Best Retreat Facilitator – MP, CPA Consultant or Outsider?

A retreat provides an opportunity for key firm personnel to meet off premises to plan the future, devise strategies and resolve problems, all of which are nearly impossible to do in the office with press of client work, questions from staff and phone calls/emails from clients. Another equally important objective is to create an environment where busy leaders get to know their partners better and improve communications.

Sounds great, right? Unfortunately, when I talk to partners about their firms’ retreats, I hear more frustration than elation. Common complaints: We didn’t accomplish anything. We came up with great ideas but nothing was implemented. We wasted our time and money.

The success of a retreat depends on many factors, including today’s subject: the retreat facilitator. Facilitators make it easy and comfortable for participants to communicate with one another and productively address the agenda issues. A good facilitator launches each topic, gets the attendees to speak up while limiting those who tend to dominate and most importantly, concludes each agenda item with a set of action steps to be implemented once everyone returns to the office.

The three most common types of facilitators are listed below, with pros and cons.

The Managing Partner – the most commonly selected facilitator.
Pros: (1) MPs feel they know the firm’s issues better than anyone outside the firm and want to control how the retreat is run. (2) Save expensive consultant’s fee, especially if consultants were used in the past with disappointing results. (3) If MPs are highly competent, their credibility and leadership style can be very effective in getting things done.

Cons: (1) “An organization cannot understand itself and learn better ways” (Edward Deming). (2) Many MPs have strong personalities that intimidate the partners; they lecture too much and fail to do enough listening. (3) MPs don’t get to be participants because they have to lead the retreat. (4) After a while, partners don’t listen as much to the MP as they used to.

CPA Firm Consultant (Full disclosure – this be me!)
Pros: (1) Experience with CPA firms. Able to share knowledge gained from other firms. Knows best practices. (2) Skill at facilitating. (3) Outsider may get partners’ attention better than the MP. (4) Good at toning down the conversation monopolizers and getting quiet ones to talk. (5) A fresh set of eyes.

Cons: (1) Lack of knowledge of the firm. (2) Some consultants have a huge ego and don’t dig deep enough. They just like hearing themselves talk and telling you what to do. (3) Expensive. (4) When the retreat is over, they scram and leave it up to the firm to implement.

Outsider. (CPA or law firm MP, professor, general consultant)
Pros: (1) An outsider gets the partners’ attention better than listening to the MP. (2) It’s good to have the perspective of someone outside of the CPA industry. (3) Fresh set of eyes.

Cons: (1) No experience with smaller, local CPA firms. (2) May not have facilitation skills. (3) Fees could be expensive. (4) A high-ego person may lecture too much and not try to get group participation. (4) Just like CPA consultants, they scram when the retreat is over and don’t implement.

Our new monograph, CPA Firm Retreatrs: The Do-It-Yourself Guide  is the completely expanded and updated version of the original, providing material to organize and facilitate a retreat that achieves RESULTS!