Sam Shar on

Consulting accountable for outcomes

Paying for results, not decks, and choosing between staff augmentation, managed services and projects.

2 newsletters, 2 videos. Updated 30 Oct 2026

Sam's approach

What I do

I start by writing down the result a client wants in a number they already report, such as cost per transaction or revenue per head, and naming who signs off that the number moved. Then I pick the engagement model with them. Staff augmentation puts my people under their managers for capacity. A managed service means I run a function to an agreed service level. A project has a defined scope and an end. The measure, the milestones and the fees go into the contract together. My people sit inside the client's teams, and I keep tracking the KPIs for months after go-live.

How I work

A staff augmentation expert is only worth hiring when the client has managers with the time to direct the work day to day. Where nobody inside the business owns the outcome, extra hands hide the gap and a managed service is the more honest answer. The rest is scope discipline. Consultancy drift starts the first time a new request is absorbed without changing the measure, so I reprice instead of swallowing it. Adoption fades in the weeks after go-live, not before, which is why I read the KPIs after the invoice is settled rather than closing the file at handover.

When to bring me in

Bring in a staff augmentation expert when you have a number that has to move by a date, and your last engagement ended with a deck and no change to it. The other trigger is a go-live with nobody named as the owner of adoption afterwards. Before you sign anything with anyone, do three things.

  • Agree the baseline for the measure, in writing, before work starts.
  • Put the review cadence and the post go-live tracking period in the contract.
  • Name the person on your side who confirms the result.

If you want to talk through which model fits, I am happy to.

Questions about consulting accountable for outcomes

What is the difference between staff augmentation and managed services?
Staff augmentation adds skilled people to your team, and you direct the work. Managed services hands a whole function to a provider, which runs it to an agreed service level. Augmentation suits short-term skill gaps and work you want to keep control of. Managed services suit stable, well-defined operations. The risk with augmentation is that nobody owns the outcome, so agree on the results the people are there to deliver.
What is outcome-based pricing in consulting?
Outcome-based pricing in this context means part of the fee depends on results the client can see, such as lower costs or higher revenue, rather than on hours worked or decks delivered. Typically a base fee covers the work, and a further portion is paid when agreed targets are hit. It asks something of both sides. The consultancy has to stand behind its numbers, and the client has to agree on a clear baseline, share the data and make decisions quickly, because a consultant can't be held to a result they aren't allowed to influence. Set the measures before you sign, and keep them few and simple.
Why do consultants leave before a project delivers?
There could be numerous reasons behind consultants leaving before a project delivers, but often it is because the contract was written around the advice rather than the outcome. Once the strategy is delivered or the system goes live, the engagement ends, and that is exactly when adoption starts to fade. Some firms also move their best people on to the next sale, which leaves the client with a junior team and no one who remembers why decisions were made. If you want the consultant to stay until the change sticks, ask for it in the contract, with named people and a plan for the months after go-live.
How do I hold a consultancy accountable for results?
To hold consultancy accountable for results, you should write accountability into the contract before the work starts. That way, you can agree on a handful of measurable targets, name the people who will do the work, and set a review rhythm, so the progress can't slow down and the goalposts can't quietly move. Tie some of the fee to results and keep checking the numbers for months after the change goes live, not just on launch day. Then hold yourself to your side of the deal, because a consultant can only be accountable for what the client lets them control.
When is staff augmentation the wrong choice?
Staff augmentation is the wrong choice when you need an outcome rather than extra hands. Staff augmentation puts people into your team to work under your direction, which suits a clear task and a manager with the time to lead them. It falls down when the problem is poorly defined, when no one internal can steer the work, or when you expect the supplier to own the result. In those cases a managed service or a project with outcome-based fees fits better. Staff augmentation is the right choice when you know what needs doing and simply lack the capacity to do it. Get in touch with me to discuss which model might be the best fit for your business.

What Sam is saying

On seeking ROI for consulting

"CFOs are on the hunt for answers. Their first line of questioning is for the tech consultants who overpromised and underdelivered."
Sam SharSam Shar, CEO, Trend-Setters Consulting (TSCi)27 Mar 2026

Get in touch

For press, speaking or working with Sam.