This is an interface that feels interesting to an inexperienced client, but is not intuitive, easy to use, or a good experience for users.
- There is WAY too much cognitive load involved.
- The user first has to understand the graph, then understand the non standard interaction model, then relate the interaction to a panel that may or may not be below the fold.
- The panel itself is non standard (non grid aligned, unfamiliar hexagonal shapes favoring cryptic icons over text)
- On top of all of this, a user who wants to peruse all services now has to drag the slider across each node in the graph, then try to read the hexagonal shapes, then repeat to much frustration.
This kind of idea is typical for clients who are creative but inexperienced with UX. Typically the design firm will have an active role to play in explaining why creativity is not the same as UX or branding, and why creative solutions can lead to bad UX and negative branding.
So my first suggestion would be...try to fix the upstream problem of bad design, otherwise this is like choosing what color to paint the Titanic.
If you really need to do this...
I would start by reducing the nonlinear, indirect interaction in the design:
Replace the drag interaction with a row of buttons, each representing a growth phase. You can use flat styling to make these look elegant while retaining the button affordance so it's clear to users how the interaction works.
When the button is pressed, highlight the growth phase in the graph and animate a drop down panel connected to the button. This provides a clear visual linkage between the graph, the button and the drop down panel content.
Use hexagons, or the graph, but not both. You are trying to do way too much by introducing visual bling into the interface. Help your client exercise some design restraint.
Hope that helps. For various professional reasons I'm very familiar with VC, legal, accounting, banking and consulting firms who frequently need to communicate a range of services spanning a company's life cycle and in my experience this is not the right way to do it: the chart is communicative, but the way it is being made interactive is not.
I'll try to add an alternate wireframe here tomorrow if I have time.