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