DISQUS

Kami Huyse · 3 years ago

I was wanting to get an audio comment to you, but I haven't sat down to do it yet. So, I am at least going to make some kind of response here.

First, you are right, I am no fan of overbilling. And I think that value billing has the potential to lead one there very quickly. To be sure, I am not opposed to per project fee; however, I am opposed to sliding fees based on how much "value." however that might be measured, that I bring to a project. For instance, how can you know what value you brought until after the project is over? You really can't. However, if you bill hourly, then bill hourly, if you bill time plus materials, then do that. If you bill per project, and the client agrees on the fee ahead of time, then, by all means, go that way. In the end, I think our disagreement is probably more semantics than reality. I believe in utmost straightforward dealings with clients and fair billing. Or, as you point out, what David Maister said, which was to ask for what anyone with your level of experience would ask. In other words, the going rate.

Now, on the topic of integrated marketing and PR programs, I also have an opinion, and that is my marketing in the mix theory. Meaning that all of this stuff shouldn't be done in a vacuum. I also outlined this in my anatomy of a key messaging post where I advocate constructing key messages on the fly based upon key values of the company or brand. This keeps everyone on "the same page" while allowing flexibility in messaging.