A series on the commercial mechanics of margin erosion in technology and professional services deals. Each piece addresses one dimension of the same problem: margin that was forecast at signing didn't materialize in delivery. The conditions that produce it follow recognizable patterns. They are often created upstream of where the variance materializes, in commercial decisions made before the consequences were visible.
Each piece is a structured argument on one dimension of the margin problem.
Substack builds the case. LinkedIn is the pressure test. Follow for the argument, distilled.
A margin projection can be sound when it's built and still fail to survive the deal-making process. Pricing assumptions change. Scope moves. Commitments accumulate. Concessions alter the economics. By signature, the margin being forecast may no longer reflect the deal the company has actually agreed to deliver.
The intervention with the greatest leverage often happens while the economics can still be protected: when pricing, scope, commitments, risk and concessions can still be challenged against what the business can actually deliver. After signature, many of those decisions have become obligations and the range of available interventions narrows.
When the variance report becomes a recurring conversation, the explanation doesn't recover the margin. What it does is reset the baseline for the next deal. That cycle has a source. Breaking it means finding where margin is repeatedly being put at risk and changing what happens there before the next deal closes.
If the variance has become a recurring conversation, the next question isn't how to explain it. It's where the pattern is being created and what needs to change before the next deal closes.
© 2026 blueFulcrum LLC