I'm not in love with any scheme that causes you to resist quoting prices your clients will understand. They want to know how much the project will cost. Tell them how much you think it will cost.
There is a huge premium to be captured by consultants simply by eliminating the appearance of uncertainty. Clients pay extra for perceived determinism.
I agree giving the project owner the appearance of certainty will make him feel safe and comfortable - however it is not good for them. The longer and more complicated the project the more likely your estimate will be wrong. So giving the customer a sense of overall effort is good - misleading them by telling them you know how much the overall project will cost is bad.
So provide a conservative estimate billed in week-long increments. You come in way under the wire, they get a week or two deducted from the final cost of the project. Customer dicks around with requirements, you get to say "I am happy to do whatever you'd like and make whatever changes you'd like but I need to remind you that we have a fixed schedule for this project".
All this stuff about "what's best for the customer" tends to be an elaborate justification for complicated pricing schemes that alienate customers while ironically undercharging them for the services you provide.
Avoid customers for whom a week's worth of your time is a make- or- break- the- business decision.
Good point. the way I was thinking about it was more like this
1- you provide an overall estimate on where you think you could come in at. you do this to give all clarity on how you are thinking about the problem, anchors your estimate and the functionality you are about to build, and allows the owner to get a sense of price
2- only commit to a week or 2 at the time. this allows the client to tweak things, see quick progress, and add or subtract features as you make progress. Or even stop, test features on customers - and pause.
The customer wants you to commit. When you say "let's do a week at a time", the customer does a mental calculation of what one week of your time is worth if the project doesn't complete, arrives at the number $0, and responds accordingly.
That doesn't mean you work a fixed-price gig. It does mean that you give serious thought to a conservative estimate of the whole gig and then confidently offer that as your price for the engagement.
That's solid advice, but only follow it once a sense of trust and rapport has developed between you and the client.
There's far too many things a potential client may not be telling you about the project, and it's incredibly hard for the independent freelancer to do enough business development, or for the client to do enough vetting, to know which random internet person is trustworthy. This is especially true when you're just starting out.
A one week sprint that solves a small, immediate need the client has will keep the project manageable, and protects both the freelancer and the client from a potentially bad situation. Worse case scenario, one of you is out a week's work. Best case scenario, after a few sprints a rapport and trust develops, and you can start providing your clients with estimates for larger pieces of work, knowing they'll be treated as estimates and not fixed bids.
Don't eliminate the appearance of uncertainty when you're legitimacy uncertain. That's bad communication. If a client needs solid estimates out of the gate they don't need an independent freelancer. They need a full-service agency.
Extra related point: some clients will really appreciate to have a higher quote that doesn't risk to go up afterwards, because the budget will be locked at project startup for internal reasons (vs. having a lower cost planned, but extra cost afterwards).
Comments
I'm not in love with any scheme that causes you to resist quoting prices your clients will understand. They want to know how much the project will cost. Tell them how much you think it will cost.
There is a huge premium to be captured by consultants simply by eliminating the appearance of uncertainty. Clients pay extra for perceived determinism.
I agree giving the project owner the appearance of certainty will make him feel safe and comfortable - however it is not good for them. The longer and more complicated the project the more likely your estimate will be wrong. So giving the customer a sense of overall effort is good - misleading them by telling them you know how much the overall project will cost is bad.
So provide a conservative estimate billed in week-long increments. You come in way under the wire, they get a week or two deducted from the final cost of the project. Customer dicks around with requirements, you get to say "I am happy to do whatever you'd like and make whatever changes you'd like but I need to remind you that we have a fixed schedule for this project".
All this stuff about "what's best for the customer" tends to be an elaborate justification for complicated pricing schemes that alienate customers while ironically undercharging them for the services you provide.
Avoid customers for whom a week's worth of your time is a make- or- break- the- business decision.
Good point. the way I was thinking about it was more like this 1- you provide an overall estimate on where you think you could come in at. you do this to give all clarity on how you are thinking about the problem, anchors your estimate and the functionality you are about to build, and allows the owner to get a sense of price 2- only commit to a week or 2 at the time. this allows the client to tweak things, see quick progress, and add or subtract features as you make progress. Or even stop, test features on customers - and pause.
thoughts?
The customer wants you to commit. When you say "let's do a week at a time", the customer does a mental calculation of what one week of your time is worth if the project doesn't complete, arrives at the number $0, and responds accordingly.
That doesn't mean you work a fixed-price gig. It does mean that you give serious thought to a conservative estimate of the whole gig and then confidently offer that as your price for the engagement.
That's solid advice, but only follow it once a sense of trust and rapport has developed between you and the client.
There's far too many things a potential client may not be telling you about the project, and it's incredibly hard for the independent freelancer to do enough business development, or for the client to do enough vetting, to know which random internet person is trustworthy. This is especially true when you're just starting out.
A one week sprint that solves a small, immediate need the client has will keep the project manageable, and protects both the freelancer and the client from a potentially bad situation. Worse case scenario, one of you is out a week's work. Best case scenario, after a few sprints a rapport and trust develops, and you can start providing your clients with estimates for larger pieces of work, knowing they'll be treated as estimates and not fixed bids.
Don't eliminate the appearance of uncertainty when you're legitimacy uncertain. That's bad communication. If a client needs solid estimates out of the gate they don't need an independent freelancer. They need a full-service agency.
Definitely agree!
Extra related point: some clients will really appreciate to have a higher quote that doesn't risk to go up afterwards, because the budget will be locked at project startup for internal reasons (vs. having a lower cost planned, but extra cost afterwards).