Whilst we do lots of different things here at Mat Dolphin, our main focus is graphic design. We design graphics. The stuff that sits on a computer screen and showcases what a person or company is offering. Or stuff that is printed onto a business card and introduces who that person is and what they do. Some of the stuff we design has to communicate a great deal within a very limited space or format. Some of the stuff we do has to communicate a great deal without actually saying too much. Often we have to work with strict, client-imposed constraints and occasionally we have complete carte blanche (which can often be the more difficult way to work).
It’s a cliché to say that every job we do is different but, like many clichés, it’s true. Each new project that comes in starts with a discussion. Before getting too excited about how amazing and beautiful the design could be, there are some practical issues we need to address. How are we going to tackle this one? What do we need to know about the job before we start designing? Do we need to get any outside help involved? How much do we charge? This last question always – without fail – always, strikes fear into my heart. Money! A lovely client has chosen us from the billions of other design agencies to design their logo/website/poster/brochure/whatever-it-may-be and we have to go back to them with an amount of money which hits the delicate balance between making sense for us and affordable for the client. If we choose to be greedy and the costs we provide are too high, there’s a good chance the potential client will put their wallet away and find someone who is charging less. And rightly so. On the other hand, if we charge too little, the client gets a great job at an amazingly low price and we can’t pay rent. You don’t need to do that too many times before your job title changes from designer to shelf stacker.
So what’s the best way to find the balance? The only thing we’re really selling is our time and creativity. Time to think of great ideas and the know-how to execute them beautifully. The ability to use this time effectively requires some resources – an appropriate place to do the thinking/executing and the tools to assist the process. These things need to be paid for and we – the people doing it – need to live in paid-for accommodation, wear clothes, eat and occasionally sleep. So alongside the mechanics of the job itself, there are external factors we need to consider. However much we consider these factors, the truth of the matter is that most of the time, people want to pay less. And why wouldn’t they? I want to pay less for things because, frankly, I want to keep as much of my own money as possible to spend on other things which I find too expensive.
So, in our line of work, the money thing can often lead to some relatively awkward conversations. We’ve heard a number of polite (and a few impolite) ways of saying ‘Thanks for the cost. Can I have it for much less? And I’d like the job to be compeleted immediately. Oh, and it’s got to be amazing by the way’. This can often be a difficult request to answer but some time ago we discovered a phrase which has been fighting the corner of the design industry for years.
Good, fast or cheap. Pick any two.
Far from an ultimatum, this simple message conveys a few important things. Our time is one of our most valuable commodities. Our creativity is one of the reasons people choose to work with us. There may be certain compromises which have to be made on both sides of the designer/client relationship. We have a number of clients who all deserve our attention and we need a reason to allow ‘queue jumping’. Much more than a witty soundbite that allows us to charge more money (because it certainly doesn’t do that), the phrase is an incredibly useful tool in explaining the value of what we’re selling.
A plumber has knowledge, equipment and tools and you pay them so your house don’t flood. It’s a fairly simple exchange and as far as I’m aware, haggling rarely occurs. If you don’t want a water-logged carpet, pay me what I need to prevent your boiler exploding. Happy plumber = dry socks. But selling time and creativity is a different thing entirely and one that can be very difficult to justify. Whilst ‘good, fast or cheap. Pick any two’ may be a blunt and overly-simplified way of explaining the value of what we do, you can’t deny, it does get the point across.
What do you think? Are you a designer (or plumber) who struggles with the eternal question of how much to charge? Are you someone who feels designers charge too much for what they do? Or are we just talking inane rubbish? We’d love to know what you think.
Thanks for reading
Mat
I think you make some great points; especially with the comparison to a plumber. The main difficulty with charging a sensible price for creative services is that design/illustration services may be something that it is advisable for the client to have, but not crucial; not as essential as electricity or running water.
Comment by Abi — August 4th, 2011 @ 10:07 am |Good post, and interesting talking point. The money/time/quality equation is very true. But the problem is with design is that clients find it hard to quantify what we do, and lot of our work is taken in subconsciously. Its bad that a lot of people don’t see design as a valuable trade (such as the plumber).. yet everyone wants an apple laptop. More needs to be done to change attitudes and educate the non-creative world who commission design.
As a young designer myself, I am only getting round to saying no to work as I the price/timescale was not right.
Sorry this is a bit of a ramble, I’m in a rush, got to design this magazine by the end of the day its ok tho, they are paying me £12.50 a page.
Good post Mat.
Liam
Comment by Liam — August 4th, 2011 @ 10:18 am |Interesting post. I constantly aim to be more than good, very fast and certainly not ‘cheap’ – No designer wants to devalue themselves. My quotes are competitive and flexible to working within budgets but I believe I provide creativity and design that others can greatly benefit from, and feel they’ve had their money’s worth plus extras. I’m happy to support and do some pro-bono charity design work, but this can depend on how much time I have available.
There are designers who charge far too much, and it’s wrong. Scamming tons of cash from naive clientel offering big (and sometimes false) claims announcing how much better they can design a logo to others isn’t an ethical way to do business.
I don’t agree with charging extra for amendments (within reason) because the client is paying you for a service, like a plumber, and of course, they want it perfect! I used to quote per job spec but now I find it easier and best for all to quote allocating my time spent.
Comment by Rebecca Emery — August 4th, 2011 @ 10:22 am |Great post. I think we’re all muttering it under our breaths half the time, but it needs to become more accepted to speak out.
I was once told bad clients get the quality of designer they deserve, and I think that’s true in the long term, but seeing projects lost to cheap designers and decisions made purely on a budget level hurt in the short term.
@Abi — Fair point, maybe not crucial initially, but it’s our job to sell the long term benefits. No one needs electricity or water either in a business that’s tanked due to poor investment in design and marketing.
Comment by Marcus Batey — August 4th, 2011 @ 10:23 am |Who needs suits eh?
Ok, I’m being cheeky, but I distinctly remember one half of your dastardly duo saying something to to this effect to me (a seasoned suit) a couple of years back.
‘Educating the client’ is a lovely ideal, but rarely realised – it’s near impossible without a long-term, relationship and for me also misses the point a wee bit.
As an agency your product and therefore your most valuable asset is your creative team’s hours.
Burning them on fee proposals is doubly ineffective since it’s a) time not spent designing and by b) those people most likely to come up against the exact issues you’ve raised. It’s your baby.. of course you will feel tricky discussing cash.
Whilst in a smll nimble outfit you might not have the, ahem, ‘luxury’ of suits and finance folk to worry about these kinds of questions, you can still emply some of the basic methodology that the big shops do. WPP refer to compensation rates i.e. a percentage over and above base cost that a project has to clear to be worthwhile. You can negotiate rate cards with preferential fees based on volume over the year or retained hours each month… It’ll get easier the longer you do it, but will likely never be fun!
Comment by Louisa — August 4th, 2011 @ 10:48 am |When quoting I’m asked how long a job may take… I often reply with “how much are they willing to pay?” knowing it most likely wont be much.
This is not to fleece as much from the client as possible, quite the opposite in fact. It’s trying to balance the best work we can produce for the client against a price they can actually afford.
Comment by Paul Andrew — August 4th, 2011 @ 10:56 am |The plumber analogy is nice. I’ve always used a hairdresser analogy for similar purposes, except that adds into the mix subjectivity and the importance of a clear brief!
®
Comment by Richard Holt — August 4th, 2011 @ 2:35 pm |Love it – but you may need a suit – simply add all this up:
Rent/Rates
Salary requirements
Heat, Light, Power
Transport
Hardware/Software investment
Quoting/Estimating time
Dead Hours
Outsourced costs
Years gaining experience (sic)
Amortise it into an hourly rate, add a margin and away you go. All clients get charged the same on a first come first served basis. For clients that need that ‘rush’ job – probably because they have taken too long to decide on which agency or had too long a lunch and completely forgotten that they need something now! Add, 50% – and if you get, you get, if you don’t, you don’t – Shimples…..
Comment by Andrew Palmer — August 4th, 2011 @ 3:32 pm |If you think there’s a chance you’re charging too little, you are. Remember, you can never negotiate your fee upward.
Comment by David Airey — August 4th, 2011 @ 4:52 pm |Work out your price each year. Day and Hour and stick to it.
Any job, any client — same base cost.
It’s not about hours /days — its about your experience as a designer to solve your clients requirements. So it might be £££ for XX days work but the client will always benefit.
More experience = better (whether its faster or not) output but not at the determent to quality. If you lose a lot of projects due to being too expensive then its likely your not worth that.
Design is pretty much the only profession I know where you have to be different every day, on every project and as such the client pays for that privilege.
Comment by Mike — August 4th, 2011 @ 5:23 pm |It’s a funny idea that makes a serious point, so an excellent example of good design!
I have a rider, though: suppose a client were to chose ‘fast’ and ‘cheap’, would you willingly, knowingly agree to produce something to that was less than ‘good’? I don’t think so.
It’s really a rhetorical question because I don’t believe any creative person would happily agree to put their name to sub-standard work. So, in practice, it all comes down to availability. Quality is non-negotiable.
In my own experience, there have been times when I’ve taken on projects with next to no money or time, just because I was excited by the challenge and happened to be available at the time. On occasion, those constraints have even resulted in work that was better than good, even extraordinary in some unexpected way.
Had I not been intrigued and excited by the project at the outset, I would probably have lied and said sorry but I’m just too busy at the moment…
Conversely, there are times when money and schedule are adequate, or even better (though not often, these days!) and the end result is still horrible, maybe even because of the money and time involved and always because of something going wrong along the way.
No one ever sets out to do bad work.
Nice idea, though!
Comment by Mario Cavalli — August 5th, 2011 @ 4:22 pm |Hi Mario
Thanks for your response. I think you’ve raised a really good point and I agree that it’s difficult (sometimes impossible) to abandon the attempt to do something ‘good’ because of factors such as time and money. If the job pays next to nothing and it’s needed for tomorrow, I still want it to be amazing. I think the point for me is that if you haven’t got the luxury of time to spend on the job and the money isn’t available – which means you have to dedicate time to other financially viable projects – the quality of the work will often suffer as a result.
Thanks for reading.
Comment by Mat Dolphin — August 5th, 2011 @ 4:56 pm |This is a really good read and sums up a lot of the difficulties I’ve been experiencing having just finished my first year trading self employed as a graphic designer.
I’ve come across the mantra ‘pick two’ before and will certainly refer to it again in the future. It makes sense and, properly explained, a decent client will understand and appreciate it.
Cheers!
Comment by Owen Jones — August 24th, 2011 @ 8:48 am |enjoyed the read(: I’m still a student, so I haven’t had lots of opportunities to charge for client work and stuff, but I thought your analogy was brilliant, my mum liked to say that too!
Comment by shuhan — September 5th, 2011 @ 9:55 am |