A very helpful piece of scene setting, Norman. I particularly like your use of "parties" at the very end.
The desired outcome of every negotiation is to work together to arrive at a solution that delights and continues to delight everyone - in other words, a 'win-win' outcome. When some people use adversarial, even military, language such as "sides" it betrays their lack of commitment to achieving 'win-win'!
David Winch
Sales & Marketing Consultant, Cambridge
Get the clients to tell you how much they value the outcomes you help them create and then charge a fraction of that. Result is "win-win" - Both you and the client receive a huge RoI. Plus you get rewarded if you can find ways of 'working smarter not harder'.
David Winch
Sales & Marketing Consultant, Cambridge
Thank you, Neil. I feel this is the first article that has specifically addressed the "voluntarily registered but remains well below the £85k threshold" with a clear confirmation of what I believed to be the case.
David Winch,
Sales & Marketing Consultant, Cambridge
If the "letter of the law" doesn't reflect the "spirit of the law" then surely the law needs to be re-drafted.
Whilst we obviously can't have split-testing of different wordings of statutes, should it not be easier to re-word laws in the light of experience?
If the law is a "donkey" [the only meaning of the original that had subsequently been redacted], the lawmakers should be blamed and tasked with improving it (there are many lawyers in Parliament I believe), and the citizen who keeps within its current format should not be blamed.
David Winch
Sales & Marketing Consultant, Cambridge
P.S. I've never had a minute's legal training in my life!
"There are quite often extras that you will expect to recover and the client will not be willing to pay without a fight."
Why? If you quoted a fixed-fee for a fixed-scope, fixed-time project that offers both parties a handsome RoI, the client will be happy to pay the fee, possibly up-front, and you can adopt the stance of "If it's within the scope, it's within the price".
And as for "Try to negotiate somewhere in between", that's not negotiating - that's haggling!
As the article eventually suggests, you need to "give and take" - That's to say if the client wants you to give them a lower price you have to take something away. If you don't know what to take away, ask them, "What would you like me to leave out in order to consider offering you a lower price?"
David Winch
Sales & Marketing Consultant
Cambridge
You do not appear to mention Value-Based Fees in this discussion.
This is just as valid a way of charging and is far fairer to both parties than time-based charging. It is a particularly good process for arriving at a "Fixed Fee" and gains strong buy -in from clients as well as protecting against scope-creep when used properly.
David Winch
Sales & Marketing Consultant, Cambridge
UK Value-Based Pricing Expert
"Clients neither know nor care whether it will take you two hours or 20 hours to provide your service."
This sums up perfectly why you need to help (prospective) clients understand for themselves the value of what they are asking you to do for them. That's the only thing they're willing to pay for.
And the pre-qualification is essential too.
David Winch
Sales, Marketing and Pricing Consultant,
Cambridge
If your charges are based on a fraction of the value your client knows/tells you they will derive from your work, then any way you find to work smarter should mean increased profit for you. The client is only interested in the result, not in how you create it.
In the extreme, if your smart way of working allows you to create and deliver the result much earlier, and if the value derived by the client would increase as a result of early delivery, you could offer them a choice - Delivery on the day requested at the agreed fee, or early delivery for a premium added to the agreed fee. Let the client decide.
David Winch
Sales & Marketing Consultant, Cambridge
The answer's in the article. In the main, like Bernie and Rupert, we continue past 65 because we enjoy it.
If others of any age have a problem with this, it's up to them to do something about it (and I don't mean 'banning' anything!), although we may well be happy to offer help and advice if asked.
David Winch
Sales & Marketing Consultant, Cambridge
My answers
A very helpful piece of scene setting, Norman. I particularly like your use of "parties" at the very end.
The desired outcome of every negotiation is to work together to arrive at a solution that delights and continues to delight everyone - in other words, a 'win-win' outcome. When some people use adversarial, even military, language such as "sides" it betrays their lack of commitment to achieving 'win-win'!
David Winch
Sales & Marketing Consultant, Cambridge
Brilliantly put, Heather, as one would expect from you.
David Winch
Sales and Marketing Consultant, Cambridge
Excellent article, Kevin.
Get the clients to tell you how much they value the outcomes you help them create and then charge a fraction of that. Result is "win-win" - Both you and the client receive a huge RoI. Plus you get rewarded if you can find ways of 'working smarter not harder'.
David Winch
Sales & Marketing Consultant, Cambridge
Thank you, Neil. I feel this is the first article that has specifically addressed the "voluntarily registered but remains well below the £85k threshold" with a clear confirmation of what I believed to be the case.
David Winch,
Sales & Marketing Consultant, Cambridge
If the "letter of the law" doesn't reflect the "spirit of the law" then surely the law needs to be re-drafted.
Whilst we obviously can't have split-testing of different wordings of statutes, should it not be easier to re-word laws in the light of experience?
If the law is a "donkey" [the only meaning of the original that had subsequently been redacted], the lawmakers should be blamed and tasked with improving it (there are many lawyers in Parliament I believe), and the citizen who keeps within its current format should not be blamed.
David Winch
Sales & Marketing Consultant, Cambridge
P.S. I've never had a minute's legal training in my life!
"There are quite often extras that you will expect to recover and the client will not be willing to pay without a fight."
Why? If you quoted a fixed-fee for a fixed-scope, fixed-time project that offers both parties a handsome RoI, the client will be happy to pay the fee, possibly up-front, and you can adopt the stance of "If it's within the scope, it's within the price".
And as for "Try to negotiate somewhere in between", that's not negotiating - that's haggling!
As the article eventually suggests, you need to "give and take" - That's to say if the client wants you to give them a lower price you have to take something away. If you don't know what to take away, ask them, "What would you like me to leave out in order to consider offering you a lower price?"
David Winch
Sales & Marketing Consultant
Cambridge
You do not appear to mention Value-Based Fees in this discussion.
This is just as valid a way of charging and is far fairer to both parties than time-based charging. It is a particularly good process for arriving at a "Fixed Fee" and gains strong buy -in from clients as well as protecting against scope-creep when used properly.
David Winch
Sales & Marketing Consultant, Cambridge
UK Value-Based Pricing Expert
Brilliant article, Mark.
"Clients neither know nor care whether it will take you two hours or 20 hours to provide your service."
This sums up perfectly why you need to help (prospective) clients understand for themselves the value of what they are asking you to do for them. That's the only thing they're willing to pay for.
And the pre-qualification is essential too.
David Winch
Sales, Marketing and Pricing Consultant,
Cambridge
If your charges are based on a fraction of the value your client knows/tells you they will derive from your work, then any way you find to work smarter should mean increased profit for you. The client is only interested in the result, not in how you create it.
In the extreme, if your smart way of working allows you to create and deliver the result much earlier, and if the value derived by the client would increase as a result of early delivery, you could offer them a choice - Delivery on the day requested at the agreed fee, or early delivery for a premium added to the agreed fee. Let the client decide.
David Winch
Sales & Marketing Consultant, Cambridge
The answer's in the article. In the main, like Bernie and Rupert, we continue past 65 because we enjoy it.
If others of any age have a problem with this, it's up to them to do something about it (and I don't mean 'banning' anything!), although we may well be happy to offer help and advice if asked.
David Winch
Sales & Marketing Consultant, Cambridge