MartinKelley.com Design/Tech

News about the business side of MartinKelley.com design and consulting.

Via 37Signal's Signals vs. Noise blog I came across a fascinating post written by Brian Fling of Blue last year on pricing a project. I'd like to talk about it and to explain my own philosophy. First a extended quote from Brian:

I find it funny... in a sad sort of way, that we often start out our partnership with bluffing, no one saying what they are really thinking... how much they are willing to pay and how much it should cost... Though every book I've read on the topic of pricing says to never ever ballpark, I have a tendency to do so. If they can't disclose the budget I typically try to start throwing a few numbers from previous projects to help gage the scope of what we are talking about, call it a good faith effort to start the discussion... While this is very awkward part of the discussion it is almost always followed by candor. It's as if once someone starts telling the truth, it opens a door that can't be closed.

I completely agree that candor is the only way to work with clients. Maybe it's the Quaker influence: we reportedly pioneered fixed pricing back when everyone haggled, with the philosophy that charging true costs were the only honest way of doing business. My official rates and contact page includes my list of "typical costs" -- essentially these are the "ballpark estimates" that Brian talks about.

When I put together estimates I base it on my best-guess informed estimates. I start by tabulating the client's requested features and determining how I'll achieve them. I then estimate how long it will take me to implement each feature and use that to determine a first-guess for project cost. I then compare it to past projects, to make sure I'm being realistic. I know myself well enough to know I always want to underestimate costs--I usually like the project and want to make it affordable to clients!--so I do force myself a reality check that usually ends up adding a few hours to the estimate.

When I put together my official estimate I try to guess where potential bottlenecks might happen. Sometimes these are technical issues and something they're more social. For example, a client might be very particular about the design and the back-and-forth can take longer than expected. If I think anything like this might happen I mention it in the estimate. Sometimes as we work through the details of a feature I'll learn that the client wants some enhancement that we hadn't talked about previously and which I didn't factor into the estimate.

When I do see a particular part of the work taking longer than expected I flag it with the client. I try to keep them informed that this will add to total costs. In many cases, clients have been happy to go with the extra work: I simply want to make sure that we both are aware that the estimate is changing before the work happens.

I charge by the hour rather than on a per-project basis since I find it to be a much more open business model. Brian Fling's post agrees:

The problem [with per-project billing is that] one way or another somebody loses, either the client pays too much, meaning paying more than it's market value, or the vendor eats into their profit... One benefits to hourly billing is the client is responsible for increases of scope, protecting the vendor and the customer. If the project is completed early the client pays less, protecting the client. This puts the onus on both parties to communicate regularly and work more effectively.

I have very little overhead: a home office, laptop and DSL. This means my rates are very competitive (one client described it as "less than plumbers and electricians charge, more than the kid who mows the lawn"). Being very careful with estimates mean that I often communicate a lot with clients before I "start the clock." I've often worked with them a few hours before the estimate is in and we're moving forward and of course some of this un-billed work doesn't result in a job.

Putting together fabulous websites is fun work. It's very much a back-and-forth process with clients, and it's often impossible to know just what the site will look like and just how it will work until the site actually launches. Half of my clientele have never had websites before, making the work even more interesting! It's my professional responsibility to make sure I work with clients to foresee costs, dream big, but most of all to be open and honest about costs as the process unfolds.

A look at the new class of "Single Page Aggregators."

Way back in 1997 I was one of dozens of lots of web designers trying to figure out how to bring an editorial voice to the internet. The web had taken off and there pages and links everywhere but few places where they were actually organized in a useful manner. As I've written before, in December of that year I started a weekly updated list of annotated links to articles on nonviolence, a form we'd now would recognize as a blog.

About eighteen months ago I started a "links blog" of interesting Quaker links, incorporated as a sidebar on my popular "QuakerRanter" personal blog. I eventually gave the links their own URL (QuakerQuaker.org) and invited others to join the linking. I always stumble when trying to tell people what QuakerQuaker is all about. The best definition is that its a "collaboratively edited blog aggregator" but that's a horribly tech description.

The rise of blogs is creating the necessity for these sort of theme-based aggregators. This morning I stumbled on Original Signal, a new site that organzes the best Web 2.0 blogs. A site called PopURLs does the same for "the latest web buzz." A site called SolutionWatch has written about these in Tracking the web with Single Page Aggregators. We're all on to something here. I suspect that sometime this fall some clever person will coin a new term for these sites.

An early description of my using the Movable Type blogging platform as a content management system (CMS) for an entire website. I've used these techniques to build websites which clients can easily manipulate and update.

Inspired by Doing Your Whole Site with MT on Brad Choate's site, I started experimenting today with putting the whole Nonviolence.org site into Movable Type. At first I thought it was just a trial experiment but I'm hooked. I especially love how much cleaner the entry for the links page now looks and I might actually be inspired to keep it up to date more now. (I've also integrated Choate's MT-Textile which makes a big difference in keeping entries clean of HMTL garbage, and the semi-related SmartyPants which makes the site more typographically elegant with easy M-dashes and curly quotes).

So here's what I'm doing: there are three Movable Type blogs interacting with one another (not including this personal blog):

  • One is the more-or-less standard one that is powering the main homepage blog of Nonviolence.org.
  • The second I call "NV:Static" which holds my static pages, much as Brad outlines. I put my desired URL path into the Title field (i.e., "info/index") and then put the page's real title into the Keywords field (i.e., "About Nonviolence.org") and have that give the data for the title field and the first headline of the page. It might seem backwards to use Title for URL and then use Keywords for Title, but this means that when I'm in MT looking to edit a particular file, it will be the URL paths that are listed.
  • The third blog is my "NV:Design Elements." This contains the block of graphics on the top and left of every page. I know I'll have to redesign this all soon and I can do it from wherever. This blog outputs to HTML. All the other pages on the site are PHP and its a simple include to pull the top and left bars into each PHP page.

Oh yes, I'm also thinking of incorporating guest blogs in the near future and all of these elements should make that much easier.

Here's another site to check out, about how someone integrated Movable Type into their church website using some interesting techniques.


When Nonviolence.org morphed into a blog
An early edition of "Nonviolence Web Upfront," which debuted December 29, 1997.
I started Nonviolence.org in late 1995 as a place to publicize the work of the US peace movement which was not getting out to a wide (or a young) audience. I built and maintained the websites of a few dozen hosted groups (including the War Resisters League, Fellowship of Reconciliation and Pax Christi USA) but I quickly realized that the Nonviolence.org homepage itself could be used for more than just as a place to put links to member groups. I realized I could highlight the articles I thought should get more publicity, whether on or off the Nonviolence.org domain. The homepage adapted into what is now a recognizable blog format on December 29, 1997 when I re-named the homepage "Nonviolence Web Upfront" and started posting links to interesting articles from Nonviolence.org member groups. In response to a comment the other day I wondered how that fit in with the evolution of blogging. I was shocked to learn from Wikipedia's article on weblog that the first use of the term occured on December 29, 1997--yes, the same day!

I think is less a coincidence than a confirmation that many of us were trying to figure out a format for sharing the web with others. Below is an excerpt from the email announcement for "Nonviolence Web Upfront." The reliable Archive.org has index of Upfront's second week, whose feature was a guest piece by John Steitz, Is the Nonviolence Web a Movement Half-Way House that sounds eerily similar to recent discussions on Quaker Ranter.

Here's the email announcement that coincided with Upfront's debut:

NONVIOLENCE WEB NEWS, by Martin Kelley Week of December 29, 1997

CONTENTS
Introducing "Nonviolence Web Upfront"
New Procedures
New Website #1: SERPAJ
New Website #2: Stop the Cassini Flyby
Two Awards
Numbers Available Upon Request
Weekly Visitor Counts

With my travelling and holiday schedule, it's been hard to keep regular NVWeb News updates coming along, but it's been a great month and there's a lot. I'm especially proud of the continuing evolution of what I'm now calling "Nonviolence Web Upfront," seen by 1800-2200 people a month!

----------
INTRODUCING "NONVIOLENCE WEB UPFRONT"
The new magazine format of the NVWeb's homepage has been needing a name. It needed to mentioned the "Nonviolence Web" and I wanted it to imply that it was the site's homepage (sometimes referred to as a "frontpage") and that it contained material taken from the sites of the NVWeb.

So the name is "Nonviolence Web Upfront" and a trip to http://www.nonviolence.org will see that spelled out big on top of the weekly-updated articles.

There's also an archive of the weekly installments found at the bottom of NVWeb Upfront. It's quite a good collection already!

Now that this is moving forward, I encourage everyone to think about how they might contribute articles. If you write an interesting opinion piece, essay, or story that you think would fit, send it along to me. For example, "War Toys: Re-Action-ist Figures" FOR's Vincent Romano's piece from the Nov. 27 edition, was an essay he had already written and made a good complimentary piece for the YouthPeace Week special. But don't worry about themes: NVWeb Upfront is meant not only to be timely but to show the breadth of the nonviolence movement, so send your pieces along!

This essay was originally written in 1995.

IT'S HARD TO IGNORE the sorry shape of the social change community. The signs of a collapsed movement are everywhere. Organizations are closing, cutting back, laying off staff, and dropping the frequency of their magazines.

On top of this, the basic resources we've depended on are getting scarcer. Paper prices and postage prices are going up. Direct mail solicitations are for many economically-unfeasible now. With every abandoned mailing list, with every discontinued peace fair, we're losing the infrastructure that used to nourish the whole movement.

Here in Philadelphia, the last few years have seen food coops close, peace organizations lay off staff, and the bookstores discontinue their political titles. I've been meeting people only a half-generation younger than I who aren't aware of the basic organizing principles that the movement has built up over the years and who don't know the meanings of Greenham Common or the Clamshell Alliance

Like many of you, I'm not giving up. We can't just abandon our work because it's becoming more difficult. We need to struggle to find creative ways of getting our message out there and communicating with others. What we need is a new media.

The Promise of the Web

The Web's revolution is it's incredibly minimal costs. Fifteen dollars a month gets you a homepage. As an editor at New Society Publishers (1991-1996), I've always had to worry whether we'd lose money on a particular editorial project, and it sometimes seemed a rule of thumb that what excited me wouldn't sell. With the Web, we don't have to worry if an idea isn't popular because we're not putting the same level of resources into each publication.

Never before has publishing been so cheap. Just about anyone can do it. You don't need a particularly fast or fancy computer to put Web pages online. And you don't have to worry about distribution: if someone sets their Web browser to your address, they'll get you "product" instantly.

All the forces pushing movement publishing over the edge of financial insolvency disappear when we go online. Switching to the Web is a matter of keeping our words in print. The Web is the latest invention to open up the distribution of words by birthing new medias. The printing press begat modern book publishing just as the photocopier begat zine culture. The Web can likewise spawn a media where words can flourish with less capital than ever before.

Advertising Each Other

The problem with the Web is not accessibility, but rather being heard above the noise. People generally find your website in two ways. The first is that they see your web address in your newsletter, get on their computers and look you up; this of course only gets you your own people. The second way is through links.

Links take you from one website to another. Webpage designers try to get linked from sites of similar interest to theirs, hoping the readers of the other site will follow the link to their webpage. This bouncing from site to site is called surfing, and it's the main way around the web.

Linking is a very primitive art nowadays. The Nonviolence Web has internal links that actively invite readers to explore the whole NV-Web. Everytime someone comes into the NV-Web through a member group, they will be inticed to stay and discover the other groups. By putting social change groups together in one place, we can have a much-more dynamic cross-referencing. Think of it as the equivalent of trading mailing lists in that we can all share those web surfers who find any one of us.

In the web world as in the real one, cooperation helps us all. If you're an activist group doing work on nonviolent social change then contact us and we'll put your words online. For free. If you have your own website already, then let's talk about how we can crosslink you with other groups working on nonviolent social change.

Come explore the Nonviolence Web and let us get you connected. Come join our revolution.

In peace,

Martin Kelley

Hire Martin! I build sites and online promotion campaigns to your specs and budgets and can be your guide to social media marketing.

Also available: my resume, organizations I've worked with, client recommendations and a portfolio of recent work:

As Seen In

EBook

Shortcut cover
Web 2.0 Mash-Ups & Niche Aggregators (O'Reilly Media, 2008, $9.95): Order here.

Other Sites

Social Networks

Search

Recent Comments