CX buyers want outcome-based pricing, yet their contracts still pay for effort

This HFS Data Viewpoint is for CX leaders and sourcing executives who want to structure outcome-based pricing that both sides can actually measure.

Our upcoming HFS Horizons: Customer Experience Services, 2026 surfaced a number we keep coming back to. Across the CX enterprise clients we surveyed and interviewed, 76% are open to outcome-based or gainshare pricing, yet only 5% are in a contract built that way today. The market keeps telling us it wants to pay for results, but it continues to sign contracts that pay for effort.

The gap between 76% and 5% will not close just because buyers want it to. It changes when both sides can measure the outcome they are paying for, and that is the part most CX contracts cannot yet handle.

The contract has not caught up with the appetit
Today’s CX contracts still run on inputs. Unit-based pricing at 36% and time-and-materials at 36% together account for over 70% of primary contracts, with hybrid models at 13%. Outcome-based or gainshare pricing sits at just 5%, level with managed services and “other.” Enterprises are buying agents, seats, and handle time, then hoping business results follow. The appetite for something better is real, but the structure of the contract has not moved with it.

You cannot price what you cannot measure
The 15x gap between appetite and adoption is a measurement problem. As one enterprise client open to outcome-based pricing put it, “The key is having transparency of measurement and a clear way to evaluate whether the agreed-upon outcomes are being achieved.” Outcome-based pricing only works when both sides trust the number, and trust starts with being able to measure the outcome and verify it.

Structure the commercial model with discipline
Telling a provider to price on outcomes is easy, but building the commercial model to survive a hard quarter is not. It takes clear KPIs that both sides can measure and attribute with clarity, inside a contract that protects the downside as well as the upside. Transparency is what clients are asking for, and it is where most deals break.

The Bottom Line: Despite a strong appetite for outcome-based pricing, today’s contracts remain locked in the legacy model.

The enterprises and providers that build discipline into the contract will win on outcomes, while the rest stay stuck on effort.