Client stories
Evidence from fee rooms, not star ratings
Partners describe specific consultations, constraints, and what changed in proposals or partner meetings afterward. Names are shortened to protect client confidentiality.
“The diagnostic showed our architecture practice was discounting schematic design almost by habit. We still had to persuade two partners who preferred the old hourly habit, but the new packaged fees held through three consecutive pitches.”
“We asked for a fee schedule review ahead of the new financial year. The annotated schedule was blunt in places — our litigation rates were out of step with the work we actually win — and that candour made the partner vote easier.”
“The scoping workshop forced us to put contingencies in writing before the client meeting. One associate said the session felt long, yet we used the checklist on a matter the following Monday and avoided a familiar write-down.”
“Coaching helped me stop offering a courtesy discount in the first ten minutes of a fee conversation. I still adapt when a long relationship warrants it, but the default is steadier.”
Extended story
Regional architecture practice, NSW
The firm had raised hourly rates twice in three years and still watched schematic design discounts appear in almost every competitive pitch. Partners disagreed on whether the problem was “market pressure” or habit.
During the diagnostic we reviewed twelve recent proposals and interviewed five principals. The pattern was clear: schematic packages were priced as open-ended hours, while documentation phases carried firmer numbers. Clients negotiated the soft end.
The redesign packaged schematic and design-development stages with named deliverables and variation triggers. Two partners resisted for a fortnight, preferring the familiarity of hourly language. After three pitches using the new structure — one lost, two won at the packaged fee — the partnership adopted the schedule firm-wide.
Write-downs on schematic work fell in the following quarter. The firm still discounts selectively for long relationships; the difference is that discounts are now recorded as exceptions rather than the opening move.
Extended story
Boutique law firm, ACT
Ahead of the financial year, the practice lead wanted an external view of litigation and advisory rates. The review compared internal schedules with the matters the firm actually won, not with aspirational peer gossip.
Recommendations included lifting advisory packages that were chronically under-scoped and holding litigation rates while clarifying counsel coordination fees. The partner vote took one meeting instead of the usual circulating email debate, largely because the annotated schedule showed where realisation had already been leaking.
Bring a live fee problem to a discovery call
We can tell you quickly whether a diagnostic, review, or workshop is the proportionate next step.
Request a discovery call