Yes, this is a very straightforward question.

But it’s a soul-searching question we often have to face.

In the eyes of many, the intangible assets created by intellectual labor seem to be “secondary” or even “superfluous.”

People pay lip service to valuing them.

But when it comes time to actually pay up, they always hesitate.

Sticking to the principle of “quality commands a premium”—

Does this really put the client at a disadvantage?

In the advertising and consulting industries, well-known large firms or top-tier studios often promote themselves with the following stance:

1. We do not accept pitch competitions or participate in tenders;

2. Minimum project fee of xxx yuan, with a down payment of at least 60%;

3. Annual fees for full-service projects must be no less than xxx million...

From the client’s perspective, these claims inevitably smack of self-promotion—after all, the client is the client; the one paying holds the power, and it’s not up to the service provider to set the rules.

However, for a knowledge-intensive enterprise, there is indeed some merit to insisting on specific collaboration methods and payment models.

From the perspective of industrial consulting services:

First, while local governments’ demand for industrial consulting is exploding, professional talent in this sector remains scarce. An industrial consulting firm has limited resources and cannot take on every project.

Second, based on cost and profit margin calculations, a reasonable fee structure has already been established for routine industrial consulting projects.

Third, the industry has entered a new era where quality commands a premium; firms with strong professional capabilities and high-quality deliverables should avoid getting caught up in a race to the bottom.

Of course, in an era of full-fledged competition, high prices coexist with low prices.

However, from the perspective of attracting investment, industrial planning is the crucial first step—only by identifying the right direction can we fundamentally ensure that regional economic development stays on track.

In a sense, this is also a form of cost-effectiveness.

If one focuses only on the immediate future and saves a few hundred thousand yuan at the outset, it is highly likely that tens of millions, or even hundreds of millions, will have to be spent later on.

For example, a certain county bundled the industrial planning for nearly twenty townships across the county and awarded the contract to a planning and design institute affiliated with a university, paying 100,000 yuan per township and requiring all plans to be completed within two months.

The cost isn’t high—just two million yuan for the entire county.

But what kind of quality can we expect from plans produced so hastily?

Be skilled at “putting yourself in others’ shoes”

Maximizing the Quality of Our Team’s Services

Once, an industrial park invited us to participate in a competitive pitch for industrial and spatial planning.

Their requirements were clear: they wanted to select the best planning concept and the most reasonable service price.

They put it this way:

"We guarantee you won’t work for nothing. Even if we don’t end up using your proposal, we will definitely pay your fees. Furthermore, we will certainly give you priority consideration for future tenant recruitment and operations."

In fact, the client’s total project investment was substantial.

However, attempting to save on industrial planning costs in this manner from the very beginning only serves to undermine our confidence in future collaboration.

Market demand is strong—why get bogged down in this?

In reality, industrial planning is closely tied to local resource endowments, industrial foundations, and historical and cultural contexts. It requires thorough research, in-depth fieldwork, and careful deliberation to produce a practical and feasible plan.

Our team should dedicate our limited time and energy to clients who have entrusted us sincerely, rather than wasting them on cumbersome procedures and the trials of building trust.

This conclusion stems precisely from putting ourselves in the shoes of local governments and industrial parks and viewing the issue from their perspective.

Of course, one must first be strong oneself.

Our own industrial research capabilities, along with the corresponding ability to attract and secure investments, must be honed through rigorous practice and continuous innovation.

Otherwise, how can we possibly earn our clients’ trust?

Reaching a “Strategic Consensus”

Put the Price Issue on the Table

During a partnership negotiation, the local state-owned platform company repeatedly haggled over the price, citing various excuses, and we couldn’t reach an agreement for a long time.

If this continued, the partnership was bound to fall through.

With no other choice, we had to reach out to the county Party secretary again.

Under the secretary’s coordination, we initiated a new round of discussions with the senior management of the state-owned platform company. It turned out that he had many doubts and misunderstandings about our approach—and even disagreed with it.

We provided detailed and thorough responses to each of the issues raised by the leadership, and the partnership was able to move forward smoothly.

Later, he shared the following thoughts with us:

"If we implement the original plan to the letter but fail to achieve the expected results, I’m worried we won’t pass the audit later on. But if we don’t push forward with it, we’d be violating the administrative directive of ‘planning-led, industry-driven county development.’ We’re caught between a rock and a hard place!"

Was our disagreement really just about service fees?

Absolutely not.

Our true disagreement lies in our differing understandings and interpretations of strategic objectives and the practical pathways to achieve them.

In other words, we have not reached a strategic consensus.

Under these circumstances, “haggling over prices” has become a mere pretext.

The other party raises the price issue out of courtesy; if cooperation stalls because we can’t agree on price, neither side has to take responsibility.

Therefore, before discussing price, it is more important to engage in dialogue on strategic issues—from what we have to what we lack, from what we want to why we want it, from what we will do to how we will do it…

Once consensus is reached, the price issue can be put on the table.

Paying for Wisdom

Putting a Price on Hope and the Future

Looking back at our industrial consulting service cases, there is no shortage of classic projects that shine with wisdom.

From the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region and the Yangtze River Delta to the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area, and from the eastern coast to the western interior, we have had the privilege of participating in the economic development of these regions, using our wisdom to create hope and shape the future.

Compared to the benefits derived from the services themselves, the joy and pride we derive from creating new development opportunities for these regions—and thereby serving as a model for regional economic development—surpasses all else.

Paying for wisdom is the first step toward respecting knowledge.

As long as we start from the expected goals and outcomes, we can certainly find a price that is acceptable to both parties.

As an intellectual-intensive investment promotion service provider, our intellectual achievements deserve respect, and we, too, require great wisdom.

Every industrial consulting service must be guided by the promotion of regional economic development, rather than strictly adhering to business logic.

Only in this way can we show the greatest respect for our own knowledge.

This is about putting a price on hope and the future.