AI shifts client expectations as fees face pressure

Teamwork.com has published research showing that one in three businesses believe AI can replace external experts, highlighting growing tension in the client-supplier relationship.

Based on responses from more than 1,000 senior business leaders and members of Teamwork.com's customer community, the findings suggest expectations around price, speed and the role of outside advisers are shifting as AI tools become more widely used.

The study found that 33% of respondents believe clients now think AI gives them the tools to bring more work in-house rather than rely on outside specialists. It also found that 35% of clients want AI to be used on projects, while 66% of service providers say clients are becoming more demanding while less willing to pay.

Another finding points to pressure on commercial relationships. According to the research, 23% of respondents said they had experienced "clientfishing", where a client uses the appearance of a project brief to gather expertise without paying for it.

Pricing Pressure

The figures add to the wider debate about how generative AI is affecting professional services firms, consultancies and agencies. As companies test AI tools internally, some clients appear to be reassessing what external advisers should charge and how much work can be done without specialist support.

That shift is creating a gap between what some buyers think AI can achieve and what service providers say still requires human judgement. Teamwork.com cited external research from Scale AI and the Centre for AI Safety, which found that even advanced AI systems can independently complete only 2.5% of projects.

Daniel Mackey, chief executive officer and co-founder of Teamwork.com, said the issue was not access to tools but how businesses valued expertise.

"Access to AI isn't the same as delivering results. Clients now have powerful tools at their fingertips, and that's shifting expectations around speed and cost. Many clients now believe that AI-assisted work should automatically be cheaper and quicker to deliver. But judgement, accountability and real expertise still separate great work from average output.

What we're seeing is a fundamental misunderstanding of where AI's value actually lies. It's an incredible tool for speed and efficiency, but it doesn't replace the strategic thinking, creative problem-solving and years of experience that clients are actually paying for.

It means showing clients what AI cannot do, like reading the room in a boardroom presentation and adjusting your approach on the fly, or knowing from years of experience that a strategy needs to change because the market shifted overnight before the client has even noticed. The teams that understand this distinction will be the ones that protect their value.

There's also a real risk here that businesses can't afford to ignore. When clients believe AI can do the heavy lifting, the natural next question is why they should pay the same rates for work they think a tool can handle. If client-facing teams don't articulate what they bring beyond the tools, they will find themselves in a race to the bottom on price. And that's a race nobody wins.

The danger is that businesses respond to this pressure by cutting fees to stay competitive, without realising they are chipping away at the very foundations that make their work valuable. Price is easy to compete on in the short term, but it's an incredibly difficult position to recover from once clients have reset their expectations of what things should cost.

The businesses that thrive won't be the ones who panicked and dropped their prices. They'll be the ones who invest in their people and use AI to deliver work that clients simply couldn't get anywhere else," Mackey said.

Client Expectations

The research suggests AI is changing not only internal workflows but also buyer behaviour. Clients appear to be asking for faster turnaround and lower fees while also requesting visible use of AI on projects.

For service providers, that creates a difficult balance. Firms may feel pressure to show they are using AI efficiently while also explaining why complex work still depends on experience, sector knowledge and accountability.

That tension is particularly significant for businesses built on billable expertise. If clients increasingly assume software can replicate specialist advice, agencies and consultancies may face more questions about how they define value and justify pricing.

The findings also point to a more transactional market for professional services. The reported rise in "clientfishing" suggests some providers believe prospective clients are seeking free strategic input before deciding whether to commission formal work.

Teamwork.com, which sells project and resource management software to companies delivering client work, framed the report as evidence that AI is reshaping expectations on both sides of the relationship. It described the data as one of the larger studies so far on AI's effect on how clients and suppliers work together.

Among the clearest signals in the research was the extent of fee pressure, with two-thirds of service providers saying clients are asking for more while resisting higher costs.