Content strategy and the project pricing dilemma

[Stacey King Gordon]

Hi everyone:

I've had an interesting issue come up with an agency partner regarding content strategy and project pricing. I've actually encountered the same issue quite often in my own projects, and I'm wondering how others handle it. 

My agency partner has been enthusiastically integrating content strategy into the beginnings of many of their website design projects over the past year. What they've discovered, however, is that they work hard to price the end-to-end design project based on assumptions -- the client's, theirs, and mine as the content strategist. However, as I dig in and do my work -- content analysis, stakeholder interviews, brand research -- the scope of the project inevitably grows. It's very difficult to be accurate in what the final site will entail until the content strategy work has been done. 

In end-to-end projects I've managed, I have been fortunate that some clients agree to do the work in phases: we price out just the discovery and content strategy phase first, then have priced out phase 2 - design and development as well as copywriting. However, it's difficult for this agency to not go in with an apples-to-apples comparison for the entire scope of the project when they are in such a competitive situation (i.e., the client is considering three different agencies).

The head of the agency is considering doing his own "lite" content analysis and delivering a proposal to the prospect that spells out exactly what the site will entail in terms of content and site architecture. It makes me nervous on a few levels: he's not a content expert, and I worry that he'll gloss over the intricacies and pigeonhole the project into these recommendations before strategy has really been laid out. At that point, it almost feels like a content strategy would be a waste of time if I can't make real recommendations and have to stick to what the contract lays out. (Isn't this the "old world" all over again?)

I'm curious what other agencies and consultants do in this situation, especially for large and complex projects where it's difficult to predict what you'll uncover in the strategy phase. Any thoughts are very welcome. 

Thanks!

Stacey King Gordon

_________________________

Night Writer Communications Inc.

Content Strategy & Copywriting

415.310.7334 p

415.520.0629 f

sta...@night-writer.com

www.nightwritercommunications.com

[Margot Bloomstein]

Hi Stacey,

Oooh, I feel your pain! I'm a big fan of conducting a high-level content audit--maybe spanning the breadth through a couple levels and then core-sampling a single section--as part of the proposal process. Get a sense of how big this will be, so that content strategy can inform the page count as well as the rest of the content strategy budget. You'll know how much more detail you REALLY need for the audit and analysis. And then tell your agency partner that this is part of his cost of doing business with you, and have him bake it into the the project budget.

Does that help?

Margot.

 

---

Margot Bloomstein
Appropriate, Inc.
Brand and content strategy consultant
617 921 4550 and www.twitter.com/mbloomstein

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Content Strategy" group.
To post to this group, send email to content...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to contentstrate...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/contentstrategy?hl=en.

[Stacey King Gordon]

This is great, thanks Margot! 

Stacey

__________________________

[Ruth Kaufman]

At our agency, we often do a statement of work (SOW) for the discovery & strategy phase and then a new SOW for the ensuing phases. This gives us an opportunity to do the content strategy work, user research, stakeholder interviews, tech assessments, experience visioning, etc. without incurring as much risk for the overall engagement. 

Sometimes clients don't have an appetite for "strategy," in which case our SOW's outline assumptions and clear scope statements. Changes to those result in a change order to the SOW. Sometimes in the process, the client realizes that they do, in fact, need some strategy work, and then they add on that piece of work or come back for a "phase 2". We often do some value add work in these tactical "phase 1" projects in the hopes of giving them something to bite on for a phase 2 request.

HTH,

Ruth

[Karen McGrane]

This is a common problem when you try to scope development—both copywriting and technology—without a clear understanding of what will be required. There are really only three options:

1. Only work with clients that will accept a 2-phased project (strategy/design + development)

2. Only deliver work within the bounds of the initial contract

3. Change order, change order, change order

The client can insist on seeing a full project plan, it just comes with a caveat that the estimates for development are just estimates. You still write two SOWs.

Otherwise, I'd question why the agency doesn't have the temerity to ask for a change order if the scope of the project goes significantly outside the initial assumptions. That is the WHOLE REASON you put those assumptions in the contract.

[Trisha Brandon]

With one client, who was focused on time and budget rather than the quality solution, we did the content audit as an initial SOW. The resulting detailed scope conversations and helped the client understand the underbelly of their issues, but it also helped both content strategy and UX process. Both of us were given more leeway to continue the project in a more quality-focused way. So a bit like what your agency is proposing, but you do the audit/assessment work.

Hope it's helpful!
Trisha

[Ariel van Spronsen]

Great thread! This is something I think most of us who work as
"outies" have to grapple with, and I'm appreciating your
perspectives. It's also really validating to hear that there are
others out there insisting on a phased scoping approach. To me this
is the only way that makes sense, and it's a drum I've been beating on
a lot lately.

There are other professional models for phased scoping: Car mechanics,
for example. When I take my car to the mechanic, I tell her about the
symptoms I understand through my lens as a driver. She can often make
some suggestions as to what she might need to do to solve the problem,
and can give me some rough estimates, but I don't expect to get an
accurate estimate until she's had some time under the hood. I also
understand that I am going to pay her for the diagnostic time.

Likewise in the web world, there's no reason a consultant should know
exactly how to address a project until she knows a thing or two about
it - and not just the high-level things learned in a brief kick-off or
from reading existing materials, but the kinds of things that are
meaningful to the consultant's work. For me, these are the things I
learn from an audit and qualitative assessment. Even a top-level
audit, as Margot suggests, can give us some good insights into the
type of activities I'll need to do. I'd love to hear if there are
other ways folks out there have found that get them to the information
they need in order to more accurately scope CS activities.

[Side note: I agree with Karen that there are other ways to manage
project estimates depending on the client - only delivering the work
in the bounds of the initial contract, and change order, change order,
change order. These are great tools but I've noticed they can often
erode client confidence and satisfaction, not to mention slam
producers (me and you) at the end of the timeline because we've been
promised to other projects. So I advocate for making the argument to
the client that it's better for all parties to understand the problem,
then together agree on the best approach to solving it. There's
inevitably going to be some creative strategery around solving within
budget and timeline constraints, but at least everyone's clear about
what corners we're cutting and expectations are set appropriately.
Sounds smart, right? However there often seems to be fear or
resistance for account people around this approach. Can anyone give
me insight into that?]

Rock on,
Ariel

On Oct 20, 1:37 am, Trisha Brandon <trishabran...@gmail.com> wrote:
> With one client, who was focused on time and budget rather than the quality
> solution, we did the content audit as an initial SOW. The resulting detailed
> scope conversations and helped the client understand the underbelly of their
> issues, but it also helped both content strategy and UX process. Both of us
> were given more leeway to continue the project in a more quality-focused
> way. So a bit like what your agency is proposing, but you do the
> audit/assessment work.
>
> Hope it's helpful!
> Trisha
>

> > *Content Strategy & Copywriting*
> > 415.310.7334 p
> > 415.520.0629 f
> > *sta...@night-writer.com*
> > *
> > *
> > *www.nightwritercommunications.com*
> > *
> > *
> > *
>
> > *

>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Content Strategy" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to content...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > contentstrate...@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group at
> >http://groups.google.com/group/contentstrategy?hl=en.
>
> >  --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "Content Strategy" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to content...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> > contentstrate...@googlegroups.com<contentstrategy%2Bunsubscribe@ googlegroups.com>
> > .