31% of Expert Network Calls Include Experts Who Say They Weren’t Fully Qualified, Landmark Woozle Research Study Finds
A new study by Woozle Research surveyed 1,368 expert network participants and found significant concerns around project matching, AI-moderated consultations, and compensation practices. The findings suggest systemic issues across the expert network industry, with most experts earning less than 20% of fees billed to clients.London, United Kingdom, December 5, 2025 -- Woozle Research today released The State of the Expert Economy 2025, a comprehensive study revealing major quality, matching, and compensation issues across the expert network industry. Nearly one-third of surveyed experts say they participated in consultations for which they were not fully qualified, alongside widespread reports of irrelevant project invitations and dissatisfaction with AI-led moderation.Major Findings Point to Industry-Wide Structural GapsThe study surveyed 1,368 expert network participants across global platforms, examining the mechanics behind project matching, qualification processes, moderation formats, and compensation structures. The results highlight a fast-paced, keyword-driven system where speed often overrides accuracy and verification.Key findings include:31% of experts say they have completed calls they weren’t qualified for71% receive project invitations that don’t reflect their expertise, with 32% receiving them frequently81% of those who experienced AI-moderated calls said the quality was worse than human moderation65% earn less than US$400 per consultation, while clients typically pay US$1,000–1,500The most common pay range is US$100–19982% believe fair compensation should be above US$500 per hour, but only 18% earn that levelProject Matching Falls Short of ExpectationsExperts rated project-to-expertise alignment at 7.5 out of 10 on average, with fewer than half giving scores of 8 or higher.Woozle’s analysis attributes most mismatch issues to:Self-certified expertiseRapid 24–48-hour fulfilment targetsKeyword-based matching algorithmsLimited corrective feedback loops“When clients pay $1,200 for a consultation and nearly one-third of experts say they weren’t fully qualified for the call, that highlights structural weaknesses,” said Mark Pacitti, CFA, Founder of Woozle Research. “Project matching, verification, and compensation practices all require meaningful improvement if the industry is to maintain credibility.”AI Moderation Raises Quality ConcernsOnly 17% of respondents have experienced AI-led moderation, but those who have are overwhelmingly critical.Reported issues include:Missed follow-up opportunitiesPoor contextual understandingTechnical errors such as voice recognition failuresDespite the quality concerns, client pricing reportedly remains unchanged when AI replaces human moderators.Experts Receive a Small Fraction of Client FeesWhile clients often pay more than US$1,000 per call, experts typically earn less than 20% of the fee.Most experts — 69% — say they do not set their own rates, instead relying on platform-set prices or accepting whatever offer is presented.The report notes growing frustration among experienced professionals and warns of potential talent flight if compensation and transparency do not improve.Experts Want Transparency and ReformA notable 90% of respondents want access to anonymised benchmarking data on pay, call volume, and platform performance — a sign that long-standing industry opacity may be reaching its limits.About the ResearchThe State of the Expert Economy 2025 surveyed 1,368 expert network participants between October and November 2025 via LinkedIn and direct outreach. The study collected detailed quantitative and qualitative responses on compensation, project matching, moderation types, and platform experiences.Full report available: https://forms.woozleresearch.com/state-of-the-expert-economyAbout the company: Woozle Research is a research and insights organisation that specialises in gathering structured intelligence from industry experts. The company provides verified insights, rigorous methodologies, and transparent data collection practices to help organisations make informed decisions. Woozle Research does not provide investment advice or financial advisory services.More information: www.woozleresearch.com.Contact Info:Name: Mark Pacitti, CFAEmail: Send EmailOrganization: Woozle ResearchAddress: Metro Building, 1 Butterwick, London, W6 8DLWebsite: http://www.woozleresearch.comRelease ID: 89177721In the event of encountering any errors, concerns, or inconsistencies within the content shared in this press release, we kindly request that you immediately contact us at error@releasecontact.com (it is important to note that this email is the authorized channel for such matters, sending multiple emails to multiple addresses does not necessarily help expedite your request). Our dedicated team will be readily accessible to address your feedback within 8 hours and take appropriate measures to rectify any identified issues or facilitate press release takedowns. Ensuring accuracy and reliability are central to our commitment.
The research highlights a fast-paced, keyword-driven environment where the speed of connecting experts with clients often takes precedence over ensuring accurate matching and proper verification of expertise. A staggering 71% of experts reported receiving project invitations that did not align with their actual expertise, with nearly a third receiving these irrelevant invitations frequently. This suggests that the industry's reliance on keyword-based matching algorithms and rapid fulfillment targets is leading to mismatches and potentially compromising the quality of advice provided to clients.
Beyond project alignment, the study also sheds light on dissatisfaction with AI-led moderation. The majority (81%) of experts who experienced AI moderation reported a decline in quality compared to human-led sessions, citing issues such as missed follow-up opportunities, poor contextual understanding, and technical glitches like voice recognition failures. Despite these drawbacks, client pricing reportedly remains the same, raising questions about the value clients receive when AI replaces human moderators.
Perhaps the most striking finding concerns compensation. The study reveals a significant disparity between what clients pay for consultations and what experts actually earn. While clients typically pay between US$1,000 and US$1,500 per consultation, 65% of experts earn less than US$400. The most common pay range falls between US$100 and US$199. This means that experts often receive less than 20% of the fees billed to clients. A vast majority (82%) of experts believe fair compensation should be above US$500 per hour, but only a small fraction (18%) currently earn that level. This imbalance is fueling frustration among experienced professionals and raising concerns about potential talent flight if compensation practices do not improve.
Mark Pacitti, CFA, Founder of Woozle Research, emphasizes the need for reform, stating that the fact that nearly one-third of experts feel unqualified for the calls they participate in, despite clients paying premium rates, highlights structural weaknesses within the industry. He calls for meaningful improvements in project matching, verification