Noise Web Design

Client projects and tech blog posts about Noise

Beth Kantor's nonprofit blog has an good article asking about the possibilities for real-time web interaction and asks whether it's possible for the web to let someone be in two places at the same time:

What interests me is if this is the next evolution of the social web - what is the culture shift that needs to happen within a nonprofit to embrace it?  Of course, I want to also know what the value or benefit is to nonprofits?

For me, the eye-opening moment of real-time collaboration came last winter when I was planning a conference with two friends. The three of us knew each other pretty well and we had all met each other one-on-one but we had never been in the same room together (this wouldn't happen until the first evening of the conference we were co-leading!). A month to go we scheduled a conference call to hash out details.

I got on Skype from my New Jersey home and called Robin on her Bay Area landline and Wess on his cellphone in Los Angeles. The mixed telephony was fun enough, but the amazing part came when we brought our computers into the conversation. Within minutes we had opened up a shared Google Doc file and started cutting and pasting agenda items. Someone made a reference to a video, found it on Youtube and sent it to the other two by Twitter. Wess had a secondary wiki going, we were bookmarking resources on Delicious and sending links by instant messenger.

This is qualitatively different from the two-places-at-once scenario that Beth Kantor was imagining because we were using real-time web tools to be more present with one another. Our attention was more focused on the work at hand.

I'm more skeptical about nonprofits engaging in the live tweeting phenomenon--fast-pace, real-time updates on Twitter and other "micro-blogging" services. These tend to be so much useless noise. How useful can we be if our attention is so divided?

Last week a nonprofit I follow used Twitter to cover a press conference. I'm sorry to say that the flood of tweets amounted to a lot of useless trivia. So what that the politician you invited actually showed up in the room? That he actually walked to the podium? That he actually started talking? That he ticked through your talking points? These are all things we knew would happen when the press conference was announced. There was no NEWs in this and no take-away that could get me more involved.

What would have been useful were links to background issues, a five-things-you-do list, and a five minute wrap-up video released within an hour of the event's end. They could have been coordinated in such a way to ramp up the real time buzz: if they had posted an Twitter update every half hour or so w/one selected highlight and a link to a live Ustream.tv link I probably would have checked it out. The difference is that I would have chosen to have my workday interrupted by all of this extra activity. In the online economy, attention is the currency and any unusual activity is a kind of mugging.

When I talk to clients, I invariably tell that "social media" is inherently social, which is to say that it's about people communicating. The excitement we bring to our everyday communication and the judgment we show in shaping the message is much more important than the Web 2.0 tool de jour.
Categories: Practical 2.0
Tags: Attention, Beth Kantor, Buzz, Collaboration, Conference, Google, Live Tweeting, Noise, Nonprofit, Press Conference, Real-Time, Social Media, Social Web, Talking Points, Twitter, Ustream, Web 2.0, Youtube | Edit

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 gauge 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.

Categories: MartinKelley.com , Practical 2.0
Tags: Blog, Budget, Good Faith, Partnership, Philosophy | Edit
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

Categories: MartinKelley.com , Niche Marketing , Web Design
Tags: Bookstores, Direct Mail, Greenham Common, Infrastructure, Mail Solicitations, Peace Organizations, Political Titles, Postage Prices | Edit

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, a brief biography, organizations I've worked with, speaking and workshop engagements, client recommendations and a portfolio of recent work:

Recent Entries

Recent Comments

Archives