[Sigia-l] Pricing the Design Process (was

[Paola Kathuria]

Jared Spool wrote:
> Maybe this is endemic to the design trade, but it sounds like you 
> charge for the activity, not for the result. If you charged for the 
> result, then the activities float out in the wash.

Eric Reiss wrote:
> Someone (like the CEO's wife) invariably comes along
> and demands I change the color of the links. I won't risk my
> company's economy unless I have the right to say "go away" to the
> bessermachers.

Actually, I don't think Jared was suggesting that one gets
paid on the quality of results but that, when you charge
by the hour, clients invariably ask to take out certain
steps, as if they were optional.

If, instead, you charge fixed price, you're charging for
the whole service; it's up to you, as experts in the field
to say what that service includes and it's not up to
negotiation. And, we don't give clients a choice for
steps that are a basic part of the design process.

We used to always charge by the hour but then a big client
that we'd worked with for many years, started asking for
fixed-price quotes. I explain that our fixed-price quotes
are based on a time estimate plus a contingency. They're
happy with that as they just want to know what it's going
to cost in advance, which is reasonable.

A fixed-priced project (if you haven't wildly under-estimated)
means you can take as long as is needed in phone calls, e-mail
and meetings. Before, I was actually shooed out at the end of
a meeting when I was having an informal chat by someone else
who was anxious at how much it would cost them. Clock-watching
is not conducive to getting the job done.

> If anyone has a workable, practical, real-world solution, I'd be
> interested in hearing about it.

With regard to design changes late in the project, when I
arrange my first requirements-gathering meeting, I tell my
contact that there are 6 places and, besides representative
users, the spaces should be used by the decision-makers from
marketing and IT and anyone else who might later scupper
the project.

During the project, I create regular review points, where the
same group approve work before we move onto the next stage
(e.g., approve wire-frames before adding visual design). And
I make a project web site where I add the latest screen-shots
and archive all past design output and decisions.

Later, when someone tries to pull the design into another
direction, I don't have a problem saying "no"; we've gone
through a documented and legitimate process and we'd have
to retrace steps if we go back a few stages (which would
cost them time and money).

However, no matter how good (I think) my process is, company
politics usually rears its ugly head at the end. There is
usually a senior manager who, despite having approved things
along the way, will over-rule the group and insist on a design
change.

Interference is usually by a manager who is insecure in their
job or a new manager who wants to demonstrate their power. When
they out-rank everyone on my review team, was not someone who
was mentioned before, and who is too busy to be involved in
the review process, there's nothing (I know of) that one can
do about it.


Paola