Clinical psychologists who are considering becoming organizational consultants rarely appreciate that the two fields are essentially different and require the reframing of basic assumptions and additional training. The authors of the featured paper (Liebowitz & Blattner, 2015) (PDF, 103KB)opens in new window are two (former clinical) psychologists who have walked this path from clinician to consultant.
The differences begin at inception. Consultants generally have to present a proposal that is part sales, part project outline, part rationale and will often change (e.g., additional cast of participants, added tasks, etc.) as the project continues. This is a rare requirement for clinicians.
The self-assessment for each differs as well. Consultants face a larger audience, which can be seductive for anyone with tendencies towards grandiosity. Since they may well be coaching CEOs, any inclinations towards "wanting to run the ship" can appear in the form of pushing the CEO in a certain direction because "I know better." Even if clinicians do venture into making decisions for their patients, the benefits (e.g., recognition, power, decision-making authority, etc.) do not accrue as they might in the consulting situation.
The consultant is often faced with a pull to take sides or with his or her disagreement with the client's assessment of the situation, among other dilemmas; a decision one way or the other can lead to disengagement, going down the wrong road, etc. The clinician is generally spared these choice points.
Who assesses success and what constitutes success differs. Organizational representatives utilize observable behavioral change as their benchmark criteria — in clinical work, the patient evaluates success. It is the enhancement of the organizational goals that is the criteria for success in consulting, not the patient's opinion.
Organizations come in different shapes (e.g., employee diversity, internationalism, size) and forms (e.g., for-profit, not-for-profit, short-term vs. long-term horizons), each with different needs (e.g. executive coaching, organizational change, team-building) requiring different approaches and talents. The clinician's front door does not open to such varied features, which underscores the importance of self-assessment and supervision in consulting.
Each of these observations (and more) require a reframing of basic assumptions. What can assist in this process is learning about organizational culture as well as system theory, neither of which are clinicians normally exposed to in their training. Each focuses the consultant to consider the setting and how it influences, if not determines, the approach to the assignment.
Citation:
Liebowitz, B., & Blattner, J. (2015). On becoming a consultant: The transition for a clinical psychologist. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 67(2), 144–161. https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/cpb0000037
Note: This article is in the I/O Psychology & Management topic area. View more articles in the I/O Psychology & Management topic area.