If a list were made of the most reviled species in the professional world, only investment bankers would stand between management consultants and the top spot. Sceptics portray these corporate consiglieri as snake-oil salesmen, bamboozling chief executive officers (ceos) and politicians with management gibberish and glossy charts while gorging on fat fees. Indeed, the profession was once the subject of a five-season skewering in a star-studded tv series. Its title: “House of Lies”.

明星薈萃的如果要列出一份職場(chǎng)最受詬病的“職業(yè)”的名單，那么在管理咨詢師和榜首之間只有投資銀行家。持懷疑態(tài)度的人把這些公司的軍師描繪成蛇油推銷員，用管理胡言亂語(yǔ)和光鮮的圖表欺騙首席執(zhí)行官和政客，同時(shí)狂吞豐厚的費(fèi)用。事實(shí)上，這個(gè)職業(yè)曾是一部明星云集的長(zhǎng)達(dá)五季的電視連續(xù)劇的主題。其劇名是《謊言屋》。

Recent events have provided even more reasons to hate consultants. “When McKinsey Comes to Town”, an exposé published on October 4th, drags its subject through the mud with evidence of decades of scandalous behaviour. On September 30th prosecutors in South Africa brought criminal charges against the firm. (McKinsey says the book is a misrepresentation and denies the charges brought against it.) Its two big rivals, Bain and the Boston Consulting Group (bcg), have also faced controversies. In France President Emmanuel Macron has come under attack after an inquiry this year found the government had spent $1bn on consulting firms with “tentacular” links with the state.?

最近發(fā)生的事件為憎恨顧問提供了更多的理由。在10月4日發(fā)布的揭露文章《當(dāng)麥肯錫來(lái)臨》，以數(shù)十年的丑聞行為為證據(jù)，使主人公名譽(yù)掃地。9月30日，南非檢察官對(duì)該公司提出了刑事指控。(麥肯錫稱這本書是歪曲事實(shí)，并否認(rèn)了針對(duì)它的指控。) 它的兩大競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手，貝恩和波士頓咨詢集團(tuán)也面臨著爭(zhēng)議。在法國(guó)，總統(tǒng)埃馬紐埃爾?馬克龍(Emmanuel Macron)受到了攻擊，因?yàn)榻衲甑囊豁?xiàng)調(diào)查發(fā)現(xiàn)，政府向與政府有“觸角”聯(lián)系的咨詢公司上花費(fèi)了10億美元。

Despite evidence of dubious conduct, business has never been better. The big three firms’ total revenue has tripled since 2010, to about $30bn; the trio now employ around 70,000 people. That implies revenue per employee of over $400,000, hinting at juicy pay packets for the people at the top. By comparison, the figure for the big four accountancy firms—Deloitte, pwc, ey and kpmg—is a comparatively meagre $140,000.

盡管有可疑行為的證據(jù)，但其生意從來(lái)沒有這么好過(guò)。自2010年以來(lái)，三大投行的總收入增長(zhǎng)了兩倍，達(dá)到約300億美元；這三家公司現(xiàn)在雇傭了大約7萬(wàn)人。這意味著每位員工的收入超過(guò)40萬(wàn)美元，意味著高層人士的薪酬豐厚。相比之下，四大會(huì)計(jì)師事務(wù)所，即德勤、普華永道、安永和畢馬威的薪酬僅為14萬(wàn)美元。

What explains the boom? A shroud of secrecy makes it hard to calculate how much value the industry adds: few ceos or politicians would credit consultants for a successful turnaround. As a result there is a widespread view that all consultants are parasites and those who pay for them are fools. In fact the firms have grown because they provide two services that bosses want—one of them more economically beneficial than the other.

如何解釋這種繁榮? 由于保密，很難計(jì)算該行業(yè)增加了多少價(jià)值:很少有首席執(zhí)行官或政客會(huì)把成功的轉(zhuǎn)變歸功于咨詢師。因此，有一種普遍的觀點(diǎn)認(rèn)為，所有的顧問都是寄生蟲，付費(fèi)咨詢的人都是傻瓜。事實(shí)上，這些公司的發(fā)展是因?yàn)樗麄兲峁┝死习鍌兿胍膬煞N服務(wù)——其中一種比另一種經(jīng)濟(jì)效益更高。

The first is an outside opinion. When firms or governments make decisions, it can pay to buy in rigorous analysis. The danger is that this becomes a ceo self-protection racket. When bosses want to push through controversial decisions, from firing staff to breaking up a firm, a consultant’s backing can bolster their credibility. And consultants’ reports in pleasing fonts with scientific-looking tables can protect leaders from legitimate scrutiny, whether by political opponents or board directors.

第一種是外部意見。當(dāng)公司或政府做出決策時(shí)，進(jìn)行嚴(yán)格的分析是值得的。危險(xiǎn)之處在于，這變成了CEO自我保護(hù)的騙局。當(dāng)老板們想要通過(guò)有爭(zhēng)議的決定時(shí)，從解雇員工到解散公司，顧問的支持可以增強(qiáng)他們的信譽(yù)。此外，咨詢顧問的報(bào)告以美觀字體以及看似科學(xué)的表格呈現(xiàn)，可以保護(hù)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者免受政治對(duì)手或董事會(huì)的合法審查。

The second service is unambiguously good both for the people in charge and the wider economy: making available specialist knowledge that may not exist within some firms and bureaucracies, from deploying cloud computing to assessing how climate change affects supply chains. By performing similar work for many clients, consultants spread productivity-enhancing practices.

第二項(xiàng)服務(wù)無(wú)疑對(duì)負(fù)責(zé)人和更廣泛的經(jīng)濟(jì)都是有益的：提供一些公司和官僚機(jī)構(gòu)可能不存在的專業(yè)知識(shí)，從部署云計(jì)算到評(píng)估氣候變化如何影響供應(yīng)鏈。通過(guò)為許多客戶執(zhí)行類似的工作，顧問實(shí)現(xiàn)了提高生產(chǎn)力的做法。

One defence against an explosion of bogus advice is better disclosure. Companies are already required to reveal how much they spend on their auditors and on investment bankers’ fees on deals. The sums individual firms spend on consultants often exceed this, running into the tens of millions of dollars a year, and should be made public too.

防止虛假建議激增的一個(gè)方法是更好地披露信息。企業(yè)已經(jīng)被要求披露它們?cè)趯徲?jì)人員和投資銀行家的交易費(fèi)用上的支出。單個(gè)公司花在咨詢顧問上的錢往往超過(guò)這個(gè)數(shù)字，達(dá)到每年數(shù)千萬(wàn)美元，而且也應(yīng)該公開。

So far the industry has escaped the formal rules that govern lawyers and bankers. If it wishes to keep it that way, it should adopt a second measure: a code of conduct that all responsible consultancies adhere to. They should eschew providing advice that helps powerful people at the expense of the institutions they run; police the revolving door between government jobs and consultancies; and avoid serving despotic regimes. Consultants have much to offer, but also much still to prove.

到目前為止，該行業(yè)已經(jīng)逃脫了管理律師和銀行家的正式規(guī)則。如果它希望保持這種狀態(tài)，它應(yīng)該采取第二種措施：制定所有負(fù)責(zé)任的咨詢公司都要遵守的行為準(zhǔn)則。他們應(yīng)該避免以犧牲他們所管理的機(jī)構(gòu)的利益為代價(jià)的為有權(quán)勢(shì)的人提供建議；監(jiān)督政府工作和咨詢公司之間的旋轉(zhuǎn)門；避免為專制政權(quán)服務(wù)。咨詢公司可以提供很多東西，但也有很多東西需要證明。