|
Welcome back for 2026! I recently came across two data science services being sold online, both by individual consultants working remotely. The first (on Fiverr) promised: "I will build you a dashboard from your data that meets your specifications." The second was a half-day "check-up" of a company's data capabilities, described as: "suitable for internal use when making strategic choices." Same type of consultant. Same general skill set. 100X difference in price. Now, you could argue the difference was all due to experience - a beginner vs a seasoned pro. But that misses the point. I've seen plenty of data scientists with 20+ years' experience who are still selling the equivalent of $100 dashboards. Meanwhile, less experienced consultants who position themselves strategically are commanding significantly higher rates. Experience helps. But it's the type of work that ultimately determines the value. Strategic vs implementation. Here's what I mean: The $100 service is purely implementation. You tell them exactly what you want, they build it, hand it over. Done. There's no strategic thinking. No consideration of whether this solves your actual problem. No transformation of your business. You're literally just buying a set of hands to execute your specification. The $10,000 service is entirely strategic. The buyer doesn't know if their organisation has a functional data operation or a disaster waiting to happen. That uncertainty could cost them millions. The consultant conducts an intensive assessment of their data team's capabilities, processes, and outputs. Yes, there's a deliverable - a summary report. But what that report actually provides is a transformation. From: "I don't know how my data team is performing." To: "I have the knowledge to make confident decisions about the data team." That transformation is worth $10,000. Notice the pattern: Implementation work (e.g. "Build me a dashboard") = low value, commoditised, easily replaced Strategic work (e.g. "Help me understand if our data capabilities can support our growth plans") = high value, differentiated, hard to replace This is why some data scientists stay stuck as "the person who builds dashboards" while others become strategic advisors to executives. It's not because they're better at Python or know more algorithms. It's because they've shifted from selling deliverables to selling transformations. From implementation to strategy. The question isn't: Can you build a model? The question is: Can you help stakeholders understand what decisions they should make and why? That's the work people actually value. And that's the work that gets recognised and rewarded - whether you're a consultant or an employee. Talk again soon, Dr Genevieve Hayes |
Twice weekly, I share proven strategies to help data scientists get noticed, promoted, and valued. No theory — just practical steps to transform your technical expertise into business impact and the freedom to call your own shots.
Around age 19, having just graduated high school, I got my first job in "data". I could barely use Excel and thought Python was something you'd find at the zoo, but a friend of the family hired me to tutor their teenaged son. My maths was good enough to help him get through high school maths. Around age 29, having just finished my PhD, I landed a role managing an insurance pricing and analytics team. I'd never heard the term "machine learning" back then, but I had spent a good chunk of the...
You’re already using optimisation every day as a data scientist - but you probably don’t think about it. Every time you train a machine learning model, you’re running an optimisation algorithm to find the best parameters. But there’s a second type of optimisation that most data scientists never even touch - and it’s where the real business value often lives. It’s called decision optimisation, and it can transform your ML predictions into actionable decisions. Here’s the difference: ML...
Data science exists to support decision making, but within any organisation, there is a hierarchy of decisions - low stakes, high volume decisions at the bottom; high stakes, low volume decisions at the top. Executives care most about the decisions at the top. There’s valuable work at the bottom of that hierarchy. But automating routine decisions is about clearing the path so executives can focus on the high-stakes decisions. It’s not about walking it with them. For years, data science has...