How Do I Know If I Have a Worthiness Deficit or Just an Underpricing Problem? (Part 2)

Q: Part 1 helped me understand the difference conceptually. But when I try to apply the diagnostic questions to my own situation, I’m still not sure. What else can I look at?

When the standard diagnostic questions produce ambiguous results, three additional assessments help clarify the picture.

The Content of the Concern

When you imagine raising your rate, what specifically concerns you?

Listen carefully to the answer. There are two distinct categories of concern:

Outcome concerns: “I’ll have fewer clients.” “My income might actually drop.” “I’ll lose market share to practitioners charging less.” These are business outcome concerns — worries about external market response.

Relational concerns: “My clients will think I’ve changed.” “My community will see me as someone who prioritizes money.” “My family won’t understand how I can charge that much.” “That relationship will feel different.” These are relational concerns — worries about what the rate change will mean for how you are perceived and valued by specific people.

Outcome concerns are characteristic of a market underpricing problem. Relational concerns are characteristic of the worthiness deficit. The presence of relational concerns — specific, personalized, about what particular people will think of you — is the clearest indicator that the worthiness pattern is the mechanism.

The Relief Test

Think about a scenario in which a prospect calls and declines your services, saying they’ve found someone less expensive. What is your emotional response?

Option A: Mild disappointment. You would have preferred to work with them, and you’re aware the income would have been useful.

Option B: Mild relief. The conversation is resolved without the enrollment conversation happening at the rate you’ve been holding.

If option B is present — if some part of you feels relieved when a prospect chooses not to enroll because the rate question is now off the table — the worthiness deficit is operating. Relief at the avoidance of the claiming conversation is a specific signal.

Underpricing without a worthiness component doesn’t produce relief at non-enrollment. It produces straightforward disappointment at lost business.

The Comparison Test

Think about practitioners in your field who charge significantly more than you do. Not the top 1% — just practitioners with comparable experience and credentials who charge 50–100% more.

What is your honest internal response to them?

Response A (no significant worthiness component): They’ve positioned well. Good for them. I should look at their approach and apply it to my practice.

Response B (worthiness component present): They’re somehow different from me. Maybe their clients are different. Maybe their confidence is just built differently than mine. Maybe they don’t care as much about accessibility. Or — privately — maybe they’re a little greedy.

Response B includes a narrative about why the higher-charging practitioners occupy a different category than you do. This narrative is the worthiness deficit constructing a barrier between “the level I’m at” and “the level where other people appropriately charge more.” This barrier is internal, not market-based.

When the Diagnosis Is Still Mixed

If these additional assessments still produce mixed results: you probably have both operating simultaneously. Most conscious practitioners who have been significantly undercharging for an extended period have a worthiness component. The question is its proportion relative to the market underpricing.

The practical answer is the same in either case: address both. Market-based underpricing responds to information and intention (learn what the market actually is, set the rate accordingly). Worthiness-driven underpricing responds to behavioral evidence (run the experiments, build the evidence log).

If you’re uncertain which is primary, start with the behavioral experiment. Name the rate that the market analysis suggests is appropriate. Run three to five enrollment conversations. Observe the alarm intensity and the actual outcomes. This will reveal, very quickly, whether the barrier is primarily internal or external.

The Abundance GPS Skool community helps practitioners run this diagnostic precisely and design the right next experiment from their specific situation. Come take a look.