Many consultancies have a methodology clients remember: a diagnostic framework, maturity assessment or scoring model that gives shape to an engagement. The firm deploys it through senior people, bills for the project and then stores the method in a slide deck until the next opportunity.
The idea of productising it tends to surface at an offsite. Recurring revenue sounds attractive, everyone agrees the intellectual property has value, and attention returns to utilisation, pipeline and hiring. The idea goes back in the drawer.
The drawer is getting expensive. Useful IP earns once when every delivery depends on a bespoke engagement. A well-chosen digital product can make a smaller part of that expertise available repeatedly, create a new route into the firm and give prospective clients something more substantial than a credentials deck.
That does not mean every framework should become software. The commercial boundary matters more than the build.
Start with the value that can travel without its creator
Modern hosting, authentication, billing, analytics and assisted development have lowered some of the practical barriers to launching a digital service. That general change is real, although the source article's precise historical build-cost comparison and AI adoption figures lack a durable source for this context. They are unnecessary to the decision.
The stronger question is whether the firm's particular expertise can deliver useful value without a senior consultant interpreting every step. If the value sits entirely in judgement, a self-service tool may expose the questions while leaving users disappointed by the answer. If part of the method is repeatable and part requires interpretation, that boundary can shape the product.
A good candidate usually has three features:
- It solves a recognisable problem for a defined buyer.
- Its repeatable part can produce a useful outcome without a bespoke project.
- Use of the product creates evidence, learning or demand that benefits the wider firm.
Productisation works best when the firm starts with that commercial proposition. Beginning with “we should build a platform” encourages teams to turn the full methodology into features before anyone has tested whether buyers want the smaller outcome.
Four models worth considering
The source article identified four useful models. They remain distinct routes, rather than stages of one maturity ladder.
An internal tool opened to clients. A delivery framework that already tracks milestones, decisions or risks can become a client-facing workspace. The first value may be a better engagement experience. Later, the firm might offer a controlled version to clients running their own programmes.
The self-assessment platform. Probably the most natural starting point for most firms. Take the diagnostic that kicks off every engagement, the one where you sit with the client for two days and assess their maturity across twelve dimensions, and build a self-service version. Clients identify their own problem before you propose a solution. It's a lead generation machine disguised as a product. We've built several of these at Distinction, including scorecards for digital platform health and CX investment benchmarking, and they consistently open conversations that would never have started with a cold outreach.
A benchmarking product. Repeated engagements may create a valuable dataset, provided the firm has the right to use it and can protect confidentiality. Aggregated evidence can support a dashboard or periodic report that clients cannot assemble from public information. Data rights, comparability and minimum group sizes are product design questions, rather than administrative details.
Subscription advisory. A focused briefing, data update and scheduled expert access can package ongoing judgement more consistently than an open-ended retainer. It only deserves the word “product” if the audience, promise, cadence and service boundary are clear.
None of these has to replace the advisory practice. Each can reach a buyer at a different point: before a major engagement, between programmes or in an organisation whose budget would never support the full service.
Decide what the product withholds
The cannibalisation debate is legitimate. If a £5,000 product promises the same result as a £200,000 engagement, the firm has created a pricing conflict and probably an undeliverable product.
The boundary should be designed deliberately. A self-assessment might show that an organisation is underperforming in three areas. It may explain the criteria and give proportionate first steps. The causes, sequence of change and organisation-specific trade-offs may still require experienced advisers. That division is defensible when the standalone result genuinely helps the user and the sales route is visible rather than concealed.
Partnership groups should agree four things before funding a build:
- The result a user receives without human intervention
- The judgement or implementation reserved for advisory work
- The target buyer and situation
- The measure that would justify further investment
Those decisions also shape price. Subscription requires continuing value. A transaction can suit a discrete output. Free access may be commercially rational if qualified demand is the intended return. Compare the economics of each model, including acquisition, support, expert input and the opportunity cost of maintaining the product.
V1 is a test of the proposition
Consultancies are prone to over-engineering their own methods. They want the product to represent the firm's complete expertise and reputation. The result can be a long programme that tries to encode every exception before a client has used the core idea.
One firm in the source material spent 14 months building a broad benchmarking platform. During that time, a competitor released a narrower service, the internal champion moved role and the original problem lost clarity. The anecdote is useful if Distinction can verify the engagement or observation; until then, treat its details as an internal evidence check rather than market proof.
A credible first release is narrower:
- One audience with a specific moment of need
- One method or dataset
- One useful outcome
- One path for feedback, support and escalation
- Enough instrumentation to learn what users do
“Small” should not mean careless. Privacy, security, accessibility, data retention and support still need proportionate treatment. The restraint belongs in feature breadth. A first version can be well made without attempting to model the entire consulting practice.
The firm should also decide what evidence would stop the product. If target users need an adviser beside them to complete every step, the method may be a facilitation tool rather than a self-service product. If they value the output and nobody will pay, it may work better as demand generation. A useful pilot permits either conclusion.
Distribution belongs in the product plan
Distinction has seen a firm build a strong diagnostic and then place it three clicks deep on its website with no sustained promotion. Eighteen months later, it had generated little demand. The product itself was not the only variable; discovery, partner behaviour and the follow-up journey had barely been designed.
That observation is one of the source's strongest practical points. Professional services firms often fund the build from a technology or innovation budget, then expect the existing marketing and sales system to absorb it. Product economics must include distribution.
Before launch, identify where a buyer encounters the product, why they would trust it, what happens after completion, who responds to a high-intent result and how partners will use it in live opportunities. If the product produces data, say clearly how the firm will use it. A diagnostic that surprises users with an aggressive sales call will erode the trust it was meant to build.
For related thinking, see Distinction's article on using digital proof to show consultancy impact and why consulting firms struggle to scale their digital presence.
A practical route from IP to evidence
Begin by identifying the firm's most valuable repeatable deliverables. Interview the people who create them and the clients who use them. Look for the moment at which the method first creates clarity, rather than trying to reproduce the whole engagement.
Sketch the smallest delivery of that outcome and test it with a handful of suitable existing clients. Ask them to use it, observe where they hesitate and compare what they expected with what they received. Willingness to praise an idea is weak evidence. Willingness to use it again, introduce a colleague, share relevant data or pay is stronger.
Then decide whether the evidence supports a product, an engagement tool, a marketing asset or no further build. This is a commercial decision with a technical implementation, not a technology project searching for a revenue model.
Your IP may already be valuable in a project. Productisation asks a harder question: which part can travel, create value and strengthen the firm without pretending that software can replace the judgement clients came for?
If you want a structured way to work out which of your firm's IP is most productisable and what a realistic v1 would look like, we've put together a productisation readiness assessment that covers the three key decisions - what to productise, how to scope v1, and how to price and position it. It's designed to be something you can share with your partnership group before committing to anything.
