If you’re (considering) running your own business or working in-house on risk (and/or compliance), this one is for you. A bit of reflection on some of the crossover lessons on pricing, keeping up with the Jones, transactional partners, and owning what you are (and aren’t).

Many of us become institutionalised. In whatever sector, career, or organisation we find ourselves, there are inevitable “the way things are done around here” rules that rub off. Here are a few of those I shed so you can do so more quickly.

Pricing against best interests

What is the value of your/our work?

Many of us gravitate to a day or hourly rate, right? Wrong. In what universe are these two examples of similar value?

1. Sitting on a 20min call where non-subject-matter experts discuss which tools are best for transferring large volumes of data. 🥱
2. 20mins developing the initial investigative plan and crisis response scenarios following a whistleblower allegation that could impact hundreds (maybe thousands) of people’s health.

Both tasks were for the same client. In one, I bring some experience (WeTransfer, Google Drive, Dropbox, OneDrive, etc.), but fundamentally, it’s not my call. I may argue that I bring decades of experience in the second example, but that’s not the point. I’ve been singing in the car for decades, and the recording contract has yet to arrive. What matters is the outcome. You’re only as good as your last project, task, file, etc. To arrive at optimal outcomes requires competence and adaptability. But we don’t price for that when we price hourly.

If you think, “I’m in-house; I don’t have an hourly rate.” You do. Your time has value – it’s sadly why you’re often called “a cost centre”. If you’re spending time on busy work(as I was on the file sharing call I need not have been on), you’re wasting your employer’s (client’s) money. I know, I know, we can’t dodge every pointless meeting.

But consider, what is the value of my output? Saving my employer/client from harm and enabling better decisions (deals, market entry, supply chain sustainability, etc.) by integrating risk management into strategy can be priceless. Be ruthless with busy work and be clinically efficient with value work.

Case study: sunk fallacy cost investigations

Some organisations demand hourly/day rates, but most are happier to discuss the value of the outcome. In this situation, our goals are aligned. I often saw the opposite in investigations. I’d see people data trawling (financials to CCTV) because they were incentivised to spend hours. Words like “exhaustive,” “comprehensive,” and “methodical” are used as a subterfuge to disguise the lack of guile. As fees wrack up, the sunk cost fallacy kicks in – “We can’t quit now; we’re committed and XX% through.”

Often, if we step back and consider the desired outcome, there are ways to work more quickly; other approaches, shrunk datasets, and talking to humans! But if you ask us to work on a time & materials basis, many people become input- not outcome-focused.

Unthinking compliance

This platform and myriad conferences create FOMO. You see a peer is doing X or Y. That must be “best practice.” Best practice doesn’t exist. We don’t construct every building the same. Why? Because location, climate, available materials, purpose, occupants, intended duration, and budget differ. The same is true of risk management.

Best practice construction for a central bank with gold deposits should not inform the design of temporary installations needed along a parade route. The folks managing risk in the bank and along the parade probably don’t align on their primary risks or objectives. “But what about regulators?” The sensible ones use terminology like “right-sized” or “fit for purpose” to reflect this need for nuance. For the less sensible, a robust risk assessment with clear explanations as to focus areas should help.

Tools of the trade

I was unthinking when I built the initial Ethics Insight software stack. Big companies use Microsoft Office, Adobe, and Windows. I must too. BS. Four years in, I’ve ditched almost all of that (I can’t quite shed Teams and Excel, as it’s so ubiquitous).

Those pieces of software aren’t built for most of us. Unless you need to use their products, don’t waste thousands of dollars on tools that are easily bettered and replaced by cheaper alternatives (happy to share if you get in touch).

For in-house folks, I see some of those same “but everyone else does” pressures, including software providers. Shop around. The dynamism in spaces like reporting line software to training platforms is exciting – you’ll also get a better deal from providers that are built to align with you and your organisational size and maturity.

Transactional partners or peers

In-house teams often need external partners for certain tasks – from audits to legal advice. Don’t settle. I wasted a lot of time and money on advisers who weren’t a good fit – from sales to accounting. When you find partners who want you to succeed, it’s game-changing. Sometimes they’re just nice people, but it doesn’t hurt that your success is in their enlightened self-interest.

You know when you’re in a transactional relationship when you’re passed around, and the knowledgeable sage who impressed you is replaced with faceless emails of others. Another glaring red flag is the dreaded “plus plus” – where you must buy add-on packages to fulfil your order or need. Find providers that guarantee outcomes for fixed fees.

Lean into what you are

Finally, stop trying to be all things to all people. I struggle with this. I still love every job I’ve done – from counter-terrorism, investigations, spy-hunting, deception detection, intelligence gathering, risk assessments, to training. But I can’t do all of them (all of the time). I have to prioritise. Investigations, for example, went from being an all-consuming guilty pleasure in year one of Ethics Insight to something more like a quarterback (calling the plays, devising the plans, coordinating the case) on a select few projects. That was hard. The control freak ached, and FOMO gnawed.

I see many of my in-house friends and clients drowning in the sea of multi-tasking and overachieving. Just because you can do tens of different things doesn’t mean you should. Yes, we all must react to things and take on more than we’d like. And, yes, crises seldom happen after finishing all your other tasks. BUT, that doesn’t mean we can’t have a clear mission and purpose. I’m not talking about the BS Purpass™️ of corporatedom; it’s more of a ruthless recognition of your value and objective(s).

I know fear drives much of the behaviour – justifying our existence. But when you meet someone who is clear in their schedule and priorities, it creates confidence, not diminishes it. A flustered person taking on all tasks does not instil confidence.

Stop trying to be an army of one – small is beautiful.