Plato decided that the poets, that is, all creative writers, should be banned from his ideal state. He objected to the claim that they imparted knowledge to their audiences. The poets gave no explanation of the basis for the stories that they told or the conclusions to which those stories led. Plato denied the validity of any claim to knowledge that was not accompanied by an account that justified the claim. Management scholars make comparable objections to management consultants. They argue (...) that consultants use rhetoric and story-telling to persuade clients of their knowledge, when their services often have no foundation in real knowledge. Consultancy knowledge is to a large extent socially constructed, dependent for its status as knowledge on clients’ acceptance of it as such. Consultants often sell their services and persuade clients of their value by appealing to their relevance to passing management fashions and fads. The poets necessarily are susceptible to Plato’s objections, because they are creative artists whose proper business is primarily to entertain rather than to impart knowledge. By contrast, consultants have a clear role in imparting and applying management knowledge. They should respond to management scholars’ objections by shifting their focus ever more sharply towards the technoeconomic contributions that consultants can make to their clients, and away from the use of rhetoric and story-telling to promote their services. (shrink)