Last updated on February 7, 2023
There’s the old saying that you have to pick two of these three choices: fast, good or cheap. With the economy being in the state that it is, it’s no surprise that “cheap” is high on most people’s lists. What has been surprising is that they seem to have less interest in “fast” or “good,” as long as the price is right.
This is a problem for me. I’ve reached a point in my career where I no longer have to scramble to do portfolio-building work, and instead only work with clients where I’m excited enough about the project, people and product that I want to show it off. “Cheap” work never falls into that category.
Now, before you write me off as a high-priced snob, let me explain the problem with cheap work. When a company only allocates a small amount for a project, it’s reflected in the amount of time and attention that they give to it. They often don’t think through what they really need in the project in the first place. Team members don’t dial in for conference calls. There’s no input and no consensus. Reviewers let the files languish in their inbox for weeks or months. In the end, the project doesn’t meet anyone’s needs, and the document fades away into the ether on some corporate intranet, never to be seen again.
On the other hand, the more a client pays, the better the end product tends to be. This isn’t solely about my work, but rather the contribution of the entire team. Decision-makers with budget on the line will commission projects with a plan in mind. They’ll pick up the phone when you call. They’ll solicit feedback from all internal decision makers. They’ll hold all parties, both internal and external, to their deadlines. And they’ll end up with a product that they’re proud to call their own.
So, when faced with the old “pick two” decision, it’s a good idea to remember that there are more consequences to “cheap” than meet the eye.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.