The mistake people make is hiring for volume instead of shape. A VA is excellent and becomes expensive when the work is identical every time, because you are paying a person to execute a rule. An agency is excellent and becomes expensive when the scope is one permanent micro-task, because their economics require a retainer.
Automation is the third option and it has a narrow, honest fit: repeatable, measurable, text-shaped, weekly or more often. Outside that boundary it fails quietly, which is worse than failing loudly.
The fix, in four steps
- Classify the work Does it need a relationship, a deadline with taste, or a rule? Those three map to VA, agency, automation.
- Price the payback Hours saved per month times your effective hourly rate. Compare against the build cost, not against zero.
- Check who does the work Ask directly whether the person who scopes it is the person who builds it. Subcontracting is the norm in agencies and the exception in studios.
- Insist on an exit Code, documents and access in your name, and a wiki someone else can run. If you cannot leave, you are not buying a system.
Before hiring for a gap, it is worth knowing which part of the gap is a person.
No-shows and unfilled cancellations, with a receptionist ringing the waitlist by hand.
The diary fills itself before the chair is empty.
“He doesn't approach problems like a typical consultant. He challenges assumptions, finds opportunities we hadn't considered, and thinks several steps ahead.”
Joseph, Founder
The same engine, set up for one kind of work. It is not software you log into. You get the modules, the procedures and the documentation, and you own them.
Only taking seven audits a month. We check the fit before you pay.
Get this applied to your business
USD 500, fixed scope, 3 days, every finding cites what I read. Seven a month, and we check the fit before you pay: if you are not a fit you are not charged.