Can the Work of a Tourism Consultant
Be Considered Ethically Responsible?
Be Considered Ethically Responsible?
Over the last decades, tourism has been one of the fastest growing industries world-wide. Experience has shown that it can lead both to positive and negative results, despite an increasing awareness for sustainability. Especially developments in new and unspoilt destinations can have damaging influences, mostly in the social and environmental context. This brings about the question of ethical justifiability of working as a tourism consultant. Considering the complex effects of the projects upon implementation, can the profession be seen in line with a responsible overall understanding of work and life?
It is a fact that the impacts of tourism development are potentially negative on the socio-economic and natural environment. Therefore, an attempt of response to the consultant’s dilemma needs to touch two central issues: the marginal effects that a consultant can have on the progress of a development project; and the applied ethical principles for management consulting.
By definition, consulting is seen as a call for external advice in a specific situation where the complexity exceeds the capabilities and resources of those involved. The consultant as an independent professional brings about contingency adjustments and creates new options for action. In the present case, the tourism expert must provide qualified outside views on plans and projections, specifically taking into account previously unaccounted factors of influence. Only under those conditions, the act of consulting can be justified in its basic principles. Examples for non-consulting situations are substitute management (taking decisions from inside the organization) and bogus consulting (acting as an excuse for already established decisions).
Having established this, the question arises to which degree the consultant actually influences the development progress. Would the development take place or not without the consultant? In most projects, this question can be answered with a clear ‘yes’. The progress does not depend on the inclusion of the consultant, but rather on other external players or factors such as project developers, construction companies, banks, industry service providers or tourism markets.
But then again, does the inclusion of the consultant accelerate the development progress and thereby potential destruction? Possibly it does so, by providing a positive strategic or financial outlook for the project and convincing the involved parties of swift action. But in realistic terms, this would not be more than a difference of several months at maximum, which can be regarded as minor in the light of world-wide developments. In turn, the involvement of a consultant often helps defining weaknesses of the project, leading to the revision of the concept with a subsequent delay in realisation. Finally, it is not uncommon that projects are stopped as a result of the consultant’s negative assessment.
According to the principles of discourse ethics, the tourism consultant should legitimise his consultancy by proving that all suggestions and recommendations are the result of an integrative communicative action. That requires him to take into account the legitimate claims of all those stakeholders affected by the project and balance them rationally. Ethics of responsibility therefore requests three main steps from the consultant:
It is a fact that the impacts of tourism development are potentially negative on the socio-economic and natural environment. Therefore, an attempt of response to the consultant’s dilemma needs to touch two central issues: the marginal effects that a consultant can have on the progress of a development project; and the applied ethical principles for management consulting.
By definition, consulting is seen as a call for external advice in a specific situation where the complexity exceeds the capabilities and resources of those involved. The consultant as an independent professional brings about contingency adjustments and creates new options for action. In the present case, the tourism expert must provide qualified outside views on plans and projections, specifically taking into account previously unaccounted factors of influence. Only under those conditions, the act of consulting can be justified in its basic principles. Examples for non-consulting situations are substitute management (taking decisions from inside the organization) and bogus consulting (acting as an excuse for already established decisions).
Having established this, the question arises to which degree the consultant actually influences the development progress. Would the development take place or not without the consultant? In most projects, this question can be answered with a clear ‘yes’. The progress does not depend on the inclusion of the consultant, but rather on other external players or factors such as project developers, construction companies, banks, industry service providers or tourism markets.
But then again, does the inclusion of the consultant accelerate the development progress and thereby potential destruction? Possibly it does so, by providing a positive strategic or financial outlook for the project and convincing the involved parties of swift action. But in realistic terms, this would not be more than a difference of several months at maximum, which can be regarded as minor in the light of world-wide developments. In turn, the involvement of a consultant often helps defining weaknesses of the project, leading to the revision of the concept with a subsequent delay in realisation. Finally, it is not uncommon that projects are stopped as a result of the consultant’s negative assessment.
According to the principles of discourse ethics, the tourism consultant should legitimise his consultancy by proving that all suggestions and recommendations are the result of an integrative communicative action. That requires him to take into account the legitimate claims of all those stakeholders affected by the project and balance them rationally. Ethics of responsibility therefore requests three main steps from the consultant:
- From the beginning, he must involve all stakeholders and their rightful demands actively in the process.
- If that is not possible, he must state their legitimate claims by his best knowledge and weigh them according to established criteria.
- If that is not possible for pragmatic reasons, he still must strive to involve the fictional claims while also trying to change the circumstances of the project.
It becomes clear that tourism consultants can play a crucial role in assuring the sustainability of development projects. Apart from the time issue, the main argument in favour of tourism consulting lies in the qualitative nature. A consultant is called into the project with the objective to detect potentially negative project impacts beforehand. While the main focus of this task is usually set on economic issues, the responsible action by the consultant can and must ensure that also social and environmental dimensions are taken into account.
By bringing in his professional experience, the consultant actually supports the mitigation of the negatives effects. He assists in implementing a higher degree of sustainability by fulfilling the following professional requirements:
By bringing in his professional experience, the consultant actually supports the mitigation of the negatives effects. He assists in implementing a higher degree of sustainability by fulfilling the following professional requirements:
- Assure that the conditions for true management consulting are fulfilled
- Involve all normative stakeholders and their legitimate claims in the consulting process
Under these considerations, the work of tourism consultancy can be considered ethically responsible. In fact, the consultant has the obligation using every opportunity to exert his influence in the light of the positive results he knows to achieve.
Andreas Hauser
Andreas Hauser
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment