A note about cost, and a story
The cost of hiring one consultant over another may be substantial. But what’s the cost of either consultant compared to the cost of the recommendations they’ll be making? The cost difference between choosing one kind of roofing system over another, just to take one example, can often be much more than your consultant’s entire fee. Don’t lose sight of your objective. Pick the person or the firm best positioned to help you and your team manage risk.
Now for the story: I once recommended a friend as an expert for a very special and unusual project. It turned out that my friend’s bid was more than twice as much as another consultant’s bid. The owner, a very intelligent man, came up with an inventive solution: He would hire the lower bidder, but he would also hire my friend —at a greatly reduced rate—to review the lower bidder’s work. I was disappointed for my friend, but also had to concede that this strategy was some real Solomon baby-splitting construction-management genius.
Guess what happened? The lower bidder recommended the addition of a completely unnecessary and costly product. My friend noted this in his review of the review, but how inclined do you think the design team was to listen to Mr. Second Choice? And how much do you think my (minimally compensated) friend was prepared to press the issue? The not-harmful-but-completely-unnecessary product became just another line item on a long list. (And it, in turn, was sent out to bid!)
So Solomon got a deal on his consultant, but paid more than twice as much as both consultants’ original bids combined on something completely unnecessary that also complicated the design and extended the construction schedule. He, of course, never knew. Do you want to be that man? Actually, yes, maybe you do: He is very smart and very rich. But in this case he was wrong! And he would be smarter and richer if he had not decided to economize on intelligence and expertise. Do not economize on intelligence and expertise!
Now for the story: I once recommended a friend as an expert for a very special and unusual project. It turned out that my friend’s bid was more than twice as much as another consultant’s bid. The owner, a very intelligent man, came up with an inventive solution: He would hire the lower bidder, but he would also hire my friend —at a greatly reduced rate—to review the lower bidder’s work. I was disappointed for my friend, but also had to concede that this strategy was some real Solomon baby-splitting construction-management genius.
Guess what happened? The lower bidder recommended the addition of a completely unnecessary and costly product. My friend noted this in his review of the review, but how inclined do you think the design team was to listen to Mr. Second Choice? And how much do you think my (minimally compensated) friend was prepared to press the issue? The not-harmful-but-completely-unnecessary product became just another line item on a long list. (And it, in turn, was sent out to bid!)
So Solomon got a deal on his consultant, but paid more than twice as much as both consultants’ original bids combined on something completely unnecessary that also complicated the design and extended the construction schedule. He, of course, never knew. Do you want to be that man? Actually, yes, maybe you do: He is very smart and very rich. But in this case he was wrong! And he would be smarter and richer if he had not decided to economize on intelligence and expertise. Do not economize on intelligence and expertise!