But we look at many consultants in the circle of friends, and their introductions always serve or consult world-renowned enterprises such as Volkswagen, BMW, Mercedes-Benz and Apple. Or have provided training or consulting services for "thousands" or even "tens of thousands" enterprises. Relatively speaking, my introduction is really not worth mentioning!
But for these world-wide enterprises, have they really gone deep into them and really changed? If all the messy things are attributed to their own achievements, it will be thin. Perhaps for these enterprises, it is the efforts of these enterprises for decades or even hundreds of years that have achieved all this. Most teachers only provide support services according to the needs of others, far from "optimization"! Perhaps only a few teachers can have the ability, and only on a certain platform, with the right opportunities, can they have the opportunity to change these big enterprises!
For those teachers who have provided services for thousands of enterprises, it is even more "virtual". I believe that since they said so, they must have done it. However, this kind of training may be similar to a concert. Clap your hands with the audience in front at most. What about interaction and problem solving?
This is actually a question of "reality". Only by truly going deep into an enterprise, truly understanding an enterprise, and changing this enterprise through corresponding optimization projects can this enterprise get real benefits, which is the "real" work.
In this era, if you have served these well-known enterprises, it means that your "label" is good, and "label" is good, which often means good business. If you have worked in many enterprises, it often means that you are "well informed" and "well connected", so it also means good business. After all, it is understandable that most business owners also pursue famous, hard-branded and influential teachers. It is really impossible for a teacher to provide services to so many enterprises or well-known enterprises without two brushes. Its popularity determines that it is the lowest risk for business owners to find such teachers.
But can these really bring benefits to business owners? A few years ago, I found dozens of well-known teachers to do training or consulting projects. I found that these teachers are really competent, and their training is really simple. No matter the theory or the case, the training is "advanced". But once the business owners ask specific questions, most teachers either avoid talking about them, or the final answer will come back: you need to analyze your actual situation in detail, and you need to combine these with your own actual situation to become your own implementation plan. Therefore, judging from the feedback from enterprises, once they go back to the company to think about how to implement it, it will be difficult to "land".
Judging from the results of consulting projects, most well-known teachers rarely provide specific solutions to problems, and most of them still provide macro ideas or routines, and then let enterprises seek specific solutions themselves, so the effect is very limited. Of course, this may have something to do with the compensation we can't provide. After all, the more famous teachers have more valuable time, they can't stay in a company for too long.
I've been working together for a long time and I'm familiar with it. I found that most famous teachers are competent, why not "ground"? Because the teacher chose the way with the lowest cost, that is, "routine". Standardized textbooks can save teachers a lot of time in compiling textbooks, and because of the case or logic of large enterprises, the probability of "mistakes" is the lowest, which is easy to cause a * * * relationship with business owners. From this point of view, it saves time and effort, has low cost and is easy to get customers. Why not? This is also the reason why teachers choose "virtual".
On the whole, the current consulting market is mixed. On the one hand, the voice of the market is that consultants need to settle down and help enterprises upgrade in a down-to-earth manner. On the other hand, the market demand is fast and effective. So some consultants do what they like, regardless of whether it is practical or sustainable. This has also led other teachers to follow suit and pursue more orders, otherwise they will fall into the trap of nothing to do. The end result of doing more is less targeted thinking, less specific analysis, less targeted countermeasures, and more "universal standardized teaching materials" and "fixed consulting routines". Although it may not be completely wrong, it has always been superficial and "virtual" (such as training forms, etc. ) rather than "real" (such as profit rate, etc.). ), this is the sorrow of the domestic consulting industry!