Three things we got wrong in our first quarter

We’re approaching the end of our first full quarter of operation. Most of the things we’ve written about have been positive — and most of those are real. But it would be a strange business that got everything right in its first three months. Three things in particular we didn’t get right, and they’re worth writing about because they’re the kind of thing that’s easy to gloss over.

One: we underestimated how long discovery would take with new clients

When we set up our first engagements we built scoping models based on how long discovery had taken in our previous careers. What we hadn’t accounted for is that new clients — particularly clients who hadn’t worked with a consultancy before — need significantly more time to engage with the discovery process than experienced buyers do.

This sounds obvious in retrospect. In practice it meant a couple of early engagements ran longer than we’d estimated, and in one case we ate the extra time rather than re-billing. What we’ve changed: discovery is now scoped with more contingency, particularly for first-time consultancy buyers, and we’re more explicit at the outset about how much client time the process will need.

Two: we didn’t write enough things down

For the first few weeks we ran on memory and good intentions. We knew what we’d agreed with each client; we knew what was due when; we knew how each engagement was tracking. None of it was written down systematically.

This worked while we were a small team running a small number of engagements. It started straining when we hit five engagements and broke entirely when we hit seven. We’ve spent significant time in the last few weeks formalising our internal knowledge management — engagement records, decision logs, contact histories. It’s tedious work and we should have done it from day one.

Three: we said yes to one engagement we should have said no to

About six weeks in we took on an engagement we knew, on balance, wasn’t the right fit. The client wanted execution-focused work in an area where we thought they really needed strategy work first. We were persuaded — partly by the client’s confidence in their own diagnosis, partly by the revenue — to do the work as requested rather than push back on the framing.

The execution was solid. The outcome was disappointing, because the underlying strategic problem we’d flagged was the real issue. The engagement closed amicably but with a result neither of us was thrilled about. What we’ve taken from it: when we have a strong view about scope, we say so before signing, and we’re prepared to lose the work if the client doesn’t agree.

Why we’re writing this

Three reasons. First, the kind of clients we want to work with appreciate honesty about mistakes. Second, writing things down forces us to actually act on the lessons. Third, our team is small enough that this kind of public accountability matters — it sets a tone we want to keep.

None of these are catastrophic. None of them required difficult conversations with clients. But the impulse to only write up the successes is one we’d like to resist, both now and as the business grows. We’ll do something similar at the end of every quarter.

Frequently Asked Questions

What went well that you haven’t written about?

Plenty. Most of it would sound like marketing copy if we wrote it, so we’d rather let the client work speak for itself.

Will you publish quarterly reflections going forward?

Yes, that’s the plan — short notes at the end of each quarter on what we’ve learned. Follow our news page if you’d like to keep up.

How transparent is too transparent?

We don’t share client-specific details without permission and we won’t write about anything currently live or commercially sensitive. Beyond that, we err on the side of saying things.