Specialty mix
The way specialty mix is measured changed during this period, so the two points are not comparable and no movement is shown.
Comparisons resume once a full period has been recorded on the new measure.
Where it stands
Specialty mix reads 31%. The mix behind it could not be compared on this read; the sections below say why.
- Window
- Stated as of Aug 23, 2026. The period the reading covers is set by its source and is not stated on this tile.
- How it is counted
- Fee revenue over this period grouped by the industry on each client account, with the largest group taken as a share of the fee revenue we can attribute. Pass-through costs are left out on both sides. A client with no industry on file lands in an unclassified bucket rather than being guessed into one.
- Source
- Financial ledger, as of Aug 23, 2026
- Drivers
- Computed from this workspace's own records.
What this is
Share of earned income in your largest specialty; the full mix is in the detail. Fee revenue over this period grouped by the industry on each client account, with the largest group taken as a share of the fee revenue we can attribute. Pass-through costs are left out on both sides. A client with no industry on file lands in an unclassified bucket rather than being guessed into one.
Why it is on your dashboard
Where the roster concentrates is a strategy read: depth in a few industries makes referrals, pricing power, and faster delivery, and a roster spread one client per industry means starting from scratch on every engagement. How much of the income sits in your biggest specialty says more about that than how many industries you can name. It sits on this board with no ratified level to read it against: distribution tracked.
Why it is where it is
Not answered here.
No chart breakdown is served for this metric.
The comparison composes from the same served breakdown the chart draws, the moment it reads.
What we checked, in order
Not answered here.
There is no ruled order of checks for Specialty mix yet. Three of these ordered diagnostics exist and they attach to the profit share, an account under the floor, and absorbed work. This metric is not one of them.
An ordered set of checks is worth more than a list of things to look at, because the order is what stops the most expensive move being tried first. Writing one for this metric is a decision about how it should be diagnosed rather than a gap in the data.
Root cause
Not answered here.
Without the served mix and a ruled shape there is no comparison to explain.
This answers when the distribution read returns.
What to do now
Not answered here.
There is no served mix to act on.
This fills in when the distribution read returns.
What stops it coming back
Lean into the specialties that repeat: a named offering, referral asks inside the deep buckets, and pipeline sourcing aimed where the roster already has depth.
Depth compounds and spread does not. Repetition is what turns delivery into playbooks, playbooks into margin, and satisfied clients into referrals inside their own industry. The product can keep the shape visible next to the pipeline; choosing where to concentrate is a positioning decision, and it is the firm's to make.
This closes no measured driver above, and does not claim to.
What happens if this is ignored
A roster that drifts toward one client per industry does not fail loudly. It shows up as delivery that never gets faster, pricing that never gets firmer, and referrals that never arrive, because nothing repeats often enough to compound. Left alone, every new win is as expensive as the first one, and the firm stays a generalist priced like one. Where this lands is not this tile. It is Delivery margin reads 83% against floor 50%, which it is inside. It is inside its band today, which is what holding this position is currently buying you. Depth is what turns delivery into a repeatable thing, and repeatable work is cheaper to produce. A roster that never repeats pays to learn an industry once per client, and that cost lands on what the work keeps.
Is this target still telling you anything
Not answered here.
This metric carries no ratified target, so there is nothing here to calibrate. A target can only be too easy or too hard once somebody has set one.
Setting a level for this metric is what turns it from a number you watch into a number you are held to, and it is what this section reads against.