Results-based coaching provides stronger evidence for effectiveness
Most coaches charge hourly. This makes sense: predictable income, easy scheduling, matches industry norms. But paying for results (sometimes called “bounties”) creates different incentives that can be better in specific contexts.
When coaches charge hourly, more sessions = more revenue regardless of progress. With pay-for-results, coaches are incentivized to:
Accurately predict who they can and can’t help
Develop 10x faster methods1
Refer specific cases to better-suited practitioners
Results-based coaching provides stronger evidence for effectiveness. Many coaching reviews make vague claims like "it was transformative!" or "had a breakthrough" - which could also just be politeness. But when someone pays a significant fraction of their net worth long after the work, that's stronger evidence something valuable happened.
I've been testing this model since July 2024 with $40,300 of results banked.
The bounty model seems particularly well-suited for unlearning rather than skill-building. Our most successful cases involve removing emotional blocks - like anxiety, insecurity, suffering, or procrastination. Traditional hourly rates might work better for gradual skill development needing sustained practice and feedback.
This focus on resolving discrete issues differs from typical coaching, which often involves weekly check-ins and ongoing support. That approach makes sense for many goals. But for unblocking, bounties can create better alignment.
In my practice, I focus on helping people who've had issues for years. When someone quickly resolves a long-term problem after working with us, the causality is usually clear.
Clients pay whenever they feel satisfied (if ever).
One might worry that bounties could incentivize practitioners to rush or oversell, but don’t these risks exist with hourly rates, too?
Even hourly practitioners could experiment with adding bounties: "If you completely resolved your issue, how much would you happily pay?" This creates skin in the game for results while maintaining hourly rates.
Questions:
Are there other incentive structures that might work better?
Have there been previous attempts at pay-on-results coaching?
What other fields could benefit from pay-on-results?
Thanks to Stag Lynn, Brian Toomey, Kaj Sotala, Anna Salmon, Damon Sasi, Ethan Kuntz, Alex Zhu, Ruby, and others for conversations that helped develop these ideas.
In theory, coaches who help clients 10x faster could earn more through volume and reputation even with hourly rates. In practice, clients rarely believe such dramatic claims based on testimonials.