Pricing Strategy Worksheet

An ICF-credentialed coach who launched her practice during the pandemic set her hourly rate at $175 because a mentor told her to start there. She now has 12 active clients, a waitlist, and a rate that hasn't moved since day one. She's working close to capacity, earning less than she would in a salaried role, and hasn't done any pricing analysis. She says she's 'not great with numbers.'

Give this as between-session work with a specific instruction: complete Section 1 (costs) before looking at anything else. The cost analysis grounds her in math before market comparison pulls her toward anchoring on competitor rates. For coaches who self-identify as 'not great with numbers,' frame Section 1 as arithmetic, not finance. The break-even calculation doesn't require expertise - it requires honesty about what running the practice actually costs.

In Section 3 (value-based pricing), watch whether she can articulate what clients gain in specific terms. Vague answers - 'clarity' and 'growth' - indicate she hasn't done the work of understanding her actual value proposition. Specific answers - 'my last three clients all got promoted or landed new roles within six months of working together' - give her real data to anchor a higher rate. The specificity of Section 3 is the leading indicator of her readiness to raise rates.

Start with the break-even number from Section 1. 'That's the floor - you cannot price below this and run a sustainable practice. What's your current rate in relation to that floor?' Then move to Section 3. 'Given the value description you wrote here, where would you need to price to reflect that value?' The gap between floor and value-based ceiling is the decision space. Focus the conversation on what has been keeping her in that gap.

A coach who has spent eight years delivering leadership programs for a large consulting firm is moving to private practice. He has strong credentialing (PCC) and real results from his corporate work. He has no idea what to charge and is anchoring on the hourly rate of adjacent professionals he knows - therapists at $200 and consultants at $300. He hasn't done any analysis of his own.

The most useful reframe for this client is Section 2 (competitor research) done with coaches rather than adjacent professionals. His anchoring on therapists and consultants is a category error - those markets operate on different models. Send the tool with a specific instruction: look up five coaches in your niche and record their actual rates. 'Don't estimate - find the real numbers.' The research itself often shifts the anchor before any other work is done.

In Section 3, watch whether he can distinguish between his corporate facilitation value and his one-on-one coaching value. These are different products at different price points. If he tries to apply corporate day-rate math ($2,500/day) to one-on-one coaching packages, he's using the wrong unit. The value-based analysis needs to be grounded in the specific outcomes his executive coaching clients will experience, not the value of his corporate work.

Start with the market positioning decision in Section 2. 'Given your credentials and the results you've described, where do you actually sit in this market?' Then use that positioning to anchor Section 4. For a newly independent PCC with eight years of real client results, the mid-market to premium positioning is usually defensible from day one - most coaches who undercharge do so because they're anchoring in the wrong comparison set.

A five-year practice owner who has strong client relationships and a full calendar wants to raise rates from $250 to $375 per session. Her current clients are all on long-term engagements at the old rate. She's worried about losing relationships she's invested in, but she's also turning away potential clients because she can't take on more at current rates without raising income.

Give the worksheet with the instruction to complete all four sections for the new rate she's considering - not her current rate. 'This is a prospective analysis. You're designing the practice you want to have, not documenting the one you have.' The Section 4 package structure work is particularly useful here - she can design a rate increase that applies to new clients immediately and uses a transition period for existing clients, rather than a single cutover.

In Section 3, watch whether her value-based rate calculation produces a number that validates the $375 target or pushes past it. Many coaches who have been undercharging for years find that a rigorous value-based analysis supports a rate significantly higher than the one they're planning. If her analysis suggests $450-$500, the real conversation is why she's targeting $375 and whether that's a value problem or a confidence problem.

Start with Section 4. 'Show me the primary package you'd lead with at this rate.' Then: 'Who specifically would pay this? Name someone you know who would pay it without negotiating.' The ability to name a real human - not a hypothetical ideal client - is a test of whether the rate is grounded in her actual market. If she can name three to five people, the rate is real. If she can't name one, the work is on understanding who her clients actually are.