[sailfast]

Agreed, however the idea that because [expensive boutique firm] was consulted on X means that now the organization has no choice but to defer to their [insert maniacal conspiracy purpose here] recommendation doesn't pass the sniff test.

I agree that there is pressure because rates are high and there is a social penalty for being wrong at high expense in public organizations, but that does not mean that by being in the door suddenly the only responsible party is the consultancy because "who could ever say no to a Harvard MBA!"

I also agree with the article's thrust about transparency and accounting for such a global org to provide a good check on what is happening. I also agree that to manage successfully you have to have enough people on staff to adequately advise these efforts and help sort the good ideas from the bad. That said, the article didn't dive into WHO operations, just the fact that they hired consultants.

[ryanobjc]

Why doesn't it pass the sniff test?

Your second paragraph essentially parallels the well known "no one was fired for buying IBM" fallacy. How is buying advice from a Harvard MBA any different?