The conversation started when I told him I like to fix fee most everything we do. His eyes lit up. He expressed frustration that leaders in his organization are usually so desperate to get an individual or company working immediately that they do not want to take the time to work through the project details. Instead, they agree to hourly rates without fully defining what the project will entail.
Before I go on, let me explain what I mean by a “fixed fee” engagement in contrast to “hourly” work. This means that the consulting firm and client agree to a flat rate to deliver a project with defined deliverables. The rate may or may not include expenses; I usually leave that up to the company’s preference. I do not consider fixed fee to include projects that have some sort of daily or monthly hourly cap; those to me are just daily or monthly (versus hourly) rates and arguably have more issues than a straight hourly rate, usually in neither parties’ favor.
I see so many organizations waste money on consultants for the very reason my friend expressed. I do think there can be good reasons to pay someone on an hourly (or daily or monthly) rate and I’ll cite some of those reasons later, but I firmly believe the buying company’s default preference should be to fix fee all consulting work. Here’s why:
- It forces the client and the consultant to think through exactly what they want to get out of the project – deliverables, milestones, outcomes, etc. – versus vague approaches. This means fewer misunderstandings and missed expectations on either side, and better outcomes since objectives were agreed to up front.
- Generally, consultants who are willing to fix fee work and are still in business are more knowledgeable and experienced in the type of work they are proposing, since without that knowledge and experience it is very hard to make fixed fee engagements profitable.
- It forces the buyer to quantify the value of the project, up front. They must ask themselves “is it worth $50,000 to have this consulting firm create all the processes and templates for our PMO?”
- Throughout the project, both parties are focused more on the desired outcomes versus the number of hours being worked. With good consultants, the buyer may even get more hours or more of the right hours because of this. A woman who does contract work for us who is extremely good at what she does and also very conscientious about her costs prefers to be paid on a fixed basis so she doesn’t feel “guilty” when she sometimes wants to spend extra time on something that she doesn’t think we’ll want to pay for! I am the same way with my clients.
- If the client really wants a contractor, someone who is filling a full-time (or part-time) role within the organization, and wants to pay this person in a temporary versus employee manner. I don’t even consider this consulting work; this is contract work.
- If the client has a very large and complicated project that will take a long time to define in a fixed fee structure, it may make sense to do a short “paid proposal” or planning phase up front. I like to fix these too, when possible, but sometimes hourly is more practical.
- If the client truly has an urgent need that is not fully defined and needs a consultant to come in and figure out the situation, in a maximum of a couple of weeks. I had a CIO call me on a Friday afternoon and say she needed to run a quick re-organization and needed me there Monday morning for two weeks. We verbally agreed to an hourly rate and I showed up, but that was only after years of working together on a fixed fee basis that we both thought this exception was warranted.
- If the consulting firm is truly only providing advisory services without a specific desired outcome or deliverable. Sometimes the client needs to have a consultant on retainer for advice, like they might for an accountant or attorney.
3 comments:
Hi Lisa,
Great post. I've been going back and forth on this in my own consulting/contract work. The issue I face is that the value I add as a business analyst is distinctly in defining the work or defining the outcomes. I've tried fixed bid a few times and end up delivering a large part of my value through the bidding process itself and so I've retreated back to an hourly rate. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on this.
Laura
http://www.bridging-the-gap.com
Lisa,
Interesting trend, here are three recent articles that talk about the hourly rate going away in many industries that traditionally billed by the hour.
WSJ
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125106954159552335.html
NY Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/30/business/30hours.html?sq=billable%20hour&st=cse&scp=1&pagewanted=all
Bloomberg
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=aXI1vGkX3dyo
Michael
Thanks, Michael, interesting stuff. Some of these articles are going beyond what I’d call fixed fee or even value based pricing to something more like gain-sharing. I think that is arguably even better than fixed fees, in consulting work that can be tied directly to outcomes such as revenue growth or cost reductions. I’d love to do that with IT strategy pricing, but we’d have to use a proxy since it would be hard to get to direct impact.
Laura, I think your point is valid from what I understand about the type of work you do. I think the question to consider is: is the work you are doing really a consulting project? Does it have a defined outcome? If you are defining requirements at the front end of a more traditional SDLC, that could be boxed in as an initial “discovery” phase and fixed. But if you are supporting requirements on an ongoing basis, for instance on more agile type development projects, fixing the discovery may be more challenging. And in either case, if you are a resource on a broader project not completely in your control, fixing your fees may be too risky.
Post a Comment