12 ms·

I know the flow, use one myself for one of the biggest corporations out there. But in my experience it's more "This is how we wish to work with clients". I see

I know the flow, use one myself for one of the biggest corporations out there. But in my experience it's more "This is how we wish to work with clients". I see a lot of "squeezing the agency" going on these days. (As in non-paid extra work and revisions despite agreements on how to work).

msrpotus 14y ago
It's important to set limits and explicitly say that changes made after approval will cost extra. Otherwise, they'lll just push you to do as much for free as they can get.
gk1 14y ago
There's always an "Oh, I thought of one more small thing..."
- jpadilla_ 14y ago
  Indeed, and that usually becomes a problem at any stage of the project, usually converting it into a longer project, and if you're not careful you will surely loose money and precious time.
- digitalengineer 14y ago
  Or the "YOU forgot about my remark 3 weeks ago regarding the -insert little detail that doesn't mean jack sh*t but I want it done anyways- ... (Sorry to rant)
mikeryan 14y ago
Yeah there's some stuff here which we won't see fly with our clients. Every step has at least 2 iterations. Sounds great but whats an "iteration"? Is a design of a whole website? What if they want a few tweaks on the about page after the second iteration because that area wasn't fully fleshed out originally? We also explain the client that anything that does not get revisions or comments from them is automatically approved Never, ever will this language be approved by our larger clients. We can sometimes get "deemed acceptance" language by but its never "immediate" its usually like "if no feedback is provided in 15 days". The alternative is to have a "pause clause" in (if you don't get us feedback in 15 days we have the right to put your project on "pause" until we can get back to it)
jonnathanson 14y ago
One of the biggest mistakes that agencies or freelancers make with big corporations is to assume that their direct point of contact is able to call shots, or is fully empowered to render decisions on behalf of the client. For the most part, the bigger the company, the bigger the bureaucracy is likely to be, and thus the less true this assumption will be. If at all possible, try to figure out where your day-to-day point person sits on his company's totem pole. How many layers are on top of him, or next to him, or between him and "Yes" or "No?" Make absolutely sure that a verdict from him, at any stage in any process, represents the verdict of anyone whose consensus or approval he needs. It's very easy to get burned when your point person renders a decision, then you find out two weeks later that his boss's boss's boss just got back from a two-week business trip and is looking at everything for the first time. Agency squeeze is usually the result of internal politics at the client firm. Either someone's throwing you under the bus to cover his/her ass, or the Big Boss is putting pressure on everyone (including the agency) to deliver additional work, outside of the SOW, for the sheer sake of applying pressure.
- PeterisP 14y ago
  The initial agreement needs to specify the responsible contact person in the ordering company with the authority to approve each iteration. Once it's approved, it's approved - the company gave him the official final vote. You are getting written agreements before investing any significant number of hours, aren't you?
  - mikeryan 14y ago
    This isn't that realistic in practice. You're going to run into one of two scenarios. First they agree to have a person with the authority to approve, but that person has to run around and gather internal approval before they sign off, and you're now stuck in the same situation you just have a designated "approver" but without veto power. Second scenario. They just don't approve that language in the contract. We have lots of brilliant language like this in our boilerplate contracts, but most of the time it just comes back deleted. We can haggle back and forth on it a while but eventually if its a big enough deal, we're just not going to decline a large contract because their approval process sucks.
psweber 14y ago
Agreed. I'm doing freelance for a huge corporate client. There was a nice plan and schedule for feedback and revisions. I'm now on the 8th round of changes and all the different departments weight in.

msrpotus 14y ago

It's important to set limits and explicitly say that changes made after approval will cost extra. Otherwise, they'lll just push you to do as much for free as they can get.

gk1 14y ago

There's always an "Oh, I thought of one more small thing..."

jpadilla_ 14y ago
Indeed, and that usually becomes a problem at any stage of the project, usually converting it into a longer project, and if you're not careful you will surely loose money and precious time.
digitalengineer 14y ago
Or the "YOU forgot about my remark 3 weeks ago regarding the -insert little detail that doesn't mean jack sh*t but I want it done anyways- ... (Sorry to rant)

mikeryan 14y ago

Yeah there's some stuff here which we won't see fly with our clients. Every step has at least 2 iterations. Sounds great but whats an "iteration"? Is a design of a whole website? What if they want a few tweaks on the about page after the second iteration because that area wasn't fully fleshed out originally? We also explain the client that anything that does not get revisions or comments from them is automatically approved Never, ever will this language be approved by our larger clients. We can sometimes get "deemed acceptance" language by but its never "immediate" its usually like "if no feedback is provided in 15 days". The alternative is to have a "pause clause" in (if you don't get us feedback in 15 days we have the right to put your project on "pause" until we can get back to it)

jonnathanson 14y ago

One of the biggest mistakes that agencies or freelancers make with big corporations is to assume that their direct point of contact is able to call shots, or is fully empowered to render decisions on behalf of the client. For the most part, the bigger the company, the bigger the bureaucracy is likely to be, and thus the less true this assumption will be. If at all possible, try to figure out where your day-to-day point person sits on his company's totem pole. How many layers are on top of him, or next to him, or between him and "Yes" or "No?" Make absolutely sure that a verdict from him, at any stage in any process, represents the verdict of anyone whose consensus or approval he needs. It's very easy to get burned when your point person renders a decision, then you find out two weeks later that his boss's boss's boss just got back from a two-week business trip and is looking at everything for the first time. Agency squeeze is usually the result of internal politics at the client firm. Either someone's throwing you under the bus to cover his/her ass, or the Big Boss is putting pressure on everyone (including the agency) to deliver additional work, outside of the SOW, for the sheer sake of applying pressure.

PeterisP 14y ago
The initial agreement needs to specify the responsible contact person in the ordering company with the authority to approve each iteration. Once it's approved, it's approved - the company gave him the official final vote. You are getting written agreements before investing any significant number of hours, aren't you?
- mikeryan 14y ago
  This isn't that realistic in practice. You're going to run into one of two scenarios. First they agree to have a person with the authority to approve, but that person has to run around and gather internal approval before they sign off, and you're now stuck in the same situation you just have a designated "approver" but without veto power. Second scenario. They just don't approve that language in the contract. We have lots of brilliant language like this in our boilerplate contracts, but most of the time it just comes back deleted. We can haggle back and forth on it a while but eventually if its a big enough deal, we're just not going to decline a large contract because their approval process sucks.

psweber 14y ago

Agreed. I'm doing freelance for a huge corporate client. There was a nice plan and schedule for feedback and revisions. I'm now on the 8th round of changes and all the different departments weight in.