All too often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees, such consultants would be unnecessary.

In an increasingly competitive landscape, companies strive for efficiency, and often invite an external perspective by hiring consultants. This practice is contested by critics who suggest that if firms listened to their own employees, consultants would not be required, and as such firms would be able to save costs.

This argument assumes that allocating a budget towards hiring outside consultants is more expensive than having the same work done by employees from within the organization. It rests on the premise that the employees, having spent so much of their day, are aware of the inefficiencies or practices that limit the success of the organization. For example, a customer service representative receiving client’s complaints about a late shipment is able to echo the voice of the customer to senior management.

However, the argument does not address or suggest, whether there are any additional conditions or requirements that must also be present to actually render the use of consultants unnecessary. In the above scenario, the customer representative is only able to identify the problem of delayed shipment, not make a recommendation as to where in the process chain it occurs, or more importantly how to fix it. He simply does not have the expertise to understand if there was a shortage in the raw materials causing a delay or whether products were actually defective and the delay was due to re-work. Also, even if management is alerted of the delayed shipping times, it may not be able to identify what is causing the delay or if the problem is more complex. This problem is particularly evident in large and complex organizations with many functional departments.

The argument most importantly disregards the fact that consultants have the expertise as well as posses the necessary impartiality. Consultants, are key because of the continued acquired knowledge they posses of business processes across varied industries. They look at the big picture and have practiced at looking at various processes of many different organizations. This enables them to identify any flaws faster, but also be able to offer recommendations that are applicable and modern. Having insight of what the competition is doing is important to improve efficiency from original state, but also achieve a competitive efficiency.

By nature of their job are detached from the day to day practices and as such are able to offer impartial opinion. Employees within organizations are subject to their biases. It human, for one’s personal weaknesses to be elusive and only focus on the flaws of others.

Ultimately, the argument might be strengthened by considering that even consultants when performing their analysis, they actually interview current employees in an effort to brainstorm and map out all possible reasons that hold back organizational efficiency. Also, it is important to consider that large organizations are able to save money by hiring staff that are devoted to assuring Quality of products. They function as internal consultants, essentially being employed full-time, but saving the organization money by continuously identifying cost-saving opportunities of various business processes.