Conservative vs. full plan: options A, B and C

Presenting a single plan may look firm, but patients often read it as "take it or leave it". Presenting three scenarios, from the most restrained to the broadest, opens a more honest conversation about priorities, budget and pace. It is also a sensitive area: the A, B and C format is known in sales for steering choices through contrast. Here is how to use it without falling into that trap.

How do you structure the three scenarios?

The right way to build them starts from the assessment, not from the price list. First define the main concern and the realistic goal. Then design:

The example is hypothetical and only shows the format. The content of each scenario comes from the patient's face. To calibrate volumes, see ml per area: ranges in planning.

What is the ethical rule for A, B and C?

Four rules, which work as a check:

1. Every option is clinically defensible. There is no scenario that exists only for comparison.
2. The recommendation is yours, and it is stated. Say which one you recommend and why. Hiding the recommendation hands over the decision without support.
3. The highest cost is not the default. Need decides, not the ticket price.
4. Scenario A is viable on its own. If it only works with future add-ons, make that clear.

More on ethical limits in ethics of result simulation and how to increase plan acceptance, where the honest approach is the foundation.

How does the simulation fit in?

Each scenario can have its own projection. This lets you compare, side by side, the effect of different volumes and helps contain exaggerated requests: on seeing scenario C, patients often realize that B already addresses their concern.

Each projection uses one credit, so plan your comparisons. An economical approach is to simulate the scenario you recommend most and the most restrained one, and generate the third only if the patient asks. See comparing Subtle, Moderate and Pronounced intensities.

How do you present the quote for each scenario?

The quote should be as clear as the plan. A good practice is to show, for each scenario, areas, ml, price, sessions and expected follow-ups.

More on the logic of value in linking plan and quote in facial harmonization and a quote the patient understands.

How do you run the conversation?

Do not present the three scenarios at once like a menu. Start with the concern, present your recommendation, and only then show the alternatives. Ask what the patient values (timing, budget, a natural look) and use that to anchor the decision.

When a patient always asks for the most, work through the reason before accepting; when they always ask for the least, check clinical viability. See the patient who always wants more and declining a request for excessive volume.

What about the patient who wants to mix options?

It happens. They may pick something from A and something from C. The condition is that the combination stays coherent. If the mix unbalances the face (for example, a projected chin without supporting cheekbones), explain it and propose an adjustment. Record what was chosen, the date and who decided.

What should you review afterward?

At the follow-up, compare the chosen scenario with what was done and adjust. If the patient started with A, reopen the conversation about B or C only when indicated. This keeps the relationship honest and avoids the feeling that every follow-up is a new sale. See follow-up and retention.

What contrast traps exist?

The contrast effect is well known: faced with three prices, the middle one looks reasonable. If option C is designed only to make B attractive, the scenario stops being information. A simple test: would you accept performing scenario C if the patient chose it? If the answer is "only reluctantly", the scenario is poorly designed.

Another trap is the order of presentation. Starting with the most expensive anchors the patient to a high figure; starting with the cheapest can sound like an invitation to ask for more. Present in the order of your recommendation and explain the reasoning, not the price.

What if the patient always chooses A?

It is a legitimate choice. It may reflect budget, caution or contentment with little. Respect it, confirm that A covers the essentials and record that the other options were presented. Do not use the follow-up to reopen the sale; reopen the plan only if there is an indication.

What if they always choose C?

Be careful: there may be anxiety, unrealistic expectations or signs of a compulsive search for change. Before accepting, talk about the reason and check whether C is clinically justified. See facial harmonization plan and mental health.

Practical summary

Present your recommendation first, design three scenarios you would actually perform, show each with ml, price and stages, use the simulation to compare, and record the patient's choice. Never build a scenario just to make another one look reasonable.