Reconsidering the Billable Hour: What If There’s a Better Fit?

Hourly billing has been a long-standing feature in professional accounting. It’s familiar. It’s structured. It’s built into many firms’ systems, client agreements, and even expectations. 

But as the scope of accounting continues to expand—especially in areas like advisory, financial planning, and client education—it’s worth taking a closer look at how well the billable hour model reflects the nature of that work. 

This isn’t about throwing it out. It’s about asking, does this still serve the kind of value clients are seeking—and the kind of value we’re offering? 

When Time and Value Drift Apart 

Some types of work still align well with time-based billing. Year-end file preparation, corporate returns, reconciliations—tasks that are process-driven and predictable in scope. But other engagements aren’t so easy to measure in minutes. 

Take strategic planning, for example. Or business structuring advice. Or even helping a client interpret shifting tax policy in the context of their succession plans. These are services that draw heavily on experience, relationships, and the ability to see the broader picture—not just technical execution. 

In many of those situations, the value to the client isn’t based on how long it took. It’s based on clarity, reduced risk, and timely decisions. Billing by the hour doesn’t always communicate that value clearly. 

Technology Has Reshaped the Nature of Output 

Technology has made many technical tasks faster, more accurate, and less manual. That’s been a welcome shift—but it’s also made “time spent” a less reliable signal of effort or quality. 

In a world where reconciliation takes five minutes instead of fifty, the client still receives the same (or better) result. But the time-based price tag drops—while the value, arguably, has not. 

This raises a worthwhile question: when output improves through efficiency, should pricing decrease proportionally? Or is there another way to recognize the real worth of the result? 

Transparency, Not Complexity 

One reason many firms have stuck with hourly billing is its perceived transparency. It’s easy to track, explain, and justify. And clients are familiar with it. 

At the same time, some firms experimenting with fixed-fee or value-based arrangements have found that clients often appreciate clarity over granularity. A clear scope and defined outcome can feel simpler than a detailed breakdown of hours—especially when clients are engaging for strategy, not just services. 

This isn’t a right-or-wrong situation. But it highlights that different models communicate value differently. And the key may be matching the pricing structure to the type of engagement—not just defaulting to time because it’s what’s always been done. 

No Single Answer—Just Better Fit 

There’s no universal solution when it comes to pricing professional work. But it can be helpful to regularly revisit how a pricing model aligns with the type of service being delivered. Especially as more firms explore roles that move beyond compliance and into planning, education, and long-term strategy. 

These conversations don’t need to be sweeping or disruptive. They can be incremental, starting with a handful of services or client types. In many cases, just identifying the kind of work that doesn’t sit comfortably within the hourly model is a useful step in itself. 

A Conversation Worth Having 

Every practice is different. So is every client relationship. But where time and value no longer align, there may be room to experiment—quietly, practically, and with the client experience in mind. 

Not as a mandate. Not as a trend. Simply as a thoughtful evolution of how we reflect the expertise that accountants bring to the table.