Score one client in 60 seconds.

It is an index, not a percentage

This is the part that surprises people, so it is worth stating before anything else. Four sevens — a client you would describe as “pretty good on everything” — score 24.01, not 70. Four eights score 40.96. The scale is deliberately unforgiving in the middle, because multiplying four numbers compresses everything that is not close to excellent.

So do not read your score as a grade. Read it as a position on a scale whose only real job is comparison: this client against that one, and this client now against the same client sixty days from now. A first score is a baseline, not a verdict.

Why the numbers multiply

Four scores of nine, nine, nine and one add up to twenty-eight out of forty. That sounds like a solid B minus. Multiply them instead and the same relationship scores 7.29.

The multiplication is a design choice, and the argument for it comes from two well-replicated findings: Slovic’s work on how trust in institutions is destroyed faster than it is built, and the review by Baumeister and colleagues titled, plainly, Bad is stronger than good. Both say negative events are weighed more heavily and remembered longer than positive ones. An additive model cannot represent that — it averages a collapse into a respectable-looking total.

To be precise about what those findings do and do not support: they establish the asymmetry. They do not prescribe this particular formula. Multiplying four variables is my way of building that asymmetry into a number you can calculate on a Tuesday, and the four-variable choice is drawn from practice rather than derived from the research.

What the bands mean

The four bands describe what I have typically seen at each level across a decade of working with service businesses.

What the score does not know

It scores four communication behaviours over sixty days, from your point of view. That leaves out a great deal: the quality of your actual work, price, contract terms, whether your client’s budget just got cut, and whether the person who hired you still works there. A relationship can end at 80 for reasons this instrument never sees.

It is also self-scored, which means it inherits your blind spots. The single most useful thing you can do with it is ask a client to score you on the same four scales and compare. The gap between the two is usually more informative than either number.

And “fix the lowest variable” is a rule about the arithmetic, not about your business. Raising the lowest number produces the largest gain per point — but points are not equally expensive. If your Personalization is a 3 and fixing it means rebuilding how you write every message, while your Consistency is a 4 and fixing it means one calendar reminder, do the calendar reminder. The formula ranks leverage. You rank effort.

What to do with it

Score your five most important clients, not just the one you thought of first. Three things usually happen. At least one score comes in lower than you expected. The client you had been vaguely worried about turns out to sit near the bottom, and now you can say why. And your highest-scoring client is often the one who last referred someone to you.

Then do the one thing the calculator suggested, re-score in thirty days, and see whether the number moved. A score you take once is a curiosity. A score you take monthly is an instrument.

The score tells you where a relationship stands. It does not tell you how to move it across all four variables at once — the methodology behind this calculator covers what it measures, what it assumes, and where the four variables came from.