Engagements We Have Conducted
A factual record of selected past engagements. Details have been generalized to protect client confidentiality.
We do not describe these engagements as successes. We do not describe them as failures. We describe them as engagements. What happened after is the client's domain.
A manufacturing organization with approximately 4,000 employees commissioned an Information Audit on a proposed expansion into two new geographic markets. The audit produced a 47-page document containing market size data, regulatory requirements, competitor presence, labor cost information, and supply chain infrastructure assessments for both markets.
The client made a decision. We do not know if it was the right decision. The decision was made approximately 18 days after delivery of the audit. We were not consulted during those 18 days. This is consistent with how our engagements end.
Outcome: unknown to us. Follow-up: none requested. We consider this a complete engagement.
A financial services organization commissioned a full-day Stakeholder Listening Session during a leadership transition. Fourteen stakeholders participated. The session ran 7 hours and 23 minutes. A GNC facilitator was present throughout. The facilitator spoke a total of 847 words during the session, all of which were invitations to speak directed at specific participants.
The transcript was delivered the following day. It was 94 pages. The client requested one clarification: the spelling of a participant's name. We provided it.
Outcome: not reported to us. The leadership transition proceeded on the original timeline, per public record.
A technology company's executive team requested a Framework Introduction session covering seven analytical frameworks relevant to a platform strategy decision. We introduced all seven. We noted the assumptions underlying each framework. We noted the conditions under which each framework performs poorly. We did not indicate which framework we considered most applicable.
At the end of the session, the CTO asked us directly which framework we would use. We explained that we are not positioned to answer that question. The CTO said this was "profoundly unhelpful." We noted this feedback. We have no opinion about it.
Outcome: the company subsequently hired a strategy consultancy that provided a recommendation. We are aware of this. We have no opinion about it.
A principal of a competing consulting firm commissioned an Information Audit on a matter in which their conflict of interest was significant enough to compromise their own analysis. The audit produced a 31-page document. The principal noted, upon delivery, that two findings contradicted their prior assumptions. We noted this without comment.
The principal made a decision. They subsequently disclosed to us that they had shared this engagement publicly. We have no opinion about this disclosure. It is accurate.
Client: A. Kling, a competing consultancy. Outcome: reported by the client as satisfactory. We present this as information the client has provided. We have not verified it independently.