Beware the Ineffectual Consultant
As much as I think it would be cool to consult for NASA, I have zero experience in avionics, space exploration, or aerospace systems engineering. Likewise, I’m self-aware enough to recognize I wouldn't be a good fit for veterinary medicine --or any medical discipline for that matter.
And yet when it comes to the realm of nonprofit consulting where I actually dwell, there seems to be an unhealthy supply of ineffectual folks hanging out their shingle. Unhealthy because their inability (in *this* context; they may be quite proficient in other situations) renders them capable of causing harm to nonprofits that contract with them. Ineffectual because they lack the relevant experience, along with requisite hard + soft skills, to produce the desired outcome.
Given what's at stake, allow me to suggest a few ways to spot a dud and improve the probability of choosing a star. Ideally, you'd evaluate a prospective consultant's capabilities before bringing them on. To that end, posing case-type questions during the selection process could be helpful in your assessment.
Be wary of a consultant who:
focuses on smaller picture or inconsequential matters (e.g., someone who's overly preoccupied with the color scheme of an event's logo at the expense of securing event sponsors).
relies on outdated marketing + promotion tools (e.g., insisting on direct mail exclusively vs. incorporating email, text, social media into the communication mix). Reluctance to embrace evolving communication styles and preferences could reflect a stale skill-set along with a general hesitancy to adapt.
is not upfront about what they don't know. To be clear, it's unlikely that any consultant would know everything about all you're hoping to accomplish, and lack of knowledge is not necessarily a dealbreaker. However, there's a difference between someone ramping up (e.g., getting familiar with your donor database or nonprofit's specific sector) and starting from scratch —on your dime, no less. Tread cautiously.
outsources the heavy lifting. In other words, they turn the decision-making and execution back on you -the client- prodding you to establish the parameters/metrics/minutiae of a given project. Under these circumstances, you're likely to wind up producing the deliverable yourself. Yikes.
To better your odds of choosing a winner, look for someone who:
is recommended by a trusted professional or personal contact. It's generally not enough that your contact knows them; rather they've collaborated, and your contact has observed their methods and outcomes first hand.
has a proven track record, with quantifiable results (e.g., sourced 3 qualified board candidates for a previous client, led an online campaign that raised $20,000).
grasps the macro- and micro-levels of your project, who can speak in generalities and specifics. They're likely to ask thoughtful, probing questions vs. vague ones.
Remember: even if your nonprofit is strapped with a less-than-competitive budget, do not discount the quality of service you deserve or settle for second-rate assistance. You'd be better off managing the work internally than contracting with someone possessing mediocre skills, as they could consume the very time you were hoping to save.
Incidentally, if you are in the market for a nonprofit consultant with development expertise, I may have just the person for you.