…not to them.
A comment from Jeri Merrell on my Blogging with a heart post made me think about how values-based activity relates to professional life. As I thought about it, I realised that consulting (like blogging) is something that you do for your clients, not to them.
The bottom line is this: no matter how many bonuses you get for bringing in new business, or writing killer IP, or finding new consultants, if you aren’t doing something of real value for your clients, then you are doing it to them not for them.
Guess which model is more sustainable and ultimately more rewarding? 
How do you define value?
If a client wants X, and you provide it and they are happy - have you delivered value?
What if X is actually not appropriate for them even though they think they want it? Would you still be delivering value if you did it anyway?
Or do you try and get them to see an alternative, and be prepared to walk away from the job?
A thought provoking post nonetheless. It reminded me to put this up on my blog: http://eicolab.com.au/blog/2007/08/02/consultant-coach-and-counsellor/
Hi Zern,
I would define value as “what was needed at the time and in that place”. As an Information Architect, I might actually be brokering a relationship between a client project team and their downstream users - ostensibly a Project/Change Management role - but if it is what is needed, then I can sleep well knowing that I have achieved something of value that day.
Diplomacy is the art of agreeing with a suboptimal solution while suggesting improvements.
As to your post - I have a slightly different definition of consulting - based around doing what is needful.
Cheers, Andrew