[agla]

We had a good thread discussing all the different ways we each go about initial client meetings, whether we charge, how much we tell them, and so forth. It was a very interesting and informative thread that has me curious as to how we all differ in our approaches in the business of design.

I know that there is a wide range of how much time and detail is spent on design jobs from person to person. Sometimes you can throw down a flat fee and whip something off that is good and adequate. I'm thinking about the more involved complete landscape design jobs that might cost a thousand dollars or more. There seems to me to be a balance between providing a good custom design that leaves the homeowner feeling satisfied that you delivered the goods and having endless revisions.

How do you satisfy a client and keep the job manageable? Billing by the hour makes clients nervous and they tend to balk at signing on. Setting a flat fee leaves doubt with them that you will nail it down without revisions, or leaves the door open to endless revisions without pay.

I believe that it is much easier to get a commitment for design work from a homeowner if they feel like they are going to get what they want and know what the design costs. Telling someone "I'll do a landscape plan for $x" leaves them wondering how well you will meet their needs. Telling them "I'll get you where you want to be for $y per hour" leaves them wondering how big the bill will be before they are satisfied. In either case, it can make them hesitant to sign on.

Which way do you go? Have you found ways to make the client feel confident that he will get what he is looking for without fear of runaway pricing?


I'll wait to check out some other methods and then throw my current method out there for what it is worth.

[PSUscaper]

Perhaps this is why the design/build business setup is becoming more of a standard rather than a more traditional method of hiring a Larch and then a contractor.

By combining the two, you eliminate the disturbances that can be created by having a LA getting payed by the hour to babysit a contractor.

If you are a design build firm, you can factor in the time a LA/designer is going to be on the job. You can also eliminate the LA completely from the project (well, asides from the initial plan) by having a foreman/supervisor on site who can translate all the LA's ideas and who also is able to make the needed adjustments that occur when unforseen obstacles present themselves.

When the designer is employed by the contractor, there seems to be a much stronger bond of trust between the client and the contractor. The client sees the design team and installation team as one, not seperate entities battling between themselves (as they often do) with no regard to what their personnal battles are costing the client. The client is unable to pick a side as to which side is right or wrong.

And because the designer is being paid by the contractor, the client can rest assure that the desiger isn't piling up a bill because in essence, all they would be doing is taking away from the mouth who feeds them, the contractor.

From my own experiences, a plan with no one behind it is useless. I do enough to see this. I have yet to see one of the contractors I work for translate a plan I have drawn for them into the creation I had envisioned.

To be honest, I'm starting to see companies who use outside design firms for their planning as aging dinosaurs whose time has come.

If you are a independent designer, then I see a pricing schedule priced on averaging out the time it takes to complete a x size project for a x set price. Over time, projects that took more attention will average out with those that took less. Therefore, a set price, regardless of time that may be spent, can be determined for each project.

As contractors, we all know there is no way to predict with exact certainity how much time you will spend with a client. No matter how careful you are, you are always going to get those few projects where everything becomes a struggle, and no decison is made without 'time outs' taking to discuss the days work.

Its much like the weather. If it rains for a solid month, we can't go ahead and bill the client for a entire months work.

Furthermore, and maybe most important, is the fact that as a designer/LA you are selling a product that cannot be seen until completion. Landscape design is so trick because we are selling somehting that can't be seen until completion...........which means until all their money is already spent.

There are no car dealers who sell cars with the pitch line "we don't have one here, nor do we have any pictures, but we can promise you it will be very nice"......they take the client into the show room, show them the car, and make sure the client sees everything they are getting for the money they are about to spend.

A luxury we do not have, and a luxury we never will have.

The bottom line is past performance. If they like what you have done in the past, then they should feel comfortable with what you will do in the future. If they don't, then perhaps you should never have worked for them to begin with.

and one more thing.

this may be the biggest reason for 'bill as you go'. If you are going to produce a plan, then the client must produce a check. If the plan is approved and the client is happy, then they need to produce another check for the remaining balance. If the client requires consultations, then checks need to be rendered for each time. This way your billing problem is always settled. No matter what, you will have received most, if not all of your money. If the client becomes distrustful, then walk away. You have completed your end of the deal, so let them try and figure out the rest. Also, this system allows the client to see exactly how much they are spending, so if they decide they are unhappy, they are SOL as you are already paid.

I've always found that the 'physical' act of handing over a check keeps clients thinking about how much they are spending and also how much more they are going to spend. We all know the story here...............Mrs johnson wants an extra planting bed here and you tell her the price and she says go ahead.............THEN, when you give her the final bill, she decides the price was unjustified.

For some reason, the physical act of pulling out a check book does strange things to peoples minds.

[agla]

You have introduced another subject that I agree with and think we should have another thread on. That of design/build being a better option for the contractor vs. hiring a design only person. I agree with you and would also say that it is the best option for most homeowners as well.

I will start that thread.

I hope that this thread can stay on the other subject of how to insure that you don't scare away design sales and still don't get bogged down by the client.

Pay as you go makes sense, but it is still unclear to the client as to how much that will become before you are both on the same page. I think you even said that if they get uneasy you can cut and run and still will have been paid for work done. But from the client's perspective, you left him hanging with the choice to continue paying or have a plan that he is not satisfied with. That open endedness makes people reluctant to sign design contracts. My question remains: How can you write your design contract that gives the client the confidence that he will know about what he is getting and about what that will cost?

[Bill Schwab]

Agla:

The question posed is an interesting one, because as you probably well know, if a client makes changes, that involves more board time, which, needs to be followed up with the client getting out thier check book. I think the communication part has to come in at one point because clients can often get this notion that no matter how much of a designers time they take, they don't have to pay for anymore of that time. I'm not sure there is any other way to do that other than saying, it costs X for any time I spend on the project, and bill it in 1/4's of the hour just like a lawyer would. You could even set a base cost for phone calls and pages of fax but at some point, that clinet needs to be made aware of time taken and billed accordingly.

[agla]

The way I I have been handling residential clients recently has really worked well for me and seems to work well for them as well. I start with the initial free meeting to get familiar with the project and what they are looking to get out of it. I show them the portfolio and sell them on myself and the company.

I follow up with a proposal to do a plan. At this point there is no use in discussing a contract to do the actual landscaping as it has yet to be designed (I only mention this because I have read posts on a number of websites where the contractor sells a job and then designs it - this makes no sense to me). The proposal will have a contract price, but limits the scope to an initial meeting, a meeting to discuss revisions, and a final presentation of a single plan (no additional details), and a proposal to do the installation. Anything more, including revisions, is billed by the hour.

This lets them know what it will cost them, makes being a PITA cost them money, and gives them the opportunity to revise the plan.

I do what is essentially a complete plan before that revision. The reason is to give them less chance to play designer and more chance to focus and react to what you are doing. If you got the right info out of them at the beginning and apply it, you won't be far off at the revision meeting. Revisions tend to be minor and the final plan almost invariably nails it. I have not had to start the meter running for additional revisions in a couple of years.

This has been a very efficient system for me. The clients are comfortable, it does not drag out, and the price seldom changes.

I have been at this game for a while. One of the biggest concerns clients have is the fear of the unknown. The biggest one of those is how many hours it will take if you charge by the hour. A contract price makes them feel safe. You just have to cover your tail by having a finite product so that they know when the meter starts running.

It might not work for anyone else, but I thought I'd share it.

[PSUscaper]

I've noticed that many designers/LA's are draw/drop-off/disappear sort of people. They take a deposit, do a plan, meet the client, get paid, and leave. Its funny, but I've often found that the client has no clue what the plan really is untill they give it to a contractor who either starts ripping it apart or goes with it. In the past year alone, I've done 2 jobs where the client had a LA do a plan and we ended up totally disregarding it. Its kind of funny too, because then they start nick picking prices by a couple thousand here, a couple thousand there, and the whole time, they threw 2 grand out the window.

I've always kept the pricing simple. Half the money to start, half at completion. Can't say I've ever had a problem with it. I've had to make a few changes, but never a complete redo.

Also, because I am working with contractors (as opposed to yourself who is more or less hiring contractors), I have alreay a leg up in the game because I was referred to the client by the contractor who is going to do the job, therefore, the trust they have in him is somewhat given to me.

You mentioned that you never understood how contractors sell jobs first and then design second. Perhaps this is un-utilized benefit of going that route.

[agla]

I actually work for a design/build, although I went part time last August due to a back problem. My full time job is more in civil site plans, but does have some pure landscape architecture projects.

Selling a job and then designing it seems very difficult to me. Difficult in the sense that you are asking for a commitment and giving a price for something that has yet to be defined. I can see it working for smaller jobs, but I think the closing rates on jobs over $100k would be pretty slight. I know that I am not likely to spend that without a pretty good idea of what I am going to get for (after I win the lottery of course).

When I meet with someone (no initial charge), I'm going to listen and have a good understanding if the job is right for us and if we are right for them. I'm going to show the portfolio and verbally let my general vision be known if I think they are close to viable (if not, the visit will be short).

They will get a proposal for me to do design work. There has to be something to price out. It takes time and effort to do a full plan for the type of market that we work in. They show the commitment by paying for the plan and we build a solid contract around that plan. The plan is part of the contract and the pricing is not subjective.

My closing rate on landscape construction contracts after doing the plan is well above 90%. My closing rate on selling the plan is probably less than 50%. Selling the plan is a very effective prequalifier in the market that this company works in. Time is not wasted writing up dead end construction proposals. Even when they don't sell, we get paid for writing them through our design fee. Out of all the places that I worked for in design/build, this method is the most efficient at cutting out low end work and custom tailoring the jobs to fit the company's goals.

It won't work in the lower budget to middle of the road jobs just as surely as designing after the sale won't work in the higher end. You just can't expect people to front load a very high percent of their budget into up front design. It takes just as long to design and price out a cheap job as it does a higher quality one if it is the same size.

Knowing the budget in the higher end job is not the same as it is in other jobs. You don't ask the budget, you listen to what they want, you design it, and you tell them what it costs. They say yes, or they reduce the size or change material to get it in range.

Designing to a budget takes away the opportunity to upsell, takes more time, and reduces the likelihood that the job will resemble what they originally asked for. None of that is in your best interest. You also keep your standards high (you are only as good as your worst job to many people)

If they see it, they are more likely to want it. If they want it, they are more likely to find a way to pay for it.

[Paul]

Originally posted by agla
Out of all the places that I worked for in design/build, this method is the most efficient at cutting out low end work and custom tailoring the jobs to fit the company's goals.

This is one of the best quote's, the company's goals are met and it's doing the type of work that best fit it's people and standards.
The company knows the market it wants to hit, doesn't lower it's self to doing cheap work that would bring down it's profit or show poor quality workmanship!

[Bill Schwab]

Agla:

I agree with most of what you are saying here. In the track home markets, it is fairly easy however to have a client set a budget, and keep within it, so long as it is a realisitic budget. It is all dictated by property size and access. Unless they decide they want some exotic tile from lower Ubangia installed on thier fountain, or, choose a weird imported style brick, budgets are fairly easy to stick to, you can taylor the job to the company nitche/profit margin, and, it eleiminates the clients from shopping your job or hiring an illegal alien and calling that competition.

I'm just saying there are certain markets where it makes sense for the company to get a commitment before any work is done, on either drawing board, or property.

[agla]

I agree 100%. There are lots of ways that are better for different situations. I think that the more different ways that can be posted, the more other people can see. That way we all learn from each other and help each other out, ....GTX at its best.

In no way am I saynig that this is the ideal way to work. It is just working really well in the situation I am in.

[PSUscaper]

Maybe this should be a scary thing, maybe not, but around here, I see 100k +++ jobs sold with out a plan, and then installed, without a plan.

Sometimes I wonder if "high end" is really a great thing to be in, and also wonder if the demographics of one customer base is a good or bad thing.

For instance........

Take a high end market like Martha's vinyards, or the hamptons, or someother ritzie place. In those areas, a 'high end' 100k job may entail a small little beach lot where the client wants 18 bazillion differnet things done and all sorts of rare exotic plants, wacky pools with underground caves, all kinds of fancy lighting, etc. etc.

In my area, a 200k+ 'high end' job may entail just a massive foundation planting (which may be done with no design) and perhaps pavers on their rediculously long driveway they have.

Its like watching that silly HGTV show.........

They people have a 20k budget and bring in a designer......before you know it, they are literally spending 'days and days' with the designer shopping for tile, shopping for plants, shopping for stone, shopping for this, shopping for that.......blah...blah ......blah....blah.......

Its obsolutely rediculous. And when I see this kind of stuff, I really wonder if I want to become more involvedin my design work, because it seems like the more YOU know.......the LESS the client does. Right now I can sell a job over the phone.........meanwhile, some designer is spending hours upon hours with clients dicussing the design of their new 5k herb garden.

I just have to ask if it is really worth dealing with that kind of market????

I think that if a client has a designer, and the client is spending a large amount of money on a project already, in no way should they start questioning billing on part of the designer. If they do, then they probably are over their heads with the entire project.

Maybe the point I'm trying to make is that whatever you do, the client is always going to have a problem with something. Whether its your bill, your design, the color of the brick.etc,