Perspective · August 2026
A field guide to commercial models, managed services, and the path to outcome ownership.
Executive Summary
Consulting and systems integration firms have more commercial options today than at any point in the industry's history, from straight time-and-materials to full gain-share partnerships. Most firms, though, default to whatever model they inherited rather than choosing deliberately.
This paper is a working reference, not a pitch for any one model. It lays out nine commercial models available to SIs and consultancies, six types of managed services that typically sit alongside them, and a five-stage maturity model showing how firms tend to progress from pricing inputs to pricing outcomes, along with the real pros, cons, and implications of each.
The right model depends on what's being sold, to whom, and how much risk each side is willing to carry — not on which model is fashionable this year.
Part One
Every commercial model answers the same underlying question differently: what, exactly, is the client paying for? Time, scope, capacity, or outcome? These are the major options in use across SIs and consultancies today.
Best suited to genuinely undefined, exploratory work. It's the weakest model once delivery becomes AI-assisted and more predictable, since it pays for the wrong thing.
A firm's estimation accuracy becomes a real competitive asset — not just an internal PM skill, but something that shows up directly in win rate and margin.
A volume and relationship play, not a strategy. Firms leaning on this long-term are betting on scale, not on IP or differentiation.
Works best paired with a clearly defined scope of access (a set number of hours or deliverables), not vague on-call availability.
Only works where milestones can be defined objectively before the engagement starts — vague or shifting success criteria break this model quickly.
Needs a firm with balance-sheet strength and delivery-data maturity that most firms haven't yet built — this is an advanced-stage model, not a starting point.
Turns the firm into something closer to a software or managed-service company than a project shop — a real operating-model shift, not just a pricing change.
Common among ecosystem-aligned SIs (Salesforce, SAP, etc.). Works best when the platform and services value are genuinely inseparable in the client's mind.
A portfolio bet, not a repeatable commercial model. Should be capped as a small percentage of overall business, not a core strategy.
Read across the models and a pattern emerges: the further a model moves from pricing time toward pricing outcomes, the more risk shifts onto the firm — and the more margin and differentiation potential becomes available to firms equipped to carry that risk responsibly.
Part Two
Managed services sit alongside, and increasingly blend with, the commercial models above. They're worth treating separately because they're less about how a single engagement is priced and more about the ongoing operating relationship between firm and client after initial delivery.
A volume business unless bundled with enhancement or outcome components — rarely a standalone differentiator.
Works best with transparent backlog governance and clear, jointly-owned prioritization rules.
A strategic-account play. Few clients justify a dedicated CoE, but the ones that do become extremely durable relationships.
Requires real operational maturity — monitoring, incident management, on-call rotations — not just delivery skill.
The most mature and most differentiated managed-services model — but only credible with real delivery data behind it.
Works best with a clearly documented RACI between the client's internal team and the firm, agreed before go-live, not after the first incident.
Managed services follow the same maturity logic as commercial models generally: break-fix and staff-driven support sit at the commoditized end, while outcome-based managed services — priced against adoption, efficiency, or business KPIs rather than ticket volume — sit at the differentiated end.
Part Three
Put the models from Parts One and Two on a single spectrum and a five-stage maturity model emerges. Firms don't need to reach Stage 5 to succeed, but they should know exactly which stage they're operating in today, and what capability is required to move up.
The client pays for hours or headcount. Risk sits almost entirely with the client. Margin is thin and scales linearly with headcount, not with skill or IP.
The client pays for a defined deliverable. Estimation risk shifts to the firm; margin starts to reward delivery efficiency and accurate scoping rather than just utilization.
The client pays for ongoing access or capacity, typically governed by SLAs. Risk is shared through service-level commitments; margin comes from utilization efficiency and scale across multiple clients.
Payment is tied to specific, measurable results. Risk shifts further onto the firm; margin becomes tied to delivery predictability and the firm's ability to define and hit clear success criteria.
The firm takes a share of the value it creates, or a subscription tied to sustained performance. Risk is substantially underwritten by the firm; margin scales directly with the value delivered, not with headcount or hours — but this stage demands real balance-sheet strength, delivery data, and productized IP most firms haven't yet built.
Part Four
A few questions tend to determine which model actually fits a given engagement, rather than which one a firm wishes it could sell:
Conclusion
None of these models is inherently right or wrong — each is a different answer to the question of who carries risk and how margin gets earned. What matters is choosing deliberately, engagement by engagement, rather than defaulting to whatever the firm has always done.
This is meant as the reference map for the shift I described in “Beyond the Billable Hour”: most firms don't need to jump straight to gain-share. They need to know exactly where they sit on this spectrum today, and what it will actually take — in data, balance sheet, and productized IP — to move one stage further.
About the Author
Bryan Musto is a Chief Revenue Officer and go-to-market leader working at the intersection of financial services and enterprise technology. He currently serves as CRO of Northlight Solutions Group, and his background includes senior roles at Capgemini Invent, Vanguard, and BNP Paribas. He holds an MBA from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.