This framework applies brilliantly to professional services but with a twist most founders miss. In service businesses, the hidden "cost to serve" isn't just delivery hours — it's founder attention. I work with professional services firms and the ones growing fastest aren't always the most profitable. One founder I worked with last year had 40% of her revenue coming from clients who consumed 70% of her time. When we mapped it, her three biggest clients were actually her three least profitable — constant hand-holding, scope creep, off-hours communication. The wrong-fit client doesn't just cost you margin. They cost you the capacity to serve the right ones. Unit economics in services needs to account for founder attention as a finite, non-renewable resource.
Wow this founder sounds like me! Your point is spot on! I am a founder offering professional services and my 'favourite' clients are those that I spend least time with
That recognition is actually the unlock, Dorothy. Most founders don’t even notice it — they just feel guilty about the clients they “neglect.” But those low-maintenance clients usually have the clearest briefs, the fastest decisions, and the best outcomes. The question worth sitting with: what if you built your entire pipeline to attract more of exactly that profile?
Dorothy — that pattern (favourite clients = least time) is one of the strongest signals in professional services. It usually means those clients are high-fit, high-autonomy, and low-friction. The uncomfortable follow-up question I ask founders: if that's your best client profile, why does your pipeline still contain the opposite?
Most of the time it's because the founder is saying yes to survival revenue. Once revenue is stable enough to get selective, the fastest move isn't getting more clients — it's firing the bottom 20% and replacing them with more of your "least time" clients. Counter-intuitive but the margin jump is usually immediate.
This framework applies brilliantly to professional services but with a twist most founders miss. In service businesses, the hidden "cost to serve" isn't just delivery hours — it's founder attention. I work with professional services firms and the ones growing fastest aren't always the most profitable. One founder I worked with last year had 40% of her revenue coming from clients who consumed 70% of her time. When we mapped it, her three biggest clients were actually her three least profitable — constant hand-holding, scope creep, off-hours communication. The wrong-fit client doesn't just cost you margin. They cost you the capacity to serve the right ones. Unit economics in services needs to account for founder attention as a finite, non-renewable resource.
Wow this founder sounds like me! Your point is spot on! I am a founder offering professional services and my 'favourite' clients are those that I spend least time with
That recognition is actually the unlock, Dorothy. Most founders don’t even notice it — they just feel guilty about the clients they “neglect.” But those low-maintenance clients usually have the clearest briefs, the fastest decisions, and the best outcomes. The question worth sitting with: what if you built your entire pipeline to attract more of exactly that profile?
Thanks for sharing.
Happy to chat if it would help
Very good example. Thanks for adding this perspective! It is really about being mindful with all kinds of limited resources.
Dorothy — that pattern (favourite clients = least time) is one of the strongest signals in professional services. It usually means those clients are high-fit, high-autonomy, and low-friction. The uncomfortable follow-up question I ask founders: if that's your best client profile, why does your pipeline still contain the opposite?
Most of the time it's because the founder is saying yes to survival revenue. Once revenue is stable enough to get selective, the fastest move isn't getting more clients — it's firing the bottom 20% and replacing them with more of your "least time" clients. Counter-intuitive but the margin jump is usually immediate.