Manichaeanism of the most feeble sort
When a consultant is sifting through his client's problems in real time there is an impulse towards diagnosis that is hard to resist. After all, we are paid to be smart, which really means that we're paid to be smarter than everyone who has already looked at the issue. The easiest way to appear smart is to think quickly: Even if I arrive at the same conclusion that you guys did, I got there in a fraction of the time and all on my own. Impressive, huh? Except that we've still only arrived at the same conclusion, which means that nothing whatsoever has been achieved.
The next trick that most consultants pull is some sort of reorganisation of the facts. The SWOT analysis is a great way of restating everything we already know but feeling smart about it because we've identified some polar opposites: strengths v. weaknesses and opportunities v. threats. It all feels very honest and important and forthright: We are strong and decisive people! We aren't afraid to name our weaknesses! We face down our threats and categorise them! Except that in order for a SWOT properly to work every relevant issue needs to end up in a quadrant and only one quadrant at that. Remember that dirty feeling everyone got when we finally agreed that the sales team was both a strength and a weakness?
Outside of the IT department binary categorisation is rarely your friend. Polarities feel cool because they remind us of all those epic, Manichaean stories of childhood where good triumphs over evil and where you're either with us or agin us. But sooner or later every binary analysis collapses under the weight of its own metaphor. Sure, internal staff and external customers are kind of opposites as are debtors and creditors but seeking meaningful alignment between these four ideas is insane. Which is not to say that I haven't seen someone attempt this very feat. Right before a long overdue coffee break it was.
There is a point in any meeting where we start looking for a way of arranging things: Jim Halpert's failed attempt to lead the Scranton branch of Dunder Mifflin is mired in an endless list of pros and cons. Oftentimes the consultant's job starts by putting a stop to the oversimplification: we live in a complex world and as adults we should maybe use that fact as a starting point.