I've been doing mostly regional work — clients with locations in 2-3 states, utilities I know well. Got approached by a national chain with 300+ locations in 38 states. The fee potential is enormous but I have zero experience with utilities in Oregon, Montana, or Maine. Do you try to learn 50 different tariff books or do you partner with auditors in other regions?
Regional vs national portfolios — different strategies?
I partnered. Tried to go national on my own once with a fast food chain and nearly drowned. The tariff structures in California alone would take months to master if you're used to working in the Southeast. I now have informal partnerships with auditors in the West Coast, Midwest, and Northeast. We refer and split fees on national accounts. I keep the Southeast locations and they handle their regions. Everyone makes money and the client gets expert coverage everywhere.
Both approaches can work. If you specialize in one or two error types — like rate classification or tax exemptions — you can audit nationally because the principles are similar even though the tariffs differ. You just need to pull each utility's tariff book and learn the specific rate names. But if you're doing comprehensive audits covering demand charges, power factor, riders, and everything else, regional expertise matters enormously. The partnership model that Phil described is how most successful national practices operate.
The partnership approach sounds right for where I am. I'd rather do excellent work in my region than mediocre work nationally. Going to reach out to some AAUBA members in other parts of the country and see if anyone wants to set up a referral arrangement.