Dos and Don’ts in Management Consultancy

10 Comments

1. 

   Ivy P. Cubid

   March 13, 2025 at 11:21 pm  ·  Reply

   Consultants prioritize client confidentiality instead of public accountability when financial crimes are suspected, since not all account is with public interest. It financial crimes were suspected, they can faced illegal activities that can harm others if they are legally required to report. They should ensure and follow appropriate legal procedures in reporting crimes.
   AI/digital solutions genuinely resolve systemic issues, rather that risking obscuring deeper crises. AI and digital solutions have the potential to address systemic issues but could incur risk if not carefully implemented. The importance of AI is largely used worldwide on how they were designed to help. AI and digital solutions can play a significant role in resolving systemic issues. But this doesn’t mean to cure but they are not a cure-all. The root causes of systemic problems possible effective collaboration between technology developers is essential to ensuring that digital solutions. Family-owned firms navigate the tension between tradition and transformation. Family-owned firms often face a unique challenge in navigating the tension between tradition such as values, and practices that have been passed on through generations. Balancing these two forces is delicate in managing and balancing impact were positioned to leverage both tradition and transformation. The responsibilities when consultants become enablers of corporate deceit can be complex on the degree of involvement, and the ethical considerations. Institutions are held responsible for upholding ethical standards and legal compliance.

2. 

   PEARL JOY ORTIZ

   March 13, 2025 at 9:19 pm  ·  Reply

   Consultants are reminded not to turn a blind eye to ethical concerns. Ethical violations, such as ignoring evidence of financial crimes, can destroy reputations and lead to legal consequences. Confidentiality of clients is important, but public accountability becomes more important when illegalities are at stake. Consultants must navigate this tightrope by adhering to ethical standards and potentially reporting crimes through the appropriate legal channels.

   The importance of using data-driven insights, which aligns with the potential of AI and digital solutions in resolving systemic issues. However, it also warns against overpromising results, which can occur if consultants rely solely on technology without addressing the root causes of problems. While AI can enhance efficiency and provide actionable insights, it must be complemented with a thorough understanding of organizational challenges to avoid shallow/band-aid fixes.

   For family businesses, there is a need to grasp organizational culture and change readiness. Consultants need to take into account deeply ingrained traditions that may influence employees’ receptiveness to new processes. To balance this conflict, consultants can suggest incremental changes that honor traditions while implementing contemporary practices. Involving multiple generations in the business and a culture of open communication can also assist in closing the gap between tradition and transformation.

   The article underscores the need for ethical principles and professional boundaries in consultancy. When consultants facilitate corporate dishonesty, both the consultants and the client organization are responsible. Consultants should maintain ethical standards and refrain from doing anything that may undermine their integrity. Client organizations, on the other hand, should have robust governance systems to avert unethical behavior.

3. 

   Louie C. Pagdato

   March 13, 2025 at 12:13 pm  ·  Reply

   1. Ought consultants prioritize confidentiality of clients or public accountability where financial crimes are suspected?
   While consultants have the professional obligation of client confidentiality to ensure trust and facilitate openness, public accountability needs to be the priority where financial crimes are revealed. Ethical obligation demands that consultants cannot collude in crime, and withholding information on financial malpractices facilitates injury to stakeholders and society as a whole. The McKinsey & Company opioid crisis scandal, where the firm advised Purdue Pharma on strategies to increase opioid sales despite the public health crisis, exemplifies the dangers of prioritizing client interests over ethical considerations. While legal obligations may vary, consultants must weigh their moral responsibility and legal obligations carefully, ensuring they do not become silent enablers of unethical corporate behavior.

   2. Can digital/AI solutions really address systemic problems, or do they risk covering up underlying crises?
   AI and digital solutions are great for streamlining business processes, enhancing efficiency, and detecting trends in large data sets. But they also have the potential to magnify bias, encourage short-term solutions over root-and-branch change, and create the illusion of control. For instance, algorithmic finance decision-making has brought about market collapses, while digital recruitment tools have at times institutionalized discrimination. Thus, as much as AI can assist in solving systemic challenges, it will need to be supplemented by human judgment, morality, and thoughtful long-term perspectives. Genuine change is only seen when technology comes with cultural and organizational transformation rather than replacing them.

   3. How do family businesses manage the balance between tradition and change?
   Family enterprises tend to struggle with reconciling their long-held traditions with the necessity of contemporary adaptation. Some companies, like Italy’s Acetificio Andrea Milano, have managed to integrate tradition and innovation—upholding their fundamental values while venturing into new territories and streamlining production processes. Likewise, the Freudenberg Group has maintained its family-oriented culture while diversifying its business into different industries. The greatest challenge is how to sustain the history and character of the company while accommodating new technologies and management principles. Effective family firms innovate in their operations without diluting the core of their image, frequently by enacting intergenerational cooperation and transforming intelligently.

   4. Who is responsible when consultants turn into facilitators of corporate deceit?
   The client organizations and consultants both share the responsibility for corporate misbehavior. Consultants have a consequential advisory function and must not participate in, condone, or turn a blind eye to unethical or unlawful activity. The McKinsey opioid crisis case is an excellent example of consultants’ implication in corporate malpractice, with far-reaching legal and reputational repercussions. As much as the final decision lies with the firms, consultants must remain ethically sound and willing to decline assignments that include dishonest activities. Ethical violations not only harm the reputation of a firm but also erode public confidence in the consulting profession as a whole.

4. 

   Stanley Sabuya

   March 13, 2025 at 12:09 am  ·  Reply

   Finding balance between public responsibility and client confidentiality is always tricky. Lucky for us accountants, we have our professional code of ethics which would come in handy to uphold balance for both client confidentiality and public responsibility. Client confidentiality is the heart of trust in a client-consultant professional relationship. Ethical considerations are always non-negotiable and warn us that sharing sensitive information has its consequences morally and legally. However, if a financial crime is suspected, public responsibility should take precedence over client confidentiality. In the case of Veronique Couture, NexGen Advisory’s consultants were aware of financial discrepancies but chose to proceed with their project, partly due to pressure to retain the contract. This decision raises questions about the responsibility of consultants. As consultants, we have the legal obligation to report it, discarding client confidentiality, as mandated by our civil, criminal, or special laws like the Data Privacy Act, eCommerce Act and Anti-Money Laundering Act among others. Initially, a consultant should seek to confirm suspicious transactions using due diligence, which aligns with the article’s data-driven insights principle. Then, the consultant should encourage self-reporting by the client. When the client did not take preventive or corrective action, consultants are obliged to take necessary action, move the issue forward in a responsible manner, and be guided by law. For after all, inaction may cause damage to both the Veronique Couture and NexGen Advisory.

   AI and other digital tools can only analyze large volume of data sets, identify trends, suggest root causes from said data analytics, and propose generic approaches in handling and eliminating deep systemic issues, as among its benefits. These tools should not be relied upon in its entirety for they will merely mask the issue. They are not capable of giving meaning and exercising judgment within the framework of human understanding, which I believe is critical in resolving deep systematic issues and problems. In Veronique Couture’s case, Project Renaissance aimed to modernize the brand with AI-driven customization and sustainable-centric initiatives. AI relies on algorithms and predefined rules, so they lack the capacity for accounting and financial context as well as moral reasoning, which are necessary for problems solving involving human perspective and community relationship. Deep systemic issues need ethical decision-making and professional accountability which AI/digital tools cannot impart. It cannot replace cultural, social and emotional intelligence that humans possess and can impart. But a good balance between human and AI solutions can be fast, effective and efficient in solving deep systematic issues.

   Finding the right balance between sticking to old ways and trying changes can be tricky.
   Staying true to their skills might cause some friction between tradition and changing, but the thing is, they need to keep up with the times and transform to a company that can meet what the global market wants. Veronique’s sales went way down when CEO Marchand was in charge because the company couldn’t get on board with technology and keep up with fast fashion. This could make buyers less interested and customers more annoyed. If they want to stay competitive, they need to add modern strategies to what they do. They have got to mix the old with the new and keep what makes them unique.

   When consultants help companies deceive and lie, a lot of people are to be blamed. Take Dr. Patel and her team at NexGen Advisory: they knew the numbers did not add up, but they still went ahead with Project Renaissance, partly because their bosses were pushing them. They twisted the truth on purpose, which means both the firm and the consultants are in trouble.
   As consultants, they need to put ethics first, because their advice should always be without bias and are honest to protect their name and stay out of legal problems. As for Veronique and its leaders, they also have to stop the deceit and fix any management fraud or dishonest financial reporting. Under our corporation law, transactions must be legal and must not harm third parties. If they do not do that, they could ruin their reputation and even get sued for torts and damages.

5. 

   Angel Mae Carlson

   March 12, 2025 at 10:41 pm  ·  Reply

   1. Should consultants prioritize client confidentiality or public accountability when financial crimes are suspected?

   Although consultants have a fiduciary duty to their clients, public accountability should come first in cases of financial crimes or ethical transgressions. After discovering financial impropriety at Véronique Couture, NexGen experts are faced with a conundrum. Even though Henri Duval is adamant about preserving the company’s reputation, hiding the truth causes more harm than good, as seen when underpaid artisans reveal the truth. Transparency and the internal and, if required, external escalation of concerns in suspected financial crimes are prerequisites for ethical consulting. Neglecting to do so may lead to legal ramifications and harm to one’s reputation.

   2. Can AI/digital solutions genuinely resolve systemic issues, or do they risk obscuring deeper crises?

   Digital solutions and artificial intelligence (AI) can spur change, but they cannot take the place of tackling core moral and business concerns. Project Renaissance presents sustainability initiatives, AI-powered personalization, and a virtual reality shopping experience in the case study. These developments, however, don’t address Véronique Couture’s underlying financial instability. In actuality, rather than resolving financial problems, NexGen’s blockchain-based transparency tracker serves to mask them. This illustrates that the effectiveness of AI depends on the moral character of individuals using it; if applied improperly, it may conceal rather than address systemic issues.

   3. How do family-owned firms navigate the tension between tradition and transformation?

   Family-owned companies frequently find it difficult to balance modernization with history preservation. Tradition is important to Véronique Couture, which has declined because of Élise Marchand’s inability to adjust to changing market conditions. Integrating innovation without sacrificing essential brand values is the difficult part. The challenge of striking this balance is demonstrated by the dispute in the case study, as Élise wishes to preserve her heritage while consultants advocate for digital transformation. Phased change, stakeholder engagement, and preserving authenticity while changing are all components of the most effective strategy.

   4. Who bears responsibility when consultants become enablers of corporate deceit? Responsibility is shared among multiple parties:

   First, the leadership of the client, Élise and Henri, purposefully manipulated finances and concealed important information from consultants. The consulting business NexGen Advisory also became engaged in dishonesty by opting to conceal financial difficulties instead of bringing them to light. In addition, individual consultants (Aisha, Luca, and Riya): Whether they prioritized economic interests or upheld ethics depended on their own decisions. While Riya tries to use technology to hide problems, Aisha and Luca support openness. The significance of moral leadership in consulting organizations is underscored by this internal dispute. Although everyone is ultimately responsible, consultants have a professional obligation to maintain ethical standards, especially in the face of client resistance.

6. 

   Sr. Bebiana Gavas, OSA

   March 12, 2025 at 8:25 pm  ·  Reply

   Management Consultancy

   1. Should consultants prioritize client confidentiality or public accountability when financial crimes are suspected?
   For me confidentiality is also important but there is a balance when there is a need to tell the truth more or lease you are also accountable to share what will happen, and you have to take the risk. The ethical and legal duty to balance client confidentiality with public accountability, especially when financial crimes are suspected. I have to follow the legal process. Legal obligations first as consultants are legally required to report financial crimes when it is needed and you have the facts. Ethical responsibilities even if not legally required consultant should follow professional ethics. Confidentiality vs reporting concern with organization. Professional disengagement as a last resort. But in this case, it happened in western culture they are very hard on the issues and the persons involved. but for us Filipino so soft with the persons involve the tendency of harm avoidance it well defeats the purpose. We are tied by utang na loob. They don’t want to take the risk

   2. Can AI / digital solutions genuinely resolve systemic issues. Or do they risk obscuring deeper crises?
   Could not be replace by human, in morality it is only a machine created by human. It could not be because they have no feelings and some other consideration. There are some advantages and disadvantages AI and digital solutions can help address systemic issues, but they also risk obscuring deeper crisis of not designed and implemented carefully whether they resolve or exacerbate systemic problems depends on factors like governance, transparency, and intent.
   AI as a tool, not a replacement for structure change.

   3. How do family – owned firms navigate the tensions between tradition and transformation?
   Family-owned firms often face a delicate balancing
   Act between honoring tradition which sustains identify and legacy and embracing transformation which ensures long-term survival and competitiveness the way they navigate the tension depends on leadership dynamics, generational shifts, and industry pressures. We need to have strategies for balancing tradition and transformation.
   • Clarifying core values, flexible practices
   • Next – Gen leadership and succession planning
   • Professionalization without losing family Spirit
   • Selective Digital and business model transformation
   • Sustaining Emotional and social capital
   When transformation can lead to stagnation and decline, while reckless change can alienate stockholders. The key is evolution, not revolution gradually modernizing while staying true to the firm identity.

   4. Who bears responsibility when consultants become enables of corporate deceit?
   When consultants became enables of corporate deceit responsibility is often shared among multiple parties. Sharing of responsibility. Go back with the job description. Do not solve problems in your own, involve the person responsible so that you can disseminate the job.
   How to prevent consultant – Enabled Deceit
   • Stranger professional code of conduct, to have legal or medical professions.
   • Transparency and independent oversight in consulting agreements
   • Legal accountability.

7. 

   Bernadette T. Tupas

   March 11, 2025 at 6:16 pm  ·  Reply

   1. Should consultants prioritize client confidentiality or public accountability when financial crimes are suspected?
   When consultants are faced with a situation where they suspect financial crimes, like fraud, money laundering, or embezzlement – their role in maintaining confidentiality is tested against the broader need for public accountability. Client confidentiality is crucial in any consulting relationship, as it builds trust and fosters open communication. Without it, clients may be hesitant to share sensitive information, which could limit the consultant’s ability to provide the best advise.
   However, when it comes to financial crimes, maintaining confidentiality could potentially allow harm to continue. Financial crimes have a far-reaching impact, from investors losing money to communities suffering as a result of corrupt practices. Ethically, consultants must prioritize the greater good. If a crime is suspected, consultants have a duty to investigate further and, if necessary, report it to the appropriate authorities.

   Legal frameworks, such as anti-money laundering (AML), laws, often oblige consultants and other professionals to report suspicious activities, even if doing so breaches confidentiality. The consultant’s duty is to ensure that they act not just in the interests of the client but also in the interest of society at large, which may require whistleblowing or escalating the issuse to regulators.
   This balance is difficult, and many consultants find themselves in a moral dilemma. A transparent, ethical approach would require them to challenge their clients when something illegal is at play, but this can be a career-risking move, as clients may turn to others who are more willing to look the other way. Ultimately, ethical integrity and the responsibility to prevent harm should guide the consultant’s actions in such situations.

   2. Can AI/digital solutions genuinely resolve systemic issues, or do they risk obscurring deeper crises?

   Al and digital solutions are undeniably powerful tools in solving operational inefficiencies, automating routine tasks, and offering real-time insights into data. However, systemic issues – whether related to inequality, environmental harm, or organizational dysfunction – often have roots deeper than what technology can address. AI may optimize processes byt will not address the underlying cultural, ethical, and structural issues that create those problems in the first place.
   For example: consider an AI that’s deployed to streamline hiring practices. If the underlying issue is a biased organizational culture, the AI may simply automate and perpetuate those biases, rather than dismantling them. In this sense, AI could inadvertently obscure the deeper crises within the organization or society by masking them with technology’s sheen of efficienty.

   Furthermore, AI solutions require proper implementation, regulation, and ethical guidelines to ensure they don’t exacerbate the issues they are meant to solve. Without these safeguards, there’s a risk that AI could be used as a “band-aid” to cover systemic problems without actually addressing the root causes.

   Technology is an enabler, but true resolution of systemic issues requires a holistic approach – one that combines technological innovation with a focus on human-driven systemic change, such as improving governance, addressing social injustices, and ensuring accountability. It’s the interaction between technology and thoughtful, human leadership that can genuinely transform systems, not just the tools alone.

   3. How do family-owned firms navigate the tension between tradition and transformation?
   Family owned businesses are often built on strong values, trust, legacy and long-term vision – that have guided them through generations. These values are a source of pride and identify, and for many family-owned firms, they form the bedrock of how they operate. However, as these businesses grow and the marketplace evolves, they must balance tradition with the need for transformation.

   The challenge often lies in adapting to a rapidly changing world while preserving the values that made the business successful. For example, family firms may need to adopt new technologies, diversify their offerings, or rethink their leadership structure to stay competitive. This shift can be met with resistance from long-time leaders or family members who fear losing the company’s roots.

   To navigate this tension, family-owned firms must focus on fostering a culture of adaptive leadership and open communication. This means creating space for both the older generation who may bring years of wisdom and tradition and the younger generation, who often bring fresh perspectives and technological know-how. In some cases, it may also require bringing in outside advisors to help mediate the change process and provide unbiased guidance.
   At its core, the goal should be to ensure the firm evolves while honoring its legacy. Innovating in a way that respects tradition is key. Family businesses that successfully navigate this tension can harness the best of both worlds: they maintain their distinct identify while becoming more dynamic and adaptable to market shifts.

   4. Who bears responsibility when consultants become enablers of corporate deceit?

   When consultants become enablers of corporate deceit, the question of responsibility is complex. Consultants are supposed to act as trusted advisors, providing expert guidance on how to solve problems and create value. however, when they are complicit in misleading stakeholders or participating in fraudulent activities, they betray that trust.

   The consultant’s role is not just to serve the client but also to uphold professional ethics. In instances where deceit occurs, consultants who participate in or overlook unethical practices are just as accountable as the organizations they serve. A consultant who knowingly provides strategies to mislead regulators, investors, or the public is violating professional standards and may be held liable for complicity in corporate wrongdoing.

   On the flip side, organizations that engage in deceit also bear significant responsibility. Corporate leaders create the environment and culture within which unethical behavior thrives, If a company’s leadership encourages deceit, consultants may feel pressured to comply, which complicates the question of responsibility. Corporate governance structures must be in place to ensure that leaders do not create such environments.

   Ultimately, responsibility is shared. Consultants who enable deceit must be held accountable by their professional bodies and the legal system. Corporate leaders who encourage or tolerate unethical behavior must also face accountability for creating an environment where deceit becomes possible. Lastly, regulators and the public have a role in ensuring that unethical practices are uncovered and that there are consequences for those involved. The system must work together to prevent such scenarios from arising.

   In summary, both parties, the consultant and the organization have shared accountability, and ethical responsibility to stop deceitful practices should never be overlooked, regardless of the potential consequences to one’s career or business.

8. 

   Marivic Causapin

   March 11, 2025 at 3:41 pm  ·  Reply

   It is generally accepted that professional consultants are entrusted with a public interest role thus, consultants have to live up to certain expectation in this regard. However, like many professions, consultants must adhere to maintain professional secrecy or client confidentiality because without this, client may withhold vital information thus limiting the consultant ability to provide client with high quality service. However, professional consultants may also have public interest mandate to address suspected instances where substantial harms maybe involved and disclosure is deemed to be in the public interest. It should be within the context of legal and regulatory obligations requiring consultants to report any financial crisis or misconduct otherwise, consultant may face legal liability or accusations of complicity.
   AI or Digital solutions have transformative potential in addressing the systemic issues but it may only provide superficial fixes that may hinder the underlying deep rooted problem which may not led to lasting change. The extent of its effectiveness may vary depending on how it was conceptualized and implemented.AI is not a panacea for all the problems, it may only help to enhance the efficiency, transparency and scalability but it cannot replace systemic change.
   This is quite a common challenging issue a family owned business often faced, balancing the long held tradition with the need for transformation to stay abreast with the current trends and intense competition and to some extent for a long term survival. To successfully overcome this crisis, firms must have a strategic approach that will both respect heritage while embracing innovation. To navigate tradition and transformation, firm needs to review and assess its core value and mission, identify what are those non negotiable tradition that define the company’s identity. Additionally, family firm leverage tradition as a source of long term commitment, intergenerational legacy and deep rooted values that provide stability and continuity(Zellweger ,2012).To balance these ongoing forces, firm may use governance structure such as family council and advisory boards to reduce conflicts and ensure organizational efforts are aligned. Establishing a dedicated innovation department will also play a crucial a role to gradually implement digital adaption, focuses on developing new ideas and products while keeping tradition at the core. And to challenge the status quo, firm may also embrace generational leadership transition, new generation leaders are believe to have a develop new ideas and product and integrate innovation while respecting the company’s legacy.
   When consultants became the enable of corporate deceit, responsibility often shared among the individuals and team who actively participated, ignored red flags and those who intentionally advice directly to led misrepresentation or any regulatory violation. While it is generally accepted that consultant should upheld integrity and transparency , they are expected to act according to what is ethical and legal

9. 

   Mark Joseph Traje

   March 10, 2025 at 6:29 pm  ·  Reply

   1. Should consultants prioritize client confidentiality over public responsibility when financial crimes are suspected?
   Consultants are legally and ethically obliged to keep clients confidential, but this is not a criminal cover-up. Where financial crime is suspected, the consultant would first deal with the matter internally, instructing the client to remedy the situation. Where the client refuses to work with the consultant and the case is serious in its violation of the law, public accountability—informing the authorities—may be the action to take. Ethical standards, professional integrity, and the law must be the deciding factors.

   2. Can Artificial Intelligence/digital applications really solve in-depth issues or could they obscure deeper crises?
   Technology can make things more efficient, decision-making better, and operations more transparent, but not cure structural problems. Toxic cultural contexts, defective business models, or bad leadership cannot be solved with technology. In other instances, AI will actually hide behind crises by creating an illusion of optimization while structural problems exist. The solution is to combine AI with a comprehensive strategy of cultural and operational transformation.

   3. How do family firms achieve the balance between tradition and innovation?
   Family businesses struggle to reconcile millennia-old customs and the demands of modernization. Successful firms go slowly—remaining committed to core values while incrementally adopting new technology, management practices, and marketing strategies. Transparent succession planning, inclusion of the next generation in decision-making, and the hiring of outside specialists also reconcile tradition and innovation.

   4. Who is to blame when consultants are corporate deceivers’ enablers? Both the consultants and the corporations that hire them are equally culpable. While corporations will attempt to manipulate facts or engage in activities that are unethical, consultants are obligated to be professionally honest and refuse to be involved in deceitful activities. Professional standards and government agencies also have an obligation to make sure that they are held accountable. Finally, consultants must understand that enabling corporate deception damages not only their reputation but also the overall economic and social fabric.

10. 

    Jojo Vito (Bacolod Blogger)

    March 8, 2025 at 12:39 pm  ·  Reply

    1. Should consultants prioritize client confidentiality or public accountability when financial crimes are suspected?
    2. Can AI/digital solutions genuinely resolve systemic issues, or do they risk obscuring deeper crises?
    3. How do family-owned firms navigate the tension between tradition and transformation?
    4. Who bears responsibility when consultants become enablers of corporate deceit?