3 ms·

There are other reasons for the differential. First, a full-time consultant has to spend time getting work, and he doesn't get to bill that. That's part of why

There are other reasons for the differential. First, a full-time consultant has to spend time getting work, and he doesn't get to bill that. That's part of why the 2-4 ratio exists. I've heard that you can expect to spend an hour looking for work for every hour that you bill. Also, being a consultant is riskier, not only in the short-term financial sense, but also in the long run: if you're unsuccessful as a freelancer, you've got nothing to show other than the fact that no one wanted to hire you, and you're probably too burned-out/exhausted by searching for work to do any interesting side projects.

lsc 18y ago
my experience with the 'hour here and there' consulting that I did a few years back was that the marketing time is more like 1 hour marketing to 30 hours work, or better. But then, I charged closer to 150% what I would expect salary (vs. 200-400%) It would have worked swimmingly if I didn't have a capital-intensive side-project. It was a pretty easy way to support myself while working two days a week or so, leaving lots of time for self-improvement. I dono... maybe I would have gotten rejected more if I charged more, but I usually enjoy the technical stuff more than the marketing, so it makes sense to work two hours on technical work rather than one hour marketing and one hour technical work, if that is indeed the choice. I have had the occasional client willing to pay me 4x what I would expect from a salaried gig, but I mostly lucked into those. Some clients offered me more than I was asking, so maybe I would have done OK insisting on the higher rates.