When a company hires a consulting firm, we can safely assume that they acknowledge there’s a gap they need to fill in the workplace. Naturally, they hire experts because they need their expertise. However, one interesting research we came across recently shows that experts don’t go through their workday unchallenged, and they are continuously tested by the people who hire them.
The client who understands what he lacks also knows what the expert needs to deliver.
A January 2025 study in Research in the Sociology of Organizations found that clients play an active role in assessing management consultants’ expertise, employing three distinct “tests” throughout engagements. As mentioned above, and contrary to the view of consultants as unchallenged experts, the research confirms that expertise is continually contested and co-created.
The three types of tests are Skill Tests, Results Tests, Loyalty Tests. Let’s briefly have a look at them:
1. Skill Tests
Clients expect consultants to adapt abstract methods to their specific organizational context.
Clients probe whether consultants can translate abstract methodologies into context-specific solutions. Executives ask detailed questions, request insider insights, and even challenge the consultancy as a way to ensure the translation of theory into practice. This evaluates consultants’ ability to adapt technical and strategic knowledge on the fly.
2. Results Tests
Clients ensure value for money by monitoring deliverables, change impact, and contractual deliverables and KPIs.
Value-for-money is monitored through oversight of deliverables, impact on organizational processes, and adherence to contractual “promises.” Clients track timesheets, review draft documents alongside competing firms, and solicit employee feedback to gauge whether recommended changes are actually adopted. Any perceived shortfall is framed as a deviation from the signed proposal.
3. Loyalty Tests
Clients gauge consultants’ allegiance by seeking political alignment and personal reassurances.
Consultants’ allegiance to client authority is assessed more informally. Subtle cues prompt consultants to “pick a side” amid internal rivalries within the client’s organization. Clients also admire consultants who engage in confidential conversations that demonstrate trust. By reassuring vulnerable executives and buffering political tensions, consultants prove their commitment to the client’s agenda.
The study advances a relational view of expertise, highlighting how everyday tests generate knowledge and shape consulting work. It shows that clients play an active role (in their engagement with consultants) as co-producers of value.
Main Reference:
Title: Expertise Put to the Test: How Clients Continually Assess the Worth of Management Consultants
Authors: Kasper T. Elmholdt, Jean-Charles Leynadier, Alaric Bourgoin
Source: Research Gate
Loor Lemon 
Leave a comment