It has been my observation that consultants are sometimes secretive and closed.

However, during this meeting our professional advisers were surprisingly open as they focused on real-world and real business problems.

They seemed to pinpoint common pain.

What surprised me is how well issues were presented and how lightly solutions were tiptoed around.

It's the square peg and the round hole phenomenon. Sometimes a change in perception or approach is required.

Consultants and doctors have in common an immense capacity for accessing information and for analytical thinking. They use factual tools to address qualitative concerns.

But, like the healing art of medicine, managing institutional clients is a subtle blend of art and science. And, as they say, that is the rub.

It is incumbent that consultants and consulting firms, as industry procedural and ethical models, raise the bar.

In short, what's good for the consultant is good for the industry. Let's see how that works.

In the consultants meeting a discussion about retaining staff and clients shifted gently, nearly imperceptibly, to a discussion about competition, pricing, and "rational" limits to growth.

The groups’ conversation about the impact of the quality of the work environment slid into a discussion about the rights and wrongs of raising fees. In psychological parlance, this presents a disconnect from the matter at hand.

It also suggests a gap between what are called one's espoused belief and one's theory in practice. This is the same gap that pushes parents to tell their children: "Do what I say, not what I do."

What is discomforting is how deftly professionals lose the opportunities at hand.

Rather than conflicting there is substantial proof that cross-referencing qualitative and quantitative information presents huge opportunities to a complex business.

It is in the confluence of the two strains of information the business people discover possibilities and solutions.

The shift from conversation to discussion reminded me of a Fortune magazine article by the humorist cum business writer cum businessman, Stanley Bing.

His short article discussed a phenomenon that he called "executive attention deficit disorder" or EADD. The symptoms he described included among other things, "Having difficulty sustaining attention in tasks or play activities," and, "often shifting from one uncompleted task to another."

Humor has its place in illustrating our inconsistencies and frailties. Adults all seem to recognize that the funnier the story the greater the truth. We have all seen it lead to excessive cocktailing.

These are serious times and serious times can make people nervous. Research shows that nervous people don't concentrate well.

Overall, I have seen plenty of occasions where consultants concentrate exceptionally well. They know their business and they know what their clients expect.

The gap appears to lie within their own business. Like many people they can look ahead. Planning for growth around the vision however is to often a separate matter.

There is a boatload of evidence to suggest business growth is seldom achieved doing the same things the same way. The biggest gap is mis-aligned strategy.

As one example, staff retention as part of a firm’s strategic objective may hold the template for growth within the consulting industry.

The solution is likely to come from a different angle however, and almost certainly from ideas generated in another industry.

Through its renowned business case-study method, Harvard University frequently demonstrates numerous ways that businesses learn from each other.

Consultants daily observe the confluence of finance, customer education, and marketing and can identify trends. Let's go one step further.

What would happen if we juxtaposed the same institutional consultants with experts from other maturing industries?

Let's take just one business legend -- David Ogilvy. Ogilvy addressed the challenges of starting an advertising business and then led the industry to vast expansion after a global war. Even with an expanding economy, nothing was left to chance.

In "Confessions of an Advertising Man," Ogilvy lays out four steps, which he used first to survive and then to grow his business. He writes:

Number one, I invited 10 reporters from the advertising trade press to luncheon. I told them of my insane ambition to build a major agency from scratch...

Second, every speech I made was calculated to provoke the greatest possible stir on Madison Avenue...

Third, I made friends of men whose jobs brought them into contact with major advertisers -- the researchers, the public relations consultants, the management engineers, and the space salesmen...

Fourth, I sent frequent progress reports to 600 people in every walk of life.

This is of course an abridged version of Ogilvy's comments.

Nonetheless, it highlights a certain commitment to act as an expert in the field and to maximize every opportunity to learn -- despite the apparent risk of embarrassment or failure.

Within a few short years Ogilvy led the industry. Long after Ogilvy's departure (as well as the departure of his potent business philosophies) positions at the Ogilvy and Mather are prized.

The recognition of a problem, while challenging, is not the most difficult part of doing business. The difficult part appears to be the commitment to solve -- right or wrong.

It's easy to express the desire for a solution and than disclaim responsibility because of a lack of power or authority. But here is the fact. Someone will always take up available power and authority.

Consultants will acknowledge that much. They'll also acknowledge that the better consultants represent a blend of skills.

Out of necessity, each professional consultant is part financial adviser, analyst, educator and marketer.

Here are several observations followed by some thoughts about how to address them.

First, consider what happens within the institutional investment process qualitatively and quantitatively.