The standard approach is obvious. Someone wants to work with you, so you take a call. You get on the phone, talk about the problem, learn what they need, pitch your solution. It's what every consultant and agency does. It's also usually a waste of time for everyone involved. After the call, you have to do the work anyway. And you're starting from a place of less information than you would have if they'd just sent you their site.
My process is different. If someone wants to work with me, they send me their site, their numbers, and a brief on their situation. I spend time reading through the materials. I dig into their business. I form hypotheses about what's broken. I write a detailed consultation. Then, if they want to move forward, we talk about how to execute on the findings. The call is only valuable after I've done the thinking.
This approach creates friction. Some people don't want to do the prep work. They want to just hop on a call and talk. That friction is a feature, not a bug. It filters out people who aren't serious. It also produces dramatically better outcomes because both parties are on the same page by the time we talk.
Calls Without Context Are Performative
The problem with calls before consultation is that they're mostly performative. The consultant is listening and nodding, pretending to take in information. But everyone knows they don't have enough information to say anything useful. So instead, the call becomes a sales call. The consultant is trying to impress. They're trying to land the engagement. They're not trying to do real thinking.
The founder is similarly performative. They're pitching their story. They're highlighting the wins. They're downplaying the problems. The call is a performance where both sides are trying to impress the other side rather than actually understand the problem. By the end of the call, both sides feel good. But nothing was actually solved or understood.
This creates a common failure mode. The founder thinks they've communicated the problem. The consultant thinks they understand what's happening. Neither is true. Then, when the work starts and the consultant reads the actual materials, they realize the problem is nothing like what they thought. The founder is disappointed because they expected the consultant to understand them from the call.
I've learned to avoid this by not taking calls. The founder has to do the work of explaining their situation in writing. They have to be specific because I can't ask follow-up questions in real time. That specificity forces clarity. When I read their materials, I actually understand the problem. The call, when it happens, is about solutions, not about understanding.
Writing Forces Better Thinking
Writing is hard. That's why most people avoid it. It's much easier to get on a call and talk through your problems. But that ease comes at a cost. Talking doesn't force clarity. You can talk in circles and feel like you've communicated something. Writing forces you to actually think through what you're saying. You have to articulate the problem clearly because you can't rely on tone or real-time feedback.
When a founder sits down to write about their situation, they often discover that their problem is not what they thought it was. They start to articulate the issue and realize they don't have all the pieces. They go and gather the pieces. By the time they've finished writing, they understand their own situation better than they did before they started.
This is deeply valuable. I'm not just getting better information from the founder. The founder is getting smarter about their own business by the time they send the materials to me. The act of preparing for the consultation is already adding value. Then, when I do the consultation, I'm building on a foundation of clearer thinking.
Asynchronous Communication Is Underrated
Synchronous communication—calls—feels more efficient. You're on the call for an hour and covering everything. But asynchronous communication—written exchanges—is actually more efficient. The founder writes their brief. I read it and do my thinking. I write my consultation. They read it. By that point, we've had more in-depth exchanges than we would have had on a call, and I've done deep thinking on their specific situation.
Asynchronous communication also scales better. If I take calls, I can only serve a small number of people. If I work asynchronously, I can work with more people because I'm not blocked by calendar availability. It sounds counterintuitive, but most of my best relationships are with people I've never talked to. We've only exchanged writing. That doesn't feel less thoughtful. It feels more thoughtful.
The other benefit of asynchronous communication is that it creates a document trail. After we've worked together, the founder can look back at my consultation and reference it. They can share it internally. It's a document they can study. A call transcript—if anyone even makes one—is not as useful. People remember calls vaguely. They reference written work specifically.
The Consultation As A Different Kind Of Deliverable
My consultation is not a quick email. It's a detailed document where I've laid out exactly what I think is broken, why I think it's broken, and what I would do about it. It's typically 3,000-5,000 words. It's specific to their business. It includes recommendations they can execute immediately. Some founders have told me the consultation was worth the cost of hiring me just because of the clarity it provided.
This level of depth requires time and thinking. I can't generate it on a call. I have to sit with the problem, do research, look at their data, form hypotheses, and write it out. The quality of the consultation depends on the quality of my thinking. Calls interrupt that thinking. They're synchronous and time-boxed. Deep thinking requires the ability to pause, reflect, and iterate.
By not taking calls before the consultation, I'm protecting the time I need to do good thinking. I'm also making it clear to the founder that the value is in the thinking, not in the conversation. Once I've done the thinking and produced the consultation, then a conversation about how to implement is useful. But before that, a conversation is just theater.
The Filter Effect
Not taking calls before the consultation also filters for serious people. If a founder is just casually exploring, they won't want to do the prep work. They'll want to just chat. But if a founder is actually serious about fixing their business, they'll be willing to send materials and get a detailed consultation. The friction filters out the casual inquiries and leaves me with people who are committed.
This has a secondary benefit. The people who make it through the filter are more likely to implement the recommendations. They've already demonstrated commitment by doing the prep work. They're getting a detailed consultation that is tailored to their specific situation. They're more likely to actually use it. Whereas someone who just wanted to chat and didn't do any prep is unlikely to take action.
This approach also eliminates the awkward part of the sales process where both sides are trying to figure out if they want to work together. By the time we're talking, it's clear we're aligned. I've done the thinking. They've seen the thinking. We're discussing implementation details, not whether we should work together.
How To Actually Do This
If you want to adopt this approach, you need clear communication about what you need from people who want to work with you. You need to be specific about what information to send. For a founder who wants a business review, I ask for their site, their traffic data, their revenue, their customer acquisition costs, and a brief on their situation. For someone else, it might be different. But be specific.
You also need to actually do the thinking. Don't pretend to do a consultation. Actually read the materials. Actually form hypotheses. Actually write a detailed response. If you're just going through the motions, the approach doesn't work. But if you're genuinely thinking deeply about their situation, the consultation becomes valuable and the founder sees it.
Finally, be willing to have the conversation after the consultation if they want it. The point is not to avoid all conversation. The point is to do the thinking first so that the conversation, when it happens, is based on clarity rather than confusion. Most founders are happy to skip a call if the written consultation is thorough and specific.
— Sam