

Zeeshan: 

Right, and then come to this one. So I fully agree with him. Uh, what he says about your he calls it customer experience. I would say user experience, user journey, right. That is where the innovation happens. That is where you what I was saying earlier nuanced the the method. Right. You understand that this is how the process flows. This is how things go or a transaction happens or a service happens or whatever. And that is where the inefficiencies are. That is where non value adds are. That is where you do your innovation. And that is also where, coming back to your question with regards to pushing the risk downstream is: if you are not putting the right team with the right experience, where you understand the environment, i.e. the customer or the sector or the regulations that you're operating in. If you are not putting the right people and right experience in terms of the technology or the process or the method that you're going to address or you're going to look into, then you are going to just take a checklist, you're going to go through it. You'll say, okay, yes, I have done the mapping and I've done this and, uh, the template suggests that I should be able to get a yield of 20% efficiencies in the process. And, uh, for that, I should optimize this and I should optimize that and, Mr. Customer, here you have it, right?  

Fionn: 

Yeah.  
 

Zeeshan: 
Now, the problem with that is that you might do it on paper. You might see those synergies or value pockets and you're realizing. But when it comes to the P&L, when it comes to reporting to the board, reporting to the market, reporting to the analysts, that is not there, and we see it time and time and time again. We've we've got mega examples of that, right. Super mergers happen. And a few years later, without quoting names and stating names, uh, de-mergers happening right where the values is not realized or the synergies are not seen.  

And that is exactly this, that, you know, someone took a template, someone, uh, went down that checklist. They didn't nuance it. They didn't put the attributes to where they belonged in the process and that is what Aires was trying to say as well, right? That, uh, we put that best in class cohort or pyramid or whatever you want to call it in front of you, where you have the right mix. And what our, emagine’s, operating model brings is that we have a set of our staff, but then we also have access to half a million, uh, super experts who are very well vetted, who are very well evaluated. And we can cherry pick from that, and we can put that cohort or that pyramid together with, what you call an A-Team or what you call bestshore. 
 
Aires:
The emagine way of doing it. 

Zeeshan: 
The emagine way of doing it.  

Right. Uh, and I think that is where the value is as well. And if I could just add one last piece to that… 

Fionn: 

Please do, please do.  
 

Zeeshan: 
Uh, another thing that I feel quite proud about is we are not like a disease that we come in and we want to stay there and stay there and stay there. We come in with a plan, that this is our end game. This is what the business outcomes are that you're looking for. And we will at that point in time when we've reached those business outcomes or we are close to reaching those business outcomes, we will start making a plan. How do we train you? How do we make you self-sufficient that midway through the flight you take control and you run with it, so that we become that value adding partner that comes in helps and then also enables you to run your ship right.  

Fionn: 

Something we've seen a lot talked about in the consulting industry has been this erosion of trust. Right. That consulting has kind of built a name for itself, sometimes as snake oil salesmen or the professional class of con artists. And we've all heard some pretty, you know, stinging stories, horror stories,
 
Aires: 
Harsh stories! 

Fionn: 
And I think in some cases very well deserved.. 

Zeeshan: 
Correct 

Fionn: 

Uh, you know, news stories. But we are, of course, consulting, and we need to think about that trust that we're building with the client. And I think whether it is the mega mega value actual realization or it is at a small level. I mean, I feel like when outcomes are pre decided, you know, “our template says we can realize a 20% gain from this”, like you mentioned, I think people stop engaging. I know, I'm sure we've all had an experience, whether you were in your first job on a shop floor or maybe in a later job in life, but, you know, somebody tells you this is the target that I have decided and you think it's divorced from reality. How will I ever reach that? Right? And you, you kind of feel like a passenger in that journey, not an owner. 

So one thing I'd love for our listeners to be able to hear is what is a moment where a leader should actually pause and say, “this feels pre decided. You know, everything you're promising me, you know how to drive the car, it sounds like. But you've already decided the destination and it's not necessarily the destination that we're trying to pick.” 

Aires: 

Well Fionn, I think that one of the things that consultancies need to realize, and I think that we are realizing that very fast, is that more and more, our customers are very self-aware of what their business means and what their business is, okay? Um, I would say that in the past, there were a lot of businesses that really didn't have that view of that self notion of what they are and what they need. Uh, and, um, it was also comfortable to bring in someone from outside saying, “well, in this region or in this continent, a typical customer like you is doing this and that and that and is gaining this and that and that”. 
 
Those are the numbers that right now, whenever I see that in a in a PowerPoint and I've been there, I put them in PowerPoints and presentations… I look at those numbers and I always take them with, uh, uh… a little bit of
 
Fionn: 

A grain of salt maybe. 
 
Aires: 
Yeah, a grain of salt probably is the best way to say it. Uh, and the problem about these numbers that we put on PowerPoints, uh, based on previous experience, they make sense in that specific experience, in that specific timeframe. 

Fionn:
That context.

Aires: 
And in that context. The problem here is that, like I said, we need to be nimble more and more. And these these industries really require us to be nimble, to be there with with our customers and to be with them side by side, really listening. They know their businesses. Okay. We can bring of course, experience from what is being done in other countries. What is being done. We are of course, probably a bit better, more we are a bit more exposed, let's say like these to other realities, but it's their business. So and we need to listen to them and help them on the journey to achieve that. So when we go with predefined solutions, “this has worked in the States”. Come on, we are not in the States. Mm. Okay. We have a different reality. We have different regulations. “Oh this works in Asia”. Perfect. But Asia is Asia okay. We work with Japanese banks and the culture. And the way that they work is completely different than the banks that we work in in Europe. Like I said, this is not just technology or just people or just processes. It's really a mix. So either you are able to see the full context and be nimble and really help your customers to achieve that or you will fail.  

Zeeshan: 

If I could add there. So slight divergence. Uh, I think I think the numbers are good. I would put it as the benchmarks in terms of cost to serve, right. How much does my finance department cost for to serve blah, blah blah. I think that benchmark is good. I think, uh, knowing that someone is being able to do that at £0.20 per invoice issue to a customer or whatever, that is a good number. What I agree with you on is maybe dissecting it and unpacking it further and understanding, okay, how much of that is driven by the environment, the cost of labor, the regulations around having labor, and how much of that is actually efficiencies built into the system and the process and your engagement with the client and so on and so on and so forth. Coming back to your point on erosion of trust, I agree that look, a lot of the customers are actually best in class in what they do. They are FTSE 100, FTSE 50, FTSE 500, Fortune 500. They are transporting hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people across the globe and whatnot. So it's not as if they don't know what they are doing right? And when they are calling you in, it's not as if they don't know how to run their business anymore. It is to diagnose on a certain problem, or maybe just for innovation, there is no problem, but they want to just, you know, find that investment for the future. How do you stay at the forefront? Right? 

And that is where again, coming in with a template, coming in with “I need ten people to get this done” and it is ten bodies and not how much industry experience am I bringing in my pyramid?  

Fionn: 

Yeah. 

Zeeshan: 

How much process understanding? Business rules? How much technology understanding, right am I bringing? Uh, so I think it always comes down to how are you nuancing everything, starting from your team that is going to go in, starting from understanding the actual challenge and the actual environment that the client is operating in. 

Aires: 

The context.  

Zeeshan: 

The context, right.  

Aires: 

Yeah.  

Fionn: 

So I think one thing I've been thinking about with this, obviously you have expertise in different industries, and I think the context is is interesting because I think maybe principals, good or bad, can carry over or can cross over, but the context doesn't necessarily. And so I know before we sat down to record this Aires, we talked about banking and how heavily regulated that industry is. So I think an open question to to both of you are there are there areas, are there examples where you say, you know, this genuinely crosses industries very, very easily?  

And also as a counterpoint, you know, what do you think is maybe something Zee, that consultants might think this is universal but doesn't actually apply in the energy industry. 
 
Zeeshan: 
If I if I get cracking with it first, right. So what is the industry agnostic. Is definitely technology like we were discussing, right. Uh, there is a lot of technology building blocks stating Aires's thoughts here, right. But, uh, they are the same. Your financial reporting is the same. Your procurement process, how you actually go through the process is the same. How your fundamentals for engineering are the same. Your document controls, your feasibility, those items and those elements in putting that framework together, they are always the same. Uh, where it moves different is what I was saying right in the beginning that the regulation part, the environment, what Aires calls right, that changes, uh, The, the region that you play in, right? So understanding those nuances, understanding the environment someone is playing in and then shaping your solutions, shaping your team, shaping your template to meet that environment. That is where sort of the agnosticism dies down and, you know, localization, uh, becomes important.  

Aires: 

Yeah, I'd say definitely. So, uh, I would say that the building blocks for, uh, if you go for an IT architecture, they might be similar. Okay. And, uh, if you look at a helicopter view of the of those blocks, yes, we will have the back-end systems. You will have your integration systems, your front-end systems. All the systems are your ERP, your GL, it's there. Now the specific things, yes, they will change. For example, if you just drill down on one specific thing, let's say you are onboarding customers just in banking. One of the major things that you need to do onboarding is your know your customer, um, AML, anti-money laundering, all these kind of things. This will change base from region to region. So there are specific things inside specific industries that change based on in on specific regions that you are working on because of regulations. Now imagine from business to business, it will of course have even bigger, bigger differences there. So yes, I would say we can have a general overview that there are building blocks that can be replicated or the general idea of them. Yes, they are replicated, they can be replicated through industries. But of course there is very, very, very specific things that will never be replicated and we will need to have that specific and inside knowledge on that specific, uh, area and subject on an industry and even inside the industry, on a region, on a specific regulation.  

Fionn: 

One thing I'd love to circle back to a little bit is we kind of started with the thesis that hybrid teams outperform, and I think you guys already laid that out a lot. And of course, hybrid teams are not just someone from a consultancy and someone from, uh, you know, an internal side. It's it's shared outcomes. It's shared accountability. Um, and it's giving internal context the power to to change plans. But that shared accountability, I think that's maybe one of the pivots that I think I want the listeners to to catch, because that I think really comes back to that idea of handing over to the client not being that built in for life, uh, disease, I think, as you termed it.  

Aires:  

Yep. 

Fionn: 

Um, and ultimately, I think that's maybe one of the key things that I see as transforming frameworks, transforming templates from ultimately being the product or the method, or even just the theatre of what's actually happening to getting back to the scaffolding that's helping your building rise.  

So it's helping your team actually adapt to reality during the project or before the project, during the project, and ultimately after the project as well. Instead of just defending a template, defending, this is what we're going to do. We're going to come in and deliver it, and then you'll rely on us forever to maintain this status quo.  

Aires: 

Well, I would say that you nailed it. So. But basically, if you ask, emagine, does emagine leave the customers? No, we don't leave the customers. Okay. For sure. Uh, of course, that we have customers where we are working for years and years and years. What we believe is that the customer should own and should really be the responsible for their business, meaning that when we entered, we entered with a specific, uh, overview of being able to deliver this to, um, put your people, uh, on the driving wheel, and we have customers where we are there for years and years and years, and we hope to continue so we have this trusted advisory role with them that allows us to be there to to complement their their skills and what they need, and of course, to to help them grow a little bit more to, to the future. Regarding, uh, what you were saying. Yeah. So, uh, one size doesn't fit all. That's one of the things that I really need to, to to stress out here. We really need to do, and our way of working is really to go in to listen, to really try to innovate with our customers and then bring in the right person at the right time to, to handle this. Okay. You will not see us: “Oh who do I have in the bench? I have two guys that just graduated or a guy that is there that has been doing GL, and now he's going to be the orchestration. Why? Because it's the guy I have”. That will not happen. 

Fionn: 

Speaking of clients, as we start to wrap up this discussion, I'd love to give something kind of concrete. So I'd love to ask you both if somebody's listening to this and they're about to hire a consulting partner. What are some questions that they could ask that kind of help cut through that template thinking maybe give an indication, is this maybe following a framework but with my context in mind, or am I being presented an item off the menu that is made the same way every time. 

Zeeshan: 

I'm asking, how are you going to do this for me? And explain to me why it is this way that you suggest that you're going to. Having that two way dialogue, understanding that do me, I emagine, as your, you know, service provider to whatever the solution is or whatever the challenge is that you are wanting me to look. Do I really comprehend that? Do I really, uh, understand the importance and the strategic relevance of that to you? Right. Uh, and then while trying to understand that, of course I will bring references, I will say this part of the solution we have done there, and it has worked very, very well. And if I put that element of the solution from another experience, where it can be similar industry, it can be similar workflow. So essentially what I'm trying to say is making me as emagine or as your consulting partner. Explain to you why. What I am thinking works for you, right? How it works for you. It becomes more important than just have you done this before and where have you done it? And how much did you improve right? 

So. So I think understanding, uh, my sort of, uh, understanding of your environment is what becomes important. What do you think?  

Aires: 

I agree, that's one of the first things for sure to ask. Another thing that, uh, whenever I'm on that side of the bench, let's say, like this or not, the other side that I ask is, okay, uh, you're in this journey with me, okay? You've done it before. Where have you failed?  

Zeeshan: 

Mhm.  

Fionn 

Mhm.  

Aires: 

Why and how did you resolve it.  

Fionn: 

Yeah.  

Aires: 

Okay. Because that for me is really one of the most important things is to really understand what, what are the pitfalls that people are foreseeing in this journey. Because we when we go and we all know, we've all been in sales, uh, in sales processes, everything is pink and unicorns and all these kind of things. But the reality is not like that.  

Fionn: 

Yeah.  

Aires: 

So. And, um, one other question that I always like to ask is, okay, so when everything fails, how are we going to take it forward?  

Fionn: 

Yeah, I think that's… 

Zeeshan: 

Resilience.  

Fionn: 

The cliché is that the person who never makes mistakes never makes anything. 

Zeeshan: 

Correct.  

Fionn: 

But I think the person who doesn't have any room to make mistakes or the consultancy or the client, you know, whatever it is, if you never have the room to make mistakes, you will always deliver something mediocre. 

Aires: 

Yeah.  

Fionn: 

Because you will never take the risks. You will never, uh, learn from those mistakes and actually figure out, well, what happens when something hits the fan and how do we respond to that, and how do we take that forward from the next time?  

Zeeshan: 

Real life story. Sorry. 

Fionn: 

Yeah.  

Zeeshan: 

Interjecting here. Right. But, uh, real life story, um, many, many years ago, uh, pre consulting days, uh, when I was in the industry, uh, we were in a dialogue with a client where it was, uh, a game changer contract. Right? Uh, hundreds of millions of dollars, and the first thing client asked was, what is your skin in this game? How are you going to share the risk? And, uh, it was, uh the first time we went into working with the client and contracting and, uh, commercially being more involved in the outcomes, uh, where we were also going to share the risks and the rewards. Right. And in the history that was or till that point, uh, in the history, it became one of the best performing contracts and engagements that we had with the client. Right. And it was not the kind of environment where or contract, where the client felt a chip on their shoulder saying, you are robbing me because you are. No, I it was actually high fiving all the way through. I mean, like it was high fiving on the day we signed the contract. It was high fiving six months later, it was high fiving 12 and 18 months later, because we both had the skin in the game, we had the resilience. We failed together. We learned from the experience together. We had a roadmap to recover. Uh, and that is what matters. Joint risks, uh, taking responsibility. So I fully agree with what you're saying.  
 

Aires: 
And especially when you're doing innovation, um, because when you're innovating, nobody has done it. 

Fionn: 

Yeah 

Zeeshan: 

Yeah. 

Aires: 

You will be the first one. And the best way to to see is who do you want to have on that journey with you is. What are your ideas? Perfect. How will you implement them? Perfect. What happens when everything fails?  

Fionn: 

Yeah 

Aires: 

Okay, so, uh, will you be next to me? Okay. Are you in the trenches with me doing this? Or you will be the guy at the end just pointing at me and laughing. No. Come on. We really need - that is really what I look for when I am on that side of the bench. Do I really have a partner? Okay. What can I expect from that partner? That's, that's the what I will be looking for, for sure. I'm of course I'm giving the that the technology and the business knowledge is there for sure. But above that is who do I want to have next to me in this journey?  

Fionn: 

I think who's the person you want beside you in the trenches, is a very good way of putting it. 

I think let's wrap things up on a positive note, because I think there we've heard some really wonderful examples, but we have talked a lot about, uh, erosions of trust and kind of negative practices. And of course, overall, maybe you know how sticking too much with a template can can kill that transformation. But obviously great consulting does exist and hopefully our listeners will, will have heard some of the proof of that. But if I could challenge you both to sum up maybe in three words or less, what does great consulting look like? 
 
Zeeshan: 
I would almost repeat everything that I've said, or one way that I've used the most. Uh, it is nuanced. It is, uh, shared risk, right? Or skin in the game. And it is business outcomes focused but on the journey. So nuanceing the journey with that business outcomes.  

Aires: 

I would have to say innovation, partnership and trust. Those from the other three words that define what a business consulting, a very successful business consulting journey is. So you need to be able to innovate and bring value to the customer, okay. You need to be a partner because like I said, there are good days. There are bad days. But in the end, the good days need need to be much bigger than the bad days. And trust. Because if you don't have trust on the person that you have next to you, it's not a consultancy project. You are not doing a good job with your customer. So if you don't have these three, it's almost a failure for me.  

Fionn: 

And I think that's a wonderful note to wrap things up on. Zee, Aires, thank you both so much for for joining today. 

Aires: 

Thank you. 

Fionn: 

Its been an absolute pleasure.  

Zeeshan: 

Likewise 

Fionn: 

I feel smarter already and I'm sure our listeners do as well. Um, I think if I can just sum up maybe where we've landed, we can see that frameworks, they can really absolutely help. Um, but sticking too close to, to a template can hurt. It's like, I don't know, following a map on your phone without looking up and seeing where you are, walking straight into a wall. And I will admit, that is definitely something I've done. But if the method is actually becoming the product, what you're getting maybe is is theatre. Whereas if a team is hybrid, if it's accountable, frameworks will actually earn their place and the outcomes will will show up and stick around.  

If you've enjoyed this episode, please consider subscribing to Beyond the Billable Hour, a podcast by emagine. And if you're about to buy “Best Practice” as a template, ask one extra question is this scaffolding for thinking or a cage dressed up as certainty?  

Bye bye.