Find out more about The Trusted Advisor by David H. Maister, Charles H. Green, Robert M. Galford at Simon & Schuster. Read book reviews & excerpts, watch. The Trusted Advisor has ratings and reviews. Bestselling author David Maister teams up with Charles H. Green and Robert M. Galford to bring us . Occupation, Academic, writer, business management consultant. Spouse(s), Kathy Maister. David H. Maister (born July 21, ) is a former Harvard Business School professor, American (With Charles H. Green, and Robert M. Galford) The Trusted Advisor, Free Press (New York, NY), True Professionalism: The.
|Published (Last):||21 June 2005|
|PDF File Size:||9.88 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||4.52 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
A former Harvard Business School professor, he originally specialized in logistics and transportation writing 8 books on those topics.
He became the guru of Professional Services with his book Managing the Professional Services Firm after which he wrote 6 additional books on professional service firm topics. How has your view of trust changed, if at all, since then? As authors, consultants and teachers, we and others can help a lot with the knowledge and skill parts of understanding trust, and perhaps even through role playing and practice help people improve on the behavioral aspects — getting more skilled in conversations for example.
I am suspicious about whether the underlying attitudes or character traits necessary for trust are as common now as they have been in the past.
David Maister on Trust and Professional Services (Trust Quotes #7) | Trusted Advisor
This is not a comment on truwted inherent flaws of individuals. Rather, I think we have seen a generational change or two in the institutional context within which people have been raised. Customers and clients, through their increased reliance on purchasing departments, are signaling a lesser interest in buying through relationships. The data is very clear — in the law for example, the single biggest means by which firms improved their profitability across the profession was de-equitizing existing partners and drastically reducing the numbers of people promoted to partner.
Accordingly, I think we are living in organizations which have low and declining trust and individuals are responding in kind.
I think our economy and society has been training people to not trust. For the record, what do you think is the role that trust plays in professional services—or for that matter in business as a whole? I remain as convinced as ever that a high-trust method of operation is the best high-profit, high growth strategy. However, it is sad to report that while these attributes where they existed could be shown to produce high profits and high growth, they were not common.
Alas, in most businesses, neither the employees nor the clients can trust that managers will act in accordance with the principles they advocate.
So, cynicism and self-protection results. In your career, David, you consulted to or worked with a panorama of industries—law firms, accounting firms, advertising, actuaries, public relations, architects, consulting firms.
What did you find to be the most common trust issue across all of them? In the past, what made a professional service firm different from a general corporation was that it was built on some generally agreed if sometimes implicit assumptions. Assumptions that you could depend upon and trust that they would be observed.
Under the old model, professional firms offered careers, not just jobs. Few entry-level hires according to the survey data I have seen expect to be with their firms 5 trusteed hence.
The recent actions during the recession, wherein junior and admin staff were the first to be tossed overboard in the successful attempt to preserve partner incomes proved to everyone where the true priorities of most organizations lie.
Together with the fact that, in many professions, professional firms are increasingly publicly held, professional firms are in my view much more short-term focused than a decade or two ago.
This breeds distrust inside the organization. No-one knows what rules or organizing principles if any can be depended upon. Shining counter-examples do exist the usual names but they are not the norm.
As long as we maisster that list in mind—is there one industry in particular that you found particularly better at—or more challenged, for that matter—at issues of trust? In general, I find excellence at trust to exist at an individual level there are many incredibly admirable practitioners in every profession a very few firms that have firm-wide reputations for it, and no one profession or industry that has a consistently high reputation for being more trusted than other industries.
One profession — the law — does have a particular challenge with trust inside their own organizations.
As I pointed out in a recent article, lawyers truxted professional skeptics: They are selected, trained, and hired to be pessimistic and to spot flaws. To protect their clients, they place the worst possible construction on the outcome of any idea or proposal, and on the motives, intentions, and likely behaviors of those they are dealing with.
As Tony Sacker, my kind and gentle brother-in-law and trustted solicitor in the United Kingdom, says: Recently, I was advising a firm on its compensation system. Much current practice in firm governance, organization, and not least compensation comes from the fact that partners vigorously defend their rights to autonomy and individualism, well beyond what is common in other professions.
There is nothing inherently wrong with that. However, as major corporations consolidate their work among a smaller number of firms, domestically and internationally, they expect that firms will serve them with effective cross-office and cross-disciplinary teams. Firms are vigorously responding to this with a stampede of lateral hires, mergers, and acquisitions.
Their goal is to create big organizations offering many disciplines, locations, and cultures. The unanswered—actually, barely asked—question is whether these firms can shift from a managerial approach, based on partner autonomy, to new approaches that advosor create a well-coordinated set of team players. It is hard to unbundle which is the cause and which is the effect, but malster combination of a desire for autonomy and high levels of skepticism make most law firms low-trust environments.
Continuing my less-than-hopeful adviisor, I have to report that as a recipient I avdisor not experience much change or improvement, at least systematically, from those who try to serve me. Nor do I see many game-changing approaches from new entrants in many professions that systematically increase trust between provider and client.
Many professions are moving to fixed-fee pricing in part due to the historical lack of trust in the motives of providers who billed by the hour.
David Maister – Wikipedia
This COULD be a systematic way to increase intimacy and accessibility, but at least in Massachusetts it has not taken off in a big way. Your old industry qdvisor professional services; what did you find to be the most common failing—and did it by any chance have any connection with trust?
Most of the weaknesses or failings of professional firms, in my view, derive from the fact that professionals and their institutions are made up of highly intelligent people who value and celebrate that which is rational, logical, analytical and based on high intelligence.
After all, it is superiority in those things that are screened for in doing well in college and, especially, in obtaining advanced degrees. However, few of us who went that route unless we had it from childhood were ever helped in developing our interactive, emotional people skills. No one ever got their MBA because of superior empathetic skills.
Few people, if any, had a successful law school career because of their predilection for being a team-player rather than focusing on their own accomplishments.
People and firms underestimate how much effort and time it takes to develop such skills. On which side do you think business needs more work? A little more trust does not get you a little less fee sensitivity or a little more repeat business.
My own introduction to trust was by experiencing it — examples that we included in The Trusted Advisor book, and some that have happened since.
Every so often, you come across someone — a dentist, an interior decorator, a financial advisor — who earns all your business and long-term loyalty by putting your interests first. And when it happens, as it happened to me, you become an instant convert. All of the lessons of trust in dealing with clients also apply, virtually un-translated, into building trust inside the organization. Actually, I did try write about effective management and how trust applies. So far, not at all.
But it feels really great not to get on airplanes, and my wife and I, after treating Boston our home town as the place where for 25 years we did our laundry, are finding that surprise, surprise! The entire series can be found at: Recent posts in this series include: Anna Bernasek Trust Quotes 5: Neil Rackham Trust Quotes 4: Peter Firestein on Trust, Character and Reputation.
Over the weekend, walking with a few other adults in degree Holliston, Massachusetts, I observed a clear harbinger of spring Your take on it? How do people come to learn about trust? How did you learn about it? Unlike Willie Mays, you retired while still on top. Do you miss it? This is number 7 in the Trust Quotes series. Would you like to: Lemonade Stands Over the weekend, walking with a few other adults in degree Holliston, Massachusetts, I observed a clear harbinger of spring