Suz wrote:
> We started talking with the clients about our current project in mid-May.
> The project should wrap up today. Since mid-May I have been deluged with
> emails with questions about their project. Until I demanded an end to it,
> they even had me on their inner-office list so that I would be cc'd on all
> their little jokes they passed around the office. Basically, even though
> their budget was equivalent to only about two weeks salary (if we were
> salaried), they've expected a level of participation from us similar to
> that of full time employees for the last 10-12 weeks. Even a simple
> suggestion like that of switching to faster host has required a half dozen
> emails. Yesterday I worked on HTML for a simple form, and found that I had
> four different e-mails listing copy for the same form, all from different
> people, and all different.
When I start working with a new client I almost always start with
identifying a person who ALL communication will be done through. That person
is assigned the responsibilities of:
1) accumulating and sending to me all text, images, data files, etc that are
going to be used as content for the site.
2) acting as my sole contact at the client's office: this person is the only
person who has unquestioned rights to add or subtract items from the job.
They have the final say on determining the project.
When we determine who this person is going to be, we make sure that other
people at her company know that they must not pester the webmaster (usually
the selected person will do something simple, like tell their coworkers
"every time you call him it costs x amount of dollars, so come to me first".
I do not have the time or inclination to sift through the requests of a half
dozen people at my client's office, which has inevitably lead to two things:
1) too many phone calls and emails to me
2) the "right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing".
This last reason, #2, is a good enough reason to have a sole, approved
contact: it saves the customer and me from a lot of
confusion/anguish/grief/bs. This person must know their responsibilities: I
define them in writing or verbally and keep them and their co-workers in
line from the very first time they stray. How? Well, here's an example:
Nancy is my contact at client XYZ. We are in agreement on this. We both
understand the scope of the project. We have had meetings with 10 other
people at her firm and they all understand that all communication with the
webmaster must go through Nancy.
Then, one day, Barney in toy development calls me up and asks me if we can
add a section on "purple fabrics around the world" to the site. I tell him
he must ask Nancy.
Another scenario is via email: Ken in molded plastics sends me an email
telling me to change the heading on a page from "Why their are no gonads" to
"New, non-removable pants". I will typically contact Nancy and tell her that
Ken sent this request. Then Nancy will take the responsibility to talk to
Ken. I may not return Ken's email, because that might lead to more. Nancy
has contacted Ken and we keep the pecking order...and I can get some work
done.
Occasionally, I will have more than one direct contact on a project, but in
that case I have always been able to give each person different
responsibilities, so "Joe" doesn't have to worry about what "Nancy" is
doing. This keeps them out of the way of each other. To make this work I
must have a clear definition of the project. It's up to me to organize it. I
can't expect my client to know how to.
> This client is not an exception. Rather, it is typical of what we've come
> to expect in client relationships. Dave and I, as has anyone who's worked
> in an ad agency or design studio environment, are good at organizing and
> directing the flow of copy and materials. Art-directing typesetting jobs
> was a great way to learn to organize our thoughts, because every
> mistake or
> every style change used to add an additional $50-$150 to the cost of a
> typesetting job. With rare exception, clients don't have these
> organizational skills.
How very true. I adjust the amount of work I expect to do based on how
disorganized my client seems to be. I don't mind, I just bump up the price
of a project if I know that they will have to use me to get organized. If
the client has a smart person who can stay organized as my contact, then
they pay for less of my skills. Seeing the organized/disorganized ratio
ahead of time is part of succeeding in not wasting a lot of time during the
project. If they seem disorganized, I'll give them some instructions in
writing to follow. A checklist or something. Tying that to a time frame is a
cute attempt at predicting what's going to happen, but from my experience
clients don't pay a lot of attention to the time schedule...and I can't
really expect it. Most of these people are busy running their business.
Fitting in a web project takes them away from their daily routine, a routine
which often has many unpredictable detours that lead to inevitable holdups.
I have not used a "penalty system" on a timeline, where a delay in getting
info to me costs a customer extra $, though I've considered it. I usually
just tell them ahead of time that they longer it takes to get their data to
me, the longer it will take me to finish the project. I read about
businesses finishing web projects "on time" once in a while. Maybe they're
doing something other than what I'm doing, or maybe they're padding their
time frame estimates from the onset more wisely than I do. For almost all of
the projects I've worked on, there have been unexpected delays. I try not to
pin down a "launch date" for a large project, since to do so could mean
never seeing my wife, sleeping 4 hours a day, not getting exercise and
eating poorly.
I'd be interested in hearing how other people define timelines (using dates)
and how they stick to them. I've found that not making my customers too many
guarantees re: time has made our relationships more relaxed.
> Their methods of presenting essential input amount
> to total chaos. I spend a good portion of every work day just
> trying to get
> copy input, photos, approvals, etc. from clients. What's worse, they've
> learned that changes to computer-based jobs are easy, so they are
> even less
> organized and more demanding than they used to be.
I think you've got to work out some defined terms for "changes and
additions" to a project. If they're defined ahead of time, such as "all
changes require a signed change form and will be billed as an addition to
the project defined in the original quoted proposal", then maybe the client
will be less inclined to request changes or you'll end up getting paid for
them. I'm working on improving my abilities at this now, since I have a
tendency to hear a good idea from a customer and just implement it for no
additional charge above and beyond the initially agreed project fee. I
always thing about how the finished product will reflect my portfolio...and
am often willing to put in extra time if I think it will improve the
finished work. Again, this is something I'm working on changing, since I end
up losing $.
The actual design and
> production portion of our jobs takes up a trivial percentage of our time.
> In fact, most any job that we could knock out in a week or two of solid
> work manages to get dragged out to two or three months, largely because of
> client disorganization. I don't think I could keep my head above water if
> we had more than two or three projects going on at any given time.
>
> Another issue is concerns my ethics. I know in my heart that I could not
> produce a powerful marketing solution for a client for $300, and
> I wouldn't
> want to do anything less than an effective job.
I guess the real key is knowing how to get paid for all your work, huh? I
tend to put more work into a project than I expected, due to many of the
reasons discussed above. I have recently read that the price of web sites is
going up, not down. Reason? A lot of web developers have screwed themselves
by underestimating time requirements when bidding projects. The same sized
project that cost $10k last year might cost $14k this year, but the
developer will be more likely to make a good wage when the hours taken to
complete the project are added up. Source: don't remember off hand, read it
a few places. Oh, here:
http://www.netb2b.com/cgi-bin/cgi_wpi_archive
There's a few links on that page re: prices climbing.
> The Web is full of enough
> crap without my taking money to add more.
It's ethics for me, too. I'd rather make a good, IMO, site and make less
money than a dumpy site for more money. I'm driven by an aesthetic, not just
the $. Those ethics are probably related to why I'm not sitting in a cubicle
anymore, too. But that's another story: The transformation of creative
culture. Small businesses and the home office are setting the pace for the
future!
Jack
____________________________________________________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Join The Web Consultants Association : Register on our web site Now
Web Consultants Web Site : http://just4u.com/webconsultants
If you lose the instructions All subscription/unsubscribing can be done
directly from our website for all our lists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
