What are the strengths and weaknesses of management consulting frameworks?

I’ve used many frameworks in consulting, teaching and research. I use them as tools for reasoning. They serve to guide data collection and organize the data once collected. They don’t provide answers…humans do that by carefully exploring the implications of the data once the framework has been properly applied.

A framework is a tool to simplify a problem, so you can understand its parts. A hammer is a tool, good for nails. You don’t use it to cut wood.

A framework can provide a systematic and organised method to analyze problems, making it easier to break down complex issues into manageable parts. It also helps in communication across the team an the organization. However a framework is to be used with discernment and flexibility.

In my more than 40 years of Management Consulting/ Management Advisor roles, I never formally used the Frameworks. Our approach used to be Creative involving the people affected. We used to derive solutions from ideas lying dormant in the people being affected. Quite often, the solutions used to be Analytical and Creative Aggregation of such ideas and criticisms culled from quite a few of the people affected. Many times, the mistakes and wrong decisions of The Top Management were brought into focus and with their active participation and endorsement, Ready To Implement Solutions would emerge. Informal and Formal used to be Parallel Processes !

A good framework is built on experience and incorporates the consultant's perspective and expertise built from analyzing and solving similar problems in many different situations. It enables the consultant to apply this body of experience to future clients and situations in an efficient way. For example, we have a framework to for equitable process design. No matter what organization or talent process we are redesigning, we always pull the framework up to help make sure we are building fairness and equity into the system we are designing. Every time we apply the framework, we see something we need to adjust in the solution to make it more equitable. Without the framework, these opportunities would likely be missed.

I feel a bit uncomfortable with this question because the best frameworks are not necessarily those of management consultants: Micheal Porter's value chain or five forces being examples. In my view the best frameworks are tautologies: you cannot prove or disprove their correctness or usefulness. They are logically the right way to think. Take strategy. The core challenge for most commercial organisations is how to win customers and make a profit when faced with competitors. Hence using Michael Porter's value chain and his concept of competitive advantage is clearly the best way to think about strategy. But, beware the consultant framework that does not have academic underpinnings: it can just be a marketing ploy.

Any good framework will give structure to your consulting approach. One size does not fit all though, and it is the job of the consultant to understand what framework best applies. In my experience, I have found that while we need to keep the framework in mind, we also need to discern when and where we divert, and why. It’s a GPS of sorts and while a good guide, reliance on it only makes sense when intelligence is also applied. It will benefit the consultant and client to make sure to continue applying reason and logic to the journey and use the framework as a guide rather than a destination.

Frameworks are valuable - they are tools for the artisan - and just like the artisan - we must "love" the "picture" and the "process" more than the tools. If the tools limit the process and fail to produce the picture that "works" - we must be willing to find or build new tools or adjust the process.

While frameworks are a very important part of the big picture, they fail to capture the human element - emotions, positive ( like loyalty, empathy, generosity, dedication, going the extra mile) or the negative ones ( you know what they are) . The human factors are key. Please do not neglect these. Factor them in your choices for framework leadership.

Sometimes, frameworks can also contradict each other in their conclusions. If this happens, go with the outcome that best aligns with your strategic goals. Another option is to go with the best of three approach.

The false sense of confidence that ‘the solution lies within these boundaries’ is an all too common outcome stemming from over-reliance on or over-adherence to frameworks. As others have said, frameworks are summations of tried and true practices and perspectives, generalized enough to be broadly applicable. The real work is in contriving a context-specific solution architecture from an existing framework or frameworks, in conjunction with full consideration and selective incorporation of everything that lies beyond. Think of it as a “best practices” vs “best fit” approach; a contest that has been settled time and time again.

Frameworks are quite useful. But one has to apply common sense, not so common, to tweak it to fit onto specific situations. Without frame work one can not work. Those who say they are not using any actually they using their own without realising.

A sign of inexperience is to be overly prescriptive about frameworks. Worse than that, I have found that certain tools operate a little like jargon - as a way of communicating membership of a clique or group. So knowledge of a particular tool (which is frequently just a new instantiation of an enduring idea) is worn as a badge of honour. Unfortunately this gets in the way of clear thinking and responsiveness to circumstance.

Frameworks are like Swiss Army knives – versatile but not always the perfect tool for every job. It's crucial to wield them with a craftsman's touch, not as a hammer seeking nails. Use them to illuminate, not obscure; to simplify complexity, not complicate simplicity. They should spark innovation, not stifle it under the guise of best practices. Remember, even the most elegant framework is no substitute for original thought and tailored solutions.

Complexity is another consideration. While frameworks provide structure, overly complex models can hinder effective communication and client engagement. Convincing clients of their relevance sometimes requires a delicate approach, especially when faced with resistance to change. From a practical standpoint, I've found that successful consulting lies in smart adaptation. While frameworks offer a roadmap, their application demands a thoughtful and customized approach. Balancing the strengths and weaknesses ensures that the consulting process remains dynamic, innovative, and, most importantly, aligned with the specific challenges and opportunities presented by each client.

Los marcos o frameworks fueron desarrollados en su momento para aplicar una teoría o para explicar mejor su aplicación. Dicho esto, no siempre se pueden calcar exactamente igual por diferencias de tiempo y contexto. Muchos autores y firmas los actualizan, otros no pierden vigencia tan rápidamente, pero no siempre aplican en el contexto o no resuelven el problema del cliente. Son herramientas pero no puede uno confiar que como tiene un martillo todos los problemas son clavos. Tienen un sesgo y hay que ser capaces de usarlos de forma práctica o elaborar los propios si se requiere.

Overuse and Stagnation: Consulting frameworks can become overused and lose their effectiveness over time. When consultants rely too heavily on frameworks without critical thinking and creativity, the recommendations may lack originality and fail to address the specific needs of the client. Client Understanding and Buy-In: Some clients may struggle to understand or fully embrace consulting frameworks. The language and concepts used in frameworks can be unfamiliar to non-consultant stakeholders, leading to resistance or misinterpretation of the recommendations.

In my experience as a management consultant and change agent, frameworks are one anchoring piece to delivering client value. Especially helpful in complex operational design, diagnosis or facilitation of systemic embedded change where lots of interconnected topics must be examined or actioned. First decision is Methodology: -Principles or categories for critical thinking - A guide to frame the investigation and final insights. -Frameworks are a great tool. Then, delivery choices: Approach - interviews or surveys - market analysis or established models Activities - How long and how much - Outputs from each - Reasoning and synthesis Tasks - Who and by when Team - Cross-functional voices Client champion - Actor or audience

Frameworks are a structured means to think through the various elements of a project/challenge and extremely helpful make sense of enormous amounts of information available. But they are a starting point and a tool, as noted, and may need to be adapted to suit the situation. Often there is simply too much information, and stakeholders come in with different perspectives...what is relevant or not can get lost without a logical structure and some judgement. Additionally, the language may not always resonate with client, and need to be translated/adapted to be relevant and understood. But all considered, I've found well developed frameworks very helpful over the years!

Use a Structured Approach: Apply the framework in a structured manner, following the recommended steps or stages. This ensures consistency and thoroughness in your analysis. Take into account the inputs, outputs, and dependencies of each step and track your progress to maintain a clear overview of the analysis process. Integrate with Critical Thinking: While frameworks provide structure, they should not replace critical thinking. Engage in thoughtful analysis, challenge assumptions, and consider alternative perspectives. Use the framework as a guide, but also bring your expertise and creativity to identify unique insights and innovative solutions.

In a recent project, on the activation and delivery side, we blended select Agile methods with Prosci's ADKAR model to drive a transformative change for a client. With its iterative and flexible approach, Agile was pivotal in managing the project's development cycle, ensuring adaptability and continuous improvement. Meanwhile, Prosci's ADKAR model (Awareness, Desire, Knowledge, Ability, Reinforcement) provided a structured framework for guiding the organization and its people through the change process. Tailoring/Blending frameworks with adjustments for cultural dynamics tend to yield rapid yet people-centric change, balancing the agility of project execution with the human aspects of change management.

Frameworks serve best when used as a guide but not as a diktat. The freedom exercised within the framework is just as important as the framework itself.

Understand the Purpose: Gain a clear understanding of the purpose and scope of the framework. Identify its intended application areas, such as strategy development, organizational analysis, or process improvement. Knowing the framework's purpose will help you apply it appropriately and align it with the specific problem or objective at hand. Contextualize the Framework: Recognize that frameworks are not one-size-fits-all solutions. Contextualize the framework by considering the unique characteristics of the organization, industry, and problem you are addressing. Adapt the framework to fit the specific context and incorporate relevant factors that may influence the analysis and recommendations.

In my experience frameworks are a good way to start the “How” part of any management consulting engagement. There is however a huge amount of work that needs to be done before getting to this stage. The “what” and the “why” parts are essential to be understood before going into execution mode, and yes I’m conscientious that there are also a vast variety of frameworks to help addressing the “what” and the “why”. At the end of the day the value is in working with a client to help flesh out the real problems, prioritise solutions and ensure the desired business benefits and outcomes are achieved.

Frameworks are fine as a general way to address a complex issue that a company is facing. Take for example Porter’s Five Forces model, it provides a general guide to evaluating an industry. However, if you are providing consulting services you will need to go well beyond general frameworks to be effective. A company looking to understand a new market opportunity can certainly use Porter to get an overall understanding but will need to do in-depth work in many areas. In my experience, some of this includes the current state of the industry and how it will evolve over time. What are your unique capabilities? By entering a new market are you filling a competitive portfolio gap? What is the best approach for entry—greenfield, M&A, etc.

1. Understand the Context: Prioritize understanding the specific problem or situation you are addressing with the management consulting framework. Tailor the framework to fit the context, industry, and organization you are working with. 2. Flexibility and Adaptability: Avoid blindly applying frameworks without considering the unique needs and characteristics of the situation. Be open to modifying or combining frameworks to suit the specific challenges at hand. 3. Holistic Approach: Remember that frameworks are tools, not the ultimate solution. Combine them with critical thinking, domain expertise, and creativity. Look beyond the framework to consider all relevant factors and perspectives.

Framework example types fall into a hierarchy I think: 1- Understand and Organize Big 4 -6 consulting firms have several. Niche firms have crisp ones like Transformation Framework for Lean Operations www.Impetus3.com 2- Target and Define action -Lean six sigma DMAIC or PDCA - Business Operating Model frameworks 3 - Break Apart, Empathize or Design - A3 problem solving from Toyota Production System TPS -Kaizen -IDEO user based design

In my experience the frameworks required by knowledge workers (software, etc) is one that has information flowing both up and down (vertically) and sideways (horizontally) through the enterprise. Pushing decisions down to the lowest responsible level is critical to velocity and power. Agile and Scrum frameworks when done WELL, which is the exception. Command and control fails to address emergent issues well and tends to be dominated by the wants, needs and whims of executives making promises to boards, not confronting what it takes to create value throughput. The focus on value delivery and team, teams of teams solves many of those issues...and frees executives up to create a vision that creates future value in the marketplace.

Acquiring knowledge of various frameworks is valuable, yet the true mastery lies in applying them judiciously. It's not just about learning the frameworks; it's about understanding their applicability and deploying them strategically where they bring the most value. The "5 Whys" Framework: Stands out for its simplicity and effectiveness in root cause analysis. Repeatedly asking "why" to drill down into the underlying causes of a problem unveils deeper issues rather than just addressing surface-level symptoms. Its iterative nature encourages a holistic understanding, aiding in identifying core issues and preventing recurring problems. This structured approach facilitates a comprehensive solution by targeting the root cause.

The right frameworks are an excellent tool. I use a framework that has been tried and tested over many years, in many territories and across many industries. It is a management capability matrix, broken down into: 1.Back office administration 2.Revenue 3.Strategy If properly applied it can show : A. Where a business is today. B. What are the next steps to improvement C. Ideally where the business would like to be in future. It can be used as a road map that demonstrates the progression. The framework will certainly increase the value to any business, by changing the Multiple, especially for an investor

There will never be a definitive list of frameworks because each domain has its own and consultants and academics are incentivised to keep coming up with new ones to sell consulting and books. I compiled a list of the 25 I find most useful for business strategy development and execution at https://www.stratnavapp.com/Articles/strategic-planning-tools

Again, there are many frameworks as the previous practitioner points out. Porter's 5 Forces, BCG Matrix, the Militaries Decision Making Process (known as MDMP), 4Ps of marketing, Robert Stewarts, SWOT, McKinsey 7S Model, Warner Burke's Action Research Model or his Burke-Litwin Change model, The Lean Thinking Model, Six Sigma's DMAIC or DFLSS model, Ishikawa models for root cause analysis, QFD for process design. Kaplan and Norton's Balanced Scorecard. The point is there are tons, that can help and provide perspective and a way to think. But what do you use when, and to get what? Practical experience matters.

Suggest to add McKinsey's 7S Model to the list - useful for organisational diagnoses and design (can also be adapted for AARs)

Mine: Framework of Adaptive Leaders, Leadership, and Organizations that provides a way of connecting the dots from Purpose to Mission to Results. OSD's: Seven Organizational Systems that frames conversation of organization systems performance and organization design.

A Process solution(s) to solve particular problems 6Sigma, DMAIC, PESTEL, SWOT.... frameworks, Balanced Scorecard: Problem and Analysis Matrix-dependent key Management Consulting frameworks

Terrance Power Power's Case Study Analysis and Writer's Handbook is a book that has a number of consulting frameworks. It was a book we used in a strategy class I had with Professor Power and I reference it often.

We wrote 'Essential Management Models' (Routledge 2023) as a compendium of the best management models from the past 50 years. "Rather than a series of independent summaries, the book makes connections between frameworks to expose the overlaps and relationships between them."

"Power's Case Study Analysis and Writer's Handbook" stands as a comprehensive resource packed with a variety of consulting frameworks. I became acquainted with it during a strategy class taught by Professor Power, and since then, it has remained a valuable reference for me, regularly consulted for its wealth of insights and tools.

For those interested in management consulting frameworks, valuable resources include "The Pyramid Principle" by Barbara Minto, which offers insights into structured communication. "Case in Point" by Marc Cosentino is a popular guide for case interview techniques. Victor Cheng's website provides free articles, videos, and podcasts covering management consulting skills and frameworks. These resources serve as excellent tools for learning and improving consulting abilities.

Strategy not working? Don’t look for another framework? Figure out why your strategy isn’t working. Too often if one idea isn’t working, people look for another idea. Here’s a thought - it might not be the idea that is wrong but your execution. Frameworks only give insight on direction, they don’t build investable or deliverable plans, they don’t bring good execution. They don’t bring leadership or the right disciplines or behaviours. All of these you need to find yourself.

A framework is just that - a “frame” simplifies and allows the work. I often think of them as a frame around a picture - the picture is the customized result but the frame brings it in the focus. Another view is the framing you would do in order to build a beautiful home.

A framework isn’t a template of steps to follow soup to nuts. It’s a suggestion, an organizational checklist. It’s a tool not an end to the means. The best consultants fashion a custom frame for each customer. It should include all stakeholders and a change management plan. It needs to consider financials, political realities, culture and the health of the organization itself. To be the right fit, a framework fits like the proverbial glove.

Totally agree. I’m being referenced for strategy build work but spend most of my time working on the ‘making it happen’ bit!

The biggest drawback to things called frameworks is that so many of them are NOT frameworks. The first thing to do is identify that a framework is not a model, and a model is not a process. An enormous amount of circulated material consists of hybrids of the three things or mislabelling of them. At the very least, framworks identify what kind of thing is going to be included as a major factor; models demonstrate the relationships of components that are instances of those factors, and processes are functional applications of the related factors in a given purpose. One framework can have many derived models, and one model can have many derived processes. If sorting these out is too difficult, get an architect to help.

Too often, the toolkit is limited (either by experience or by "frameworks" available). One size does not fit all and having the ability to understand the business dynamics, culture and current position BEFORE jumping in is key.

Frameworks are simply tools you can use as a starting point. They are not substitutes for critical thinking and analysis. That's on you.

In embracing frameworks, remember that they're tools, not silver bullets. An over-reliance can stifle creativity and critical thinking. Don't let frameworks become a barrier to connecting the dots uniquely for your business. Blend them with intuitive insights and consider the human factor. Employees aren't just cogs in a machine; they're individuals with diverse skills and perspectives. For example, combining McKinsey's 7-S Framework with Design Thinking can foster a holistic approach, incorporating both structure and empathy for more effective problem-solving.

The article does not achieve the goal in the title, it is just a waste of time. Artificial intelligence is clearly not ready to provide us with insights. Management techniques and decisions should have the following criteria: "is it possible to bet money on the decision" and "what and how is managed, and what indicates that everything is going right /bad." People who are great at juggling concepts, frameworks, consulting, they also perfectly drowned unsinkable business giants, hundred-years-old banks, and some of them even had a privilege to did it more than once.

Along the way, every consulting firm evolves around the way they do things. At the heart of that is their framework, methodology or approach. I like to look at the approach, framework, or methodology as a toolbox, with all sorts of tools and techniques that make up this toolbox. No two consulting projects or clients are alike, similarities yes, but there are differences. We adopt and use our favorite and most effective tools given the project scenario. What works as a tool for consultant A may not work for B, and likewise for the client, or the project. A good consultant is not rigid in their approach; on the contrary, they must possess a strong playbook and the capacity to adapt it to fit the need.