A company selects a consultancy largely because of the partner who ran the pitch. He was excellent, understood the problem immediately and clearly knew the sector.
The engagement starts. The partner attends the kick off meeting and is not seen again. The work is done by two people the client has never met, one of whom is an associate engaged specifically for this project.
None of that was hidden. It was simply never stated, and the client bought one thing and received another, which is how a perfectly competent engagement still ends badly.
Ask: who will actually be on this engagement
By name, before signing. A firm that cannot answer this is either not resourced yet or not willing to say, and both matter.
Ask: what experience do those people have
With this sector and this kind of problem. The partner's experience is not transferable to whoever is actually doing the work.
Ask: how much of the senior person's time is included
In days or hours, written into the proposal. Buyers assume access to the person who sold the work and frequently receive a monthly check in.
Ask: which people are employed and which are associates
Not to disqualify associates, who are frequently the most experienced people involved, but so the buyer understands who they are getting.
Ask: who holds the relationship when something goes wrong
A named person with the authority to change things. Escalating into a firm with no named route is where engagements deteriorate.
Ask: what happens if a named person leaves
Mid engagement changes happen. Knowing whether a replacement is guaranteed to be equivalent is worth establishing before it matters.
Ask: who owns the quality of the output
Whether anybody senior reviews what is delivered, and who signs it off. This is what a firm's name is supposed to buy.
Ask: how the team will actually work
On site, remote, how often, and what that requires from the client, which connects to access to people and data questions.
Look for: a firm that volunteers this
The best answer to all of the above is a firm that supplies it unprompted in the proposal, because it indicates a firm that is not hoping the question is not asked.
Look for: honesty about the associate model
A firm that explains plainly why it uses associates, and how it selects and manages them, is far more trustworthy than one that blurs the distinction.
Look for: continuity into delivery
Frequently the recommendation is where the firm stops, which is the ground in implementation questions after the recommendation.
Watch for: the pitch team that disappears
The commonest complaint in professional services. A buyer who asks about it in advance is far less likely to experience it.
Watch for: an unexplained rate difference
Where rate cards vary by seniority, the buyer should know who is being billed at what, since this is where the value of the engagement is actually decided.
Answer the who will do the work question at the enquiry
An assistant that explains how the firm resources engagements, states how associates are used and managed, sets out how much senior time is included and names who holds the relationship gives a buyer the answer before they are attached to whoever ran the pitch. The same question in agency relationships appears in who actually works on my account questions, and the same matching logic in ai shopping assistant product fit. See features, start at try, and the sector view sits under consultants.