Singapore – Professional services firms are losing a median of roughly USD $60,000 annually to nonbillable client coordination work, according to a new benchmark survey by Progress ShareFile, a division of Progress Software.
The self-reported benchmark study surveyed 355 firms across ten markets, spanning industries including accounting, legal, financial services and healthcare, and set out to measure the operational work that surrounds client-facing services such as tax filing, legal advice, financial planning and audits, rather than the delivery work itself.
Client-facing staff spent an average of 20.3 hours a week on coordination tasks that never appear on a client invoice, the findings show. That workload includes chasing missing documents, correcting incomplete submissions, manually tracking statuses and managing files and signatures across disconnected systems.
Broken down further, respondents reported spending 5.99 hours a week following up on missing documents, 5.10 hours fixing incorrect or incomplete submissions, 4.71 hours tracking requests and statuses manually, and 4.52 hours managing signatures and file-related tasks.
At an average billing rate of $65 an hour, that unbilled time translates into a median annual cost of $60,840 per firm. Nearly one in three firms surveyed said the overhead exceeds $120,000 a year, a sum comparable to the cost of an additional full-time hire.
Despite the scale of the cost, the survey found a disconnect between how firms feel about their processes and how those processes actually perform. Eighty-four and a half percent (84.5%) of respondents rated their current coordination methods as satisfactory, even among those carrying the heaviest coordination loads.
Firms spending the most time chasing clients reported almost identical confidence levels to those spending the least, suggesting that inefficient habits have become normalised rather than genuinely effective. The survey’s authors attribute this to routine practices, such as recurring follow-up emails and manually updated spreadsheets, becoming so embedded in daily work that they are rarely questioned.
The consequences, however, extend beyond internal operations and into client relationships. Sixty-seven percent of firms reported that between 10% and 50% of their quarterly engagements are delayed due to missing information or workflow issues, whilst one in ten firms said delays affect more than half of their engagements each quarter.
Missed deadlines emerged as the most commonly cited consequence, ranked first by 28.7% of respondents. Other reported impacts include client dissatisfaction, compliance concerns, rising staff burnout and billable time write-offs.
Growth appears to be a key driver of the strain. Eighty-three percent (80%) of firms said that client volume growth has increased operational pressure, as more requests, overlapping deadlines and reduced visibility make manual tracking harder to sustain.
Among the specific friction points measured, “getting complete information” from clients scored highest for frequency of difficulty, followed by email follow-ups on missing items, getting correct information, managing changes mid-engagement and getting required documents submitted.
Improving the client experience ranked as the top priority for nearly 60% of respondents, ahead of faster service delivery and fewer errors and rework, each cited by 42% of firms. Reduced compliance risk, faster task turnaround, a better employee experience, greater visibility and higher billable utilisation followed further down the list of desired outcomes.
When asked which capabilities matter most to managing client engagements effectively, firms ranked structured information collection, oversight across engagements, structured document requests and a single view of clients above artificial intelligence tools. AI-assisted document handling ranked last overall on importance, despite more than six in ten (6:10) firms expressing strong interest in it, particularly those under the greatest coordination strain.
According to the survey’s findings, this ordering suggests firms want defined, structured processes in place before layering automation on top, rather than treating AI as a fix for unstructured workflows.
Commenting on the findings, John Yang, Vice President, APJ at Progress Software, said, “Across Australia, professional services firms are embracing digital transformation to improve productivity, strengthen client relationships and support growth. Yet many client interactions are still managed through fragmented processes that create unnecessary delays, inefficiencies and governance challenges.”
“As firms look for new ways to remain competitive, there is growing recognition that better client collaboration is not simply an operational improvement but a strategic business advantage. By bringing greater structure, visibility and intelligence to these workflows, firms can enhance client trust, support compliance obligations and deliver better outcomes, while freeing their teams to focus on the expertise and advice that clients value most,” Yang continued.
On the other note, Loren Jarrett, EVP and GM, Digital Experience at Progress Software, emphasised, “Helping clients and providing positive client experiences is the primary goal of professional services firms. However, many firms are failing to deliver client engagement experiences that are streamlined, effective and efficient. For years, firms have accepted fragmented client coordination as simply part of the job. Our research shows these inefficient, manual processes are not only costly but also detrimental to the overall client experience.”
Echoing that view, Amy Machado, Research Director, Content and Knowledge Discovery Strategies at IDC, added, “Professional services firms are growing fast, but the way work gets coordinated hasn’t kept up. Too much still depends on disconnected email, spreadsheets and informal processes, which creates delays, margin pressure and inconsistent client experiences.”
“The market has demand for a better way to collect information, organise work, and deliver for clients with confidence. Progress has built a platform specifically to solve those challenges,” she further elaborated.
Taken together, the data paints a picture of an industry that has invested heavily in the quality of the advice and services it delivers, whilst the administrative scaffolding around that work has not kept pace. As client volumes rise, the survey suggests, firms relying on informal coordination systems built around inboxes, spreadsheets and chat threads may find those systems increasingly unable to scale.
