Been doing utility auditing solo here in Wyoming for about a year now, mostly dealing with Rocky Mountain Power accounts. Getting approached by some energy consulting firms who want to partner on larger commercial accounts. They handle the initial client contact and billing analysis, I do the detailed tariff work and present findings. Anyone else working this kind of arrangement? What's a fair revenue split when they're bringing the clients but I'm doing the technical heavy lifting?
Working with consultants vs doing audits yourself - what's the balance?
Brenda, I've been doing something similar here in South Dakota with NorthWestern Energy accounts. Started with a 60/40 split (60% to me for the audit work, 40% to them for client acquisition) but found that I was doing most of the follow-up work too. Renegotiated to 70/30 after the first year. The key is being clear upfront about who handles what parts of the client relationship.
I work with a couple consultants here in San Antonio on CPS Energy accounts. The arrangement works best when they stick to what they know - customer relationships and general energy management advice - and leave the tariff analysis completely to me. Problems arise when they try to second-guess my technical findings or make promises about savings amounts before I've completed the audit.
Jorge's right about staying in lanes. I had a consultant here in Albuquerque tell a PNM customer they could save $15K annually before I'd even looked at their bills. Turned out the account was already on the optimal rate schedule. Nearly lost the client when the "guaranteed savings" didn't materialize. Now I insist on reviewing all marketing materials before they go to prospects.
That's a great point about reviewing marketing materials. The consultant I'm working with has been pretty good about letting me control the technical messaging, but I can see how that could become a problem. What do you all typically charge for audits when you're working through a consultant vs. direct client relationships?
My rates are the same regardless of how the client came to me. The consultant partnership just changes how the total fee gets split, not the value of the work I'm providing. I've found that discounting audit fees to accommodate consultant markups just devalues our expertise. If they can't sell the full value of professional utility analysis, maybe they need better sales skills.
Arnold makes a good point. I used to reduce my fees thinking it would help the consultant close more deals, but it just trained them to expect discounted work. Now I quote my standard rates and let them figure out their margin. Has actually led to better quality referrals since they have to be more selective about which prospects they bring me.
The other thing to watch is consultants who want to white-label your reports. I had one ask me to remove my name and contact info from audit reports so the client would think they did all the work internally. That's a hard no from me - my professional reputation is tied to that analysis and I need to maintain the client relationship for follow-up questions.
Jorge, absolutely agree on the white-labeling issue. Had a similar request and declined for the same reasons. Plus if there are any errors in the analysis, I need to be able to address them directly with the client. Can't do that if they don't know I exist.
This has been really helpful. Sounds like the key is maintaining clear boundaries about technical work vs. business development, keeping my standard rates, and ensuring I can maintain direct client contact for technical questions. The consultant I'm talking to seems open to these terms, so I think it could work out.
That sounds like a solid foundation Brenda. Just make sure you get the arrangement in writing, especially the revenue split and who handles what parts of client communication. I've seen too many handshake deals go sideways when the first big audit comes through and suddenly everyone has different expectations about roles and compensation.