Contact Us | Print Page | Sign In
Message From The Chair
Blog Home All Blogs
Search all posts for:   


View all (91) posts »

Communication, Planning and YouTube

Posted By David T. Norman FIMC CMC-AF, Monday, July 18, 2011

As I continue to blog things of interest to you as a member of IMC USA, my emphasis is on (1) creating more dialogue among members of the Institute, and (2) discussing interesting 'happenings' within IMC and the profession itself. 

In that regard, I have posted several entries on ethics and the ethics lapses of management consultancies that have become public through the media.  I have also posted several entries on internal efforts of IMC USA, including Confab. (And, watch this space next week, for more information on an exciting offering at Confab.  A tease, what is "CCC"?)

Annually, members of your Board do strategic planning, looking at the current situation and the management consulting environment (you know, the "SWOTs") and developing both an operational plan and a strategic direction for the organization.  This year, our strategic planning was very ably lead by Jim Rodgers, from Atlanta.  Those of you who know Jim won't be surprised that he really challenged and pushed us. 

We took a clean-slate approach to our assessment and it yielded results that were quite thought-provoking -- so much so that I'm now taking this opportunity to share the major conclusions with you, our members, via YouTube.

It's an exciting time for IMC USA and for you as members -- you will see IMC USA further positioned as the thought leader and driver of the standards for the profession and an advocate that speaks for and is of value to consultants and colleagues, to clients and to the profession.  By being a strong advocate for the profession, we raise the visibility and relevance of all our members.

The Standard of Consulting Competency and Ethics since 1968.

See the video here:

Stay tuned.

My best,

Tags:  Confab  David Norman  IMC  Strategic Planning 

Share |
Permalink | Comments (6)

Comments on this post...

Eugene A. Razzetti CMC says...
Posted Monday, July 18, 2011
You would restore IMCUSA credibility faster if you posted its own ethical lapses.
Permalink to this Comment }

Jim W. Soudriette CMC. FIMC says...
Posted Monday, July 18, 2011
Hang in there
changes in administration each year bring forth expiriments; some work and some do not, however, the board, committee people and the general membership, over benefit from these "changes and expirimants"
Permalink to this Comment }

Roberta Guise says...
Posted Monday, July 18, 2011
I suggest we keep our eyes on ethics breaches in all areas, not just consulting, because as consultants we invariably will encounter violations, through our clients or through very public cases that garner headline news.

Members can establish their thought leadership by writing letters to the editor, submitting op-eds and blogging. The most effective opinion pieces feature a case that's in the news -- a story will anchor your views and is memorable.

Look no further than today's headlines (and likely for the next few days too) for a cornucopia of ethics violations fodder courtesy News Corp. The scandal (as the media are currently labeling it), presents a variety of opportunities for consultants to showcase their analysis and opinion as these relate to their consulting focus.

Permalink to this Comment }

Alan Weiss FIMC says...
Posted Monday, July 18, 2011
It seems to me that the entire focus of the board should be on branding IMC and CMC among BUYERS of consulting services. "Since 1968" that's never been done! That's why membership is dwindling. Until and unless corporate buyers place credence in IMC and CMC and those designations help people market, it's all for naught. Unfortunately, there is no successful branding that's ever been done for those marks. How about making that the sole and highest priority of the organization? Otherwise, why does it exist?
Permalink to this Comment }

L. William Katz CMC says...
Posted Sunday, July 24, 2011
I wholeheartedly support Alan's comment. The CMC's importance is only stressed among the small number of the "in group" of CMCs. In over 40 years of consulting (I received my CMC in 1981) I have never had a client state that he or she sought a CMC because it was a mark of excellence and integrity. In my time as a CMC there have been several attemps at branding, none successful. We seek the CMC designation because it shows we have attained a level of excellence achieved by only a small number of professional consultants, but IMC USA has never succeeded in communicating that fact to the only audience that really counts - the BUYER of consulting services. That should be our highest priority! Of what value is our membership in IMC if those we serve do not recognize its value?
Permalink to this Comment }

Drumm McNaughton FIMC says...
Posted Sunday, July 24, 2011
I support Alan's comment as well. Having said that, branding has been and continues to be the highest priority of the Board. For example . . . .

Just to name a few from the top down approach, we are doing government relations work to raise the visibility of the CMC and IMC members with government buyers of consulting services; PR with media such as the WSJ, Kennedy and others; making alliances with those organizations who can help us with branding and government relations; and attending conferences of procurement officials, consultants, and other buyers of consulting.

From the bottom up, member CMCs are evangelizing the CMC to our clients, and IMC has a CMC toolkit which we provide to help in this area. Baldwin Tom has formed a company made up of only CMCs which goes after government projects.

Two years ago we did market research with buyers of consulting services from companies with revenues of $200M or greater. They told us that the best way to get clients to recognized the CMC is to get the firms to use it, so that is what we've been doing through expanding membership to consulting firms and establishing a CMC Firm certification which has been recognized internationally.

I wish we had the $5M or so which is needed to do more, but until Alan or another benefactor gives us a substantial grant to use for branding, we must leverage the $$$ we have.
Permalink to this Comment }