Yes. Each case study and engagement tier carries a work-type tag in postmeta: packaging architecture, pricing-metric design, value-based pricing, competitive benchmarking, or a bundle. When a prospect describes their need, the bot filters to the relevant tier and case study. Heavy packaging work scopes very differently than a clean pricing-metric migration project.

Case studies are tagged with starting ACV, ARR band, SaaS segment, and realized uplift in postmeta. The bot matches by closest starting ACV and segment first, then realized uplift. A $24k ACV ask gets a similar-starting case, not a $200k enterprise case that is irrelevant to the buyer's situation. Realism beats impressive every time.

Yes. Van Westendorp price-sensitivity studies, conjoint analysis for feature bundling, and willingness-to-pay interviews each sit as research methodology options. The bot reads which fits the prospect's situation and quotes the research-inclusive tier. Lighter engagements skip primary research and rely on existing customer interviews plus competitive benchmarking.

Sprint tiers can ship in 4-6 weeks for packaging-only work. Full Resets including primary research run 10-14 weeks. The bot quotes timeline ranges based on the scope and the prospect's deadline. CFOs running against a board cycle get realistic guidance about whether their window allows for primary research or whether existing-data engagements fit better.

Value-based pricing is one of the most requested but hardest-to-execute methodologies. The bot reads your published framework and explains the prerequisites (clear value metric, willing customer panel for interviews, executive buy-in for differential pricing). It quotes the value-based tier and routes the conversation to your principal consultant when the prospect is serious.

Yes. Your methodology library covers the trade-offs: seat-based scales with team adoption but caps at headcount, usage-based scales with consumption but creates revenue volatility, hybrid combines both. The bot reads the prospect's product and customer profile, then recommends the metric strategy that fits, with case study examples from similar transitions.

Yes. Competitive benchmarking can be a standalone Sprint or a component of a larger Reset. The bot quotes the standalone scope (typically 4-6 weeks, $25k-$40k) and explains what it delivers: competitive matrix, pricing-page screenshots, packaging architecture comparison, and recommended positioning gaps. Benchmarking alone rarely moves ACV meaningfully without packaging work alongside.

Case studies flagged confidential in your CMS never surface in chat. Only public studies and anonymized excerpts get quoted. The system instruction reinforces this so the bot never invents a logo or fabricates a quote from a real customer. The privacy guarantee matters especially in pricing consulting, where client identities are often closely held.