3 ms·
they're a order of magnitude higher for some reasons though. I work in consulting, and occasionally larger enterprises approach our firm. We almost always decli
by calvinmorrison 2y ago
they're a order of magnitude higher for some reasons though. I work in consulting, and occasionally larger enterprises approach our firm. We almost always decline because their requirements from vendor screening, to change review boards, to just the amount of sheer meetings it takes to enact a change to a title change on the website home page - its not worth it.
A couple times we made the mistake of giving a 'go away' number and they took it, and then i had to deal with the insanity of F500 business...
- ethbr1 2y agoThis ^ and uncertainty If I had to break down how consulting contracts are actually priced, it'd be: - 50% work - 35% requirement ambiguity - 15% customer management overhead
- icedchai 2y agoBased on my experience with a smaller contractor, I think your overhead number is low. ;)
- calvinmorrison 2y agoBasically, but with big companies with on hand lawyer litigation is much more likely. They want things like contingency plans, licensing information, even asking what our own financials look like. We just walk and focus on clients who don't have so much risk
- curiouscavalier 2y agoYep, the procurement process (and related) requires a lot be baked into pricing. I’d also be curious what the fully burdened rate of in-house staff is compared to consultants. I’ve seen situations in the gov (not DoD) where despite high consulting rates, the full cost of hiring was even higher per hour. But I’m loath to defend the big firms. Generally, quality plus the ever push for expanding scope leaves a sensation of waste. The solution is just going to need more than simply tossing them out.
- calvinmorrison 2y agothats part of it. onboarding vendors is such a PITA bringing on a DO-ALL-KINDA-BADLY vendor is preferred over a specialist vendor.