engagement-shape

engagement-shape — pick the pattern that fits

The shape of the engagement determines whether the work is sustainable. Pick wrong and you spend the engagement fighting the structure instead of doing the work. Four shapes cover most situations.

The four shapes

Project — fixed outcome, defined end date.

• Use when: scope is clear, deadline is real, the shape repeats well across similar engagements.
• Pricing: fixed-value tiers (see propose).
• Risk: scope creep destroys margin. Define exclusions hard (see scope).

Retainer — ongoing access, capped scope per month.

• Use when: recurring need, but the exact ask varies week to week; client values availability as much as deliverables.
• Pricing: monthly fixed fee with a clear cap (hours, deliverables, scope domain — pick one).
• Risk: undefined cap turns it into unlimited support. Re-cap every renewal.

Advisor — fractional strategic time, no execution.

• Use when: client has execution capacity in-house but needs perspective, steering, or expertise their team lacks. You're a brain, not hands.
• Pricing: monthly retainer, sometimes plus a capped hourly overflow.
• Risk: scope creeps from advice into execution. Hold the line — if it starts looking like project work, reprice it as a project.

Fractional — specific named role (Fractional CTO, Fractional Head of Sales, etc.) at a percentage of FTE.

• Use when: ongoing role-shaped gap, the work is genuinely a job rather than a problem, client can't yet justify a full-time hire.
• Pricing: percentage of an FTE comp package, not hourly.
• Risk: blurs into employment. Be clear about boundaries — your other clients, your decision authority, your exit ramp.

How to pick

Ask in this order:

1. Is the outcome bounded or ongoing? Bounded → project. Ongoing → retainer / advisor / fractional.
2. Is the work mostly thinking or mostly doing? Thinking → advisor. Doing → project / fractional.
3. Is it a recurring task domain or a recurring role? Domain (e.g. "ongoing security reviews") → retainer. Role (e.g. "head of engineering") → fractional.
4. Can the client describe the next 90 days of work? Yes → project. No, but they know they'll need help → retainer / advisor.

When you're unsure, default to project. Projects have natural exit points. Retainers and fractionals are harder to graduate cleanly out of, so pick them deliberately.

Watch the mismatch

Most engagement pain comes from the wrong shape:

• Project shape on what should be retainer — every "while you're at it" becomes a scope battle. Suggests the underlying need is ongoing access, not a fixed deliverable.
• Retainer on what should be project — no urgency, no clear end, scope creeps in both directions. Client doesn't feel value because there's no completion event.
• Hourly on any of these — you're getting paid to be present, not to think. Wrong unit (see price).
• Fractional that's really employment — full-time hours, full-time expectations, fractional pay. Walk.

When a shape isn't working, name it and re-shape — usually mid-engagement renewals are the right moment. "This started as a project but the work pattern is really a retainer; here's what that looks like and what it costs."

Anti-patterns

• Letting the client pick the shape — they don't know the tradeoffs; that's your job.
• Single shape for everything — every consultant has a default. If yours is "project," you'll force projects onto ongoing problems and burn out on scope battles.
• Never reshaping mid-flight — pretending the wrong shape will work itself out. It won't.

Pair with discover (the discovery surfaces which shape fits), scope (each shape scopes differently), propose (tiers can mix shapes — e.g. project + advisor retainer), price (shapes price differently), and position (peer-mode picks the right shape; vendor-mode takes whatever shape the client named).