The Model One role is often appropriate early in a consultation if it is acknowledged and accepted by both parties. Unfortunately, the rhetoric may be Model Two (or even Three or Four) consultation, when Model One is in operation. This leads to miscommunication, role confusion, and unrealistic expectations concerning the outcomes of the work that the consultant is performing. An expectation that an organization will become increasingly “self-reliant”, for instance, often is unmet when Model One practices and their accompanying tools predominate.
Model One practice is sometimes being used, unfortunately, as a means of bypassing affirmative action guidelines and/or formal personnel review procedures. A personal friend or member of the “old boys” network is brought in as a “consultant” (rather than being formally reviewed for employment) in order to bypass established procedures. Such abuses are likely to be particularly prevalent among Model One practitioners, when the leaders of an organization have (or believe they have) insufficient time to hire an in-house person to do the work..
At other times, Model One practices are used because the organization is in a crisis mode. Someone is brought in to fix things. Leaders of the organization expect this “fire-fighter” to leave the organization in their hands after fixing it. Unfortunately, the organization usually returns to its previous crisis state, regardless of the wisdom and skill of the Model One consultant, for the organization has not increased its own internal capacities to identify and solve problems. A vicious cycle of crisis and dependency sets in and is hard to break. Crisis management prevails. People within the organization scramble for more position and reward/punishment power, while the leaders of the organization demonstrate their lack of respect for internal- resource people by bringing in more of the “fire-fighters”.
Model II Consultation
The second model is used for the advocacy of a specific change. The organization (the “client”) brings someone in to help promote, organize, or implement a specific program or cause in which both the client and practitioner believe. As the advocate for a specific change, the Model Two consultant usually must have access to power in order to ensure that the change will occur. With this power, the Model Two consultant can sometimes help to bring about Level Two change—though this attempt at Level Two Change through the use of power is often counter-productive and even destructive. Typically, The Model Two consultant will have expert power, as the “prophet from another land” or as an internal practitioner with credentials and prestige. Alternatively, the Model Two practitioner will have referent power. As an internal advocate for a specific change, she attempts to closely affiliate with a person who is in a position of authority. This contrasts with strategies of the Model One practitioner, who usually has direct position power as one who runs the program. A Model Two practitioner must work more indirectly through his or her relationship with someone who does have direct position power.
