← Engagements
Category comparison
Lock vs. a general HR consultancy
A general HR consultancy typically sells a project or a policy deliverable for one function at a time. Lock designs across the whole operating system so the interfaces between processes do not break.
Comparison table
| Dimension | Lock | Alternative |
|---|---|---|
| What you get | A cross-process architecture: decisions, ownership, data, workflows, and controls that connect. | A deliverable scoped to one function (a policy, a handbook, a single process fix). |
| Who runs it afterwards | The client, or Lock through a defined implementation-leadership or improvement engagement. | Usually the client, once the consultancy’s engagement ends. |
| Whether seams are connected | Yes — broken seams between processes are treated as part of the problem. | Not usually in scope; each function is typically treated as a silo. |
| Measures | Measurement and continuous improvement are part of the mechanism, not an afterthought. | Varies by firm; often reporting added at the end, if at all. |
| Price model | Published starting prices by scope (see /pricing). | Typically a quoted project fee, negotiated per engagement. |
When not to use Lock
This comparison is not always in Lock's favor.
- You need a narrow, single-function deliverable and do not want the cross-process work.
- You already have a connected operating system and only need execution help.
- The engagement is a one-time compliance filing rather than a repeatable process.