Tags: pricing, consulting, fractional, negotiation
Pricing fractional leadership services isn’t about charging “what you’re worth.” It’s about understanding what makes it worth it for you.
In a recent coaching call with a Fractional Data Leader, we dug into a common challenge: pricing fractional leadership services. The key insight wasn’t just about numbers—it was about understanding the psychology of pricing.
When setting your price, there are really only three points that matter:
Your job? Figure out what those numbers are for you.
You’ve done the math on costs—52 weeks minus vacation, health insurance, etc. Great. That gives you a floor. But your price?
Your price is the number that makes you want to get up in the morning and do the work. If it doesn’t, you priced it too low.
Some example numbers:
That ecstatic price? It’s the “I’ll deal with whatever comes, because I have options” price. If they blow up the scope, if they ping you at 3AM, you’re still fine. You’ve built room for it. You’re covered. You’re ecstatic.
And if they flinch at the number and you land at your happy price? Great!
If you only have a few seconds to come up with a price and can only offer one, use this model: “What number makes me want to get up and work for this client every day?” Use that number.
If they say no, that’s OK (because you don’t want to work for them). If they say yes, awesome. How fast did they say yes? Did you leave something on the table? Don’t worry about it for now - you’re in your happy price. But next time, push it harder. When you’re not hungry, you want the client to hesitate and think for a second - or even run away screaming.
Before you even get to price, have the “why” conversation:
You want them explaining, in their own words, why they need you. This isn’t about putting yourself in a stronger negotiating position (although it does that). It’s about making them sell you on working with them – using their own words.
And if they’re saying things like:
“We’ve looked everywhere and can’t find anyone else who checks all the boxes.”
You’re in the middle of their Venn diagram. You cover the overlap they can’t get anywhere else.
That’s why you charge ecstatic prices. Because they’ve already told you—they can’t wait, and they can’t find anyone else.
The price is the last unknown.
If you’re the only person who checks all their boxes, price becomes the last unknown.
They’re thinking, “This is the person.” They just don’t know how much it costs yet.
That’s your leverage. That’s why you push to ecstatic first—because you can always scale back to happy, but you can’t go the other way.
You’ll see a lot of advice about never negotiating. And I agree, mostly.
But giving clients structured choices isn’t negotiating—it’s running a business.
Don’t negotiate your ecstatic price down. Offer a more focused engagement at your happy price. This isn’t negotiation or a discount.
“We could start with a more focused engagement at $20,000…”
Suddenly, your happy price looks like a bargain compared to the ecstatic price you initially quoted.
Jonathan Stark has a great way of handling price reduction requests. It’s not about lowering the price—it’s about adjusting the scope. It goes something like this:
“Let me know which parts are most valuable to you. We can reduce the scope to focus on just those, and I’ll calculate a new engagement price based on that.”
While this model intentionally simplifies pricing, pricing can get complex. Wildly complex, if you let it.
This you-focused approach is really about boundaries. Establishing borders so that you know where you stand before the pressure of pitching a client.
It’s a starting point.
When you’re thinking about packaging, these numbers give you a baseline.
When you’re doing value pricing, these prices give you something to anchor to.
These numbers are a thought exercise. They force you to think about your time, energy, and capacity. But they’re also a tool you can keep in your back pocket, ready when you need them.
“If I’m making $100k a month from a client, I’m ecstatic. I’ll do whatever it takes.”
“If I’m making $10k a month from a client, I’m fine. Bills are paid, I’m good. But this is minimum effort.”
This is about drawing your own lines. You decide where you’re willing to show up, and on what terms.
Want to dig deeper into pricing and the “Why Conversation”?
The Why Conversation by Jonathan Stark
Jonathans’s original Why Conversation post—still the gold standard.
Jonathan Stark and Blair Enns Compare Notes (podcast + full transcript)
A conversation about what makes value pricing work—and where people screw it up. If you’re a fractional or solo consultant, this is as relevant as it gets.
Pricing Creativity by Blair Enns
Blair breaks down how to stop selling time and start pricing based on the value you create. If you want structure, rules, and tactics for pricing creative and advisory services, this is it.
You’re not just selling your time. You’re running a business. Price like it.
Don’t be afraid to aim high. The right clients—the ones who truly value what you bring—will rise to meet you.
Certainly. Here’s a draft for a brief conclusion section:
Pricing isn’t just about numbers—it’s about setting yourself up for success. When you price at a level that motivates you, you show up as your best self for your clients. You’re not just filling time; you’re delivering real value.
Remember:
Start with your ecstatic price. You can always scale back to happy, but scaling up is much harder. And don’t be afraid of clients saying no—the right clients, the ones who truly value what you bring, will rise to meet you.
Pricing is a journey, not a destination. As you grow and evolve, so will your prices. Keep refining, keep pushing, and always aim for ecstatic. Your future self (and your bank account) will thank you.
Struggling with pricing your fractional services? Let’s fix it. Book a Strategy Session and we’ll work through your specific situation. Book a Strategy Session and we’ll work through your specific situation.
If you want to stay in the loop, join my mailing list. I send out useful insights now and then.
Subscribe here: