It’s Customary in Project Launch Meetings to Listen to the Expectations of the Party Requesting Consulting or Training Services Regarding the Specific Outputs in the Scope of Work. Usually, the Beneficiary Starts from the Position of Knowing What They Want, and that the Scope of Work is Sufficient. This is not a Point of Contention, as the Project Was Approved Based on a Specific Need. However, when Comparing Their Expectations with the Scope of Work, Discrepancies Appear. Consequently, Project Management and its Outputs Must be Aligned and Capable of Bridging this Gap, which is Generally Agreed upon.
The consultant’s experience, knowledge of work details, how to implement them, and the impact they hope to achieve through implementing activities and delivering outputs may require presenting a vision that might seem different to the beneficiary from what they planned, or that doesn’t align with what they’re accustomed to from managing previous projects. Therefore, they might insist that you must adhere to their view, and that their satisfaction is required, repeating the famous phrases “The customer is always right” or “I know what’s best for me”.
At Al-Rowad Group, we are bound by our value system, which includes the value of benefiting people. One of its components is prioritizing the beneficiary’s interest over their satisfaction. This means we commit to explaining the optimal method of implementation, suggesting certain details, or alerting to issues that may conflict with the beneficiary’s desire, but overall contribute to achieving return on investment.
We may encounter strong opposition, but as activities and implementation procedures progress, and the beneficiary’s understanding expands, the validity of the opinion we presented at the beginning becomes clear. This maturity in vision is credited to the project, but reverting to implement initial views may cost effort, money, and time.
Why Do We Insist on Prioritizing the Beneficiary’s Interest over Their Satisfaction?
In three work discussion sessions launching different projects in scope and beneficiary, the entity’s representative said: “But this negatively affects you, you’ll lose some projects?”
His statement is correct; we have declined to implement some projects when the project owner insisted on implementing their desires. There are large projects where we advised entities to modify the scope of work, as the existing one might have effects contrary to what was planned. This makes us deal with this matter from the perspective of our value system.
Once, a government entity decided to refer the project to another consulting firm, and during implementation, it became clear that the impact on the end beneficiary (the community) was the opposite of what was intended, forcing them to stop it.
We operate from a value-based and ethical commitment standpoint, and each time, the beneficiaries of our services and products thank us for the vision we ultimately presented to them.
How Can We Resolve this Issue?
We present our perspective in the technical proposals submitted, and through initial meetings, we explore the beneficiary’s desires for the project after mapping internal and external stakeholders. Together, we draw the mental image of the outputs, determine their added value, and design a methodology for transferring knowledge to the beneficiary’s team through various means, either by integrating it into project activities or through on-the-job training and sharing explicit and implicit knowledge. This includes providing evidence from a proven record in implementing similar projects and reviewing some practices. Many come to see the correctness of the opinion and approach we take.
Is there a Conflict between the Beneficiary’s Interest and Seeking Their Satisfaction?
There is no conflict, but what’s better and good for them is to seek their interest, which ultimately includes their satisfaction. In fact, it achieves high levels of satisfaction with the project, its activities, and outputs. When they find that the entire scope of work has been implemented and that they have received all outputs according to their standards, even exceeding their expectations, they will be satisfied. However, we see that prioritizing their interest stems from a value-based and ethical foundation, based on offering advice, and that prioritizing their satisfaction at any cost is a pragmatic matter.