Business News

31% of Expert Network Calls Include Experts Who Say They Weren’t Fully Qualified, Landmark Woozle Research Study Finds

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 Gaps The 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 for 71% receive project invitations that don’t reflect their expertise, with 32% receiving them frequently 81% of those who experienced AI-moderated calls said the quality was worse than human moderation 65% earn less than US$400 per consultation, while clients typically pay US$1,000–1,500 The most common pay range is US$100–199 82% believe fair compensation should be above US$500 per hour, but only 18% earn that level Project Matching Falls Short of Expectations Experts 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 expertise Rapid 24–48-hour fulfilment targets Keyword-based matching algorithms Limited 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 Concerns Only 17% of respondents have experienced AI-led moderation, but those who have are overwhelmingly critical. Reported issues include: Missed follow-up opportunities Poor contextual understanding Technical errors such as voice recognition failures Despite the quality concerns, client pricing reportedly remains unchanged when AI replaces human moderators. Experts Receive a Small Fraction of Client Fees While 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 Reform A 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 Research The 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-economy