|
There is a fine balance here that should work for everyone. There are three different people who stand to benefit by the relationship. When any of them think that they are the most essential it stresses the relationship. Each has something to give and each has something to gain.
The starting point is the nursery. They have lots of people coming in which creates a very strong well targeted customer base for selling design and construction. The nursery has enough to manage (since they are subbing) running their nursery. But they still are the source for a steady supply of design work. The design work has to get built and built well for the designers reputation.
The weakest link in the whole deal is the designer. Without the nursery the designer would not get enough work or (s)he would not be commited to moving plants for that particular nursery. There are a lot of people who would love to be fed the design service work from a good nursery and there are a lot of hungry designers out there. The nursery does have a big edge over the designer - feast or famine.
You are a contractor who is not commited to work for or by from any particular nursery.On the other hand they don't have to use you either. Most likely, they are using you because you do good work and do it with good service. Maybe they can replace you, but maybe they feel like you do very well for them. In any event, they are not your sole source of work which makes you not as beholden to them as the designer.
Is the designer a sub or an employee of the nursery? If (s)he is a sub, there is a big risk to the nursery having her/him taking on the project management role. First of all it is adding another layer of expense onto the customer for management sevices that do not seem to be needed. It also either either becomes the designer's job or the nursery is taking on the liability of the designer (who probably does not have errors and ommissions insurance).
Ideally, the designer should be able to charge for design services and keep the money. You should be able to charge for your services and keep the money.The nursery should be able to charge for the plants and keep the money. The only person givin anything up in that relationship is you because you don't make any money on the plants.
What has happened is that the designer is thinking that (s)he (it is a she isn't it?) should be getting a percentage because that is what they read and hear about. That is for project management which comes after the design. What is there to manage? The nursery has the plants and will select the finest for the job (and you can't get them anywhere else), the contractor is already selected, the designer probably knows nothing about any other aspect of the project besides plant arrangement, so there is really no project management that needs to be done.
I would remind the nursery that you are giving up your ability to mark up plant materials and that you are grateful for the work that they provide, but there is a limit to your generosity. Also suggest that additional expenses charged to the customer for unneeded project management could serve the nursery better if they were used to buy more materials from them.
I don't think that there are a lot of good contractors licking their chops to get at landscape work where they are not going to make money on the plants. Then throw in some designer who may or may not know much about the construction to start interfering with how things are done?
I think they are pushing this a little too far and you need to reine them in. The easiest part of this relationship to replace is the designer.
I think the nursery should want to reine in the designer because if (s)he takes on too much power in this relationship, (s)he'll be independent and buying plants more directly which will cost them business (I don't know how you could tell them that tactfully).
I'm a designer, by the way.
|