Chapter 14. Choose Clients Wisely
It does cost money to turn down a project, but saying “yes” to the wrong client can be equally as costly. We have only so many hours we can devote to our profession, and working with the wrong people means you don’t have time for more enjoyable and potentially more profitable jobs.
As the late motivational writer Stephen R. Covey, author of The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People (Free Press, 2004), once said, “Doing more things faster is no substitute for doing the right things.”
A case in point, to illustrate why saying “no” can be the right move. A prospective client approached a studio in London called ico Design with a new food retail concept (he’d seen some of the studio’s work for other food clients and was interested in working with the team). The prospect had recently sold his flat and had a substantial amount of cash to back his idea. In the initial client/designer meeting he talked through his concept, his ambition, the people he saw as potential customers, and even where he might open his first store.
“From the outset, alarm bells started ringing, especially given that something like 90 percent of all new food ventures in London fail in the first year,” explained ico’s Russell Holmes.
“His concept was incredibly niche, yet he imagined that it would be something that would appeal to everyone. His business model demanded something that no food outlet could ever guarantee: that customers would visit every single day. When we questioned him about the likelihood of this, he got extremely defensive. His food was going to be great, healthy, and tasty. Why wouldn’t everyone want to go every day?
“We took stock internally. This man obviously had ambition and wanted to work with us; however, we felt that if he went ahead with his idea, it would almost certainly fail. Design was a critical part of his concept, so if it did fail he would surely look to us as bearing some of the responsibility.”
Rather than take the man’s money and get involved with a potential white elephant, ico Design decided to approach him with a proposition. In a follow-up meeting, the ico team expressed its doubts about the retail concept. They suggested that the client pay ten percent of ico’s proposed fee. ico would conduct some research and suggest if and how the concept could be improved. He agreed, and as ico predicted, their research showed that the public was not the slightest bit interested in his proposition. ico turned down the job.
Financially, ico did not profit as it might have, plus the team had no new work for the studio’s portfolio. But the decision was the best course of action in the long term. Sometimes it’s better to step away from a project that is potentially flawed than to get involved purely for money.
But Holmes notes that there is still a potential upside. “We took a gamble that this particular client would look favorably on our good advice should he ever want to start up another business.”
Red flags
Here’s an excerpt from an email I received earlier this year:
“Do you have a money-back guarantee? Because I’ve already worked with two companies but I’m not satisfied.”
I’ve fielded thousands of inquiries, and a statement like that is a definite warning sign of a potentially difficult client. It hints that I, too, might be asked for a refund after the project started. Also, because this person was already unhappy with the work of two other companies, how likely is it that he would be happy with my design? Of course, there’s a chance that the other work was not good, but there’s also the chance that the problem lay with an impossible-to-please client. There are other sorts of clients to avoid, and when necessary, fire.
Mr. Too-Good-to-Be-True
Northern Ireland-based Darragh Neely has been running his own design practice since 1997. He recalls some telltale signs of potential nightmare clients.
“The promise of large—and too-good-to-be-true—amounts of work further down the line in return for a small piece and usually free or very cheap design; indications that the client has been ‘round the houses’ already and has visited a number of your contemporaries to no avail; outrageous claims of success; name-dropping; and the intimation of limitless funding for your work. Finally, it is likely that your ego will have been scratched to within an inch of its life: Phrases like, ‘I’ve heard great things about you,’ or, ‘You come highly recommended,’ are commonly misused in conjunction with any or all of the above.”
In one particular example, Darragh took a call from a potential client early in 2012. Let’s call him Fred. Fred was itching to meet the design team. He sounded rather eccentric, a little excitable, and was at pains to point out that his “exciting” project was “very urgent.” Intrigued, Darragh obliged him with a face-to-face appointment a few days later.
“Fred looked and behaved exactly as I thought he would after our brief phone conversation. To begin with, he spent a good few minutes gushing about our work, making special note of the fact that we had been recommended to him by a friend. When pushed as to the origin of the referral, he very cleverly sidestepped the answer. It would have been rude to pursue this, and I assumed he would tell me at a later date. Even after 19 years in this business, my BS-ometer only slightly twitched. In hindsight, this was flag number one.”
Darragh accepted the brief. It was for a product Fred had been developing for some time, and although it seemed a little unpolished and somewhat “bonkers,” Darragh thought it could be raw enough to leave some scope for a nice bit of branding and packaging.
“Fred’s enthusiasm and excitement was almost infectious. It made me forget that I had doubted his intentions, albeit fleetingly.”
Fred was given a date by which he could expect to see some concepts, along with an estimate of costs to which he immediately agreed. Work commenced in the studio in the normal way, and the ideas began to flow. The designers started to research the product competition, inspirations and Fred himself. Flag number two began waving, not because of what they found, but because of what they didn’t find.
“Some of the outrageous claims our client had made just didn’t stack up. Nevertheless, we kept working, caught up in our own excitement and eager to please and reach a solution.
“In the interim, Fred had been in touch. He was pushing—a little too hard for my liking—for visuals early for ‘an important meeting.’ He had cleverly contacted one of our designers directly rather than me, saying he wanted them emailed, another warning sign. A face-to-face presentation should always be employed for the first reveal. This gives you control and protects your work. It also gives you the ability to control any decisions. Flag number three.”
Darragh refused the request, and Fred was told the designs weren’t quite ready. The number of flags was increasing, and concerns were voiced within the design team, but they kept working.
“The information that came back over the next few days was startling. Fred had been to at least two other agencies, one of which was uncomfortably close to me. I decided to talk to both agencies directly. It’s worth noting that although healthy competition exists in the local design community, we still look out for each other. It transpired that ideas had been generated over an extended period of time and, in both instances, the design house had parted company with Fred with no money having changed hands. By this time we had reached quite an advanced stage in the process: A set of highly polished and ‘almost ready’ visuals were at third iteration, ready to send for sign-off.”
The conclusion Darragh reached was that this guy was milking every designer he could get his hands on for ideas without paying a penny.
“I tackled Fred directly on my findings—not an easy thing to do, believe me—and despite his protestations informed him that we would no longer be continuing with his project, my only solace being that we had not let visual material leave the studio, electronically or otherwise.”
If there’s a lesson to be learned from Darragh’s experience, it’s to take heed of any apprehension you have over a particular client. “It’s still possible to get it wrong regardless of how much experience you have. Nobody wants to fire a client, but it’s easier to do early rather than late, so look out for those flags.”
Darragh has had to make the decision three times during the 15 years in which his company has existed. Regardless of how good a designer you are, unless you’re incredibly lucky, it’s a situation you’re unlikely to avoid.
The Jekyll-and-Hyde client
Tim Lapetino of Chicago- and Los Angeles-based Hexanine is another experienced designer who has had to fire a client. Hexanine was engaged to create a new community website centered on women’s issues, specifically, issues surrounding the perception of their bodies. “We loved the concept as well as the cleverness and verve of the founder, and how we might be able to really flex our creative muscles. In the early going, we were also very encouraged by the fact that this client seemed to get the process. Our client talked the talk, understood the lingo, and seemed very responsive to what we proposed, as well as our process. A love fest, you might have said.”
But the tide turned almost immediately. As soon as the designers began putting pencil to paper, the conflicts began. The only part of the process that didn’t draw complaints, confusion, mid-course corrections, and yelling from the client was the initial sketch concept round. “The client wasn’t happy with initial design rounds, so we redoubled our efforts on many subsequent rounds, and sought to dig deep into unexplored territory, and out of that came some excellent work that will never see the light of day.”
For Hexanine, one additional round became ten, a few bonus concepts turned into many, and they agreed to waive their normal practice of curbing scope creep in order to please the client. But they couldn’t land on something the client would approve, and the criteria devolved from stated business goals to gut hunches that couldn’t be predicted, based on whims of the moment and ethereal catchphrases.
“After quite a lot of work, we settled on an identity concept that was part of one of our ideas, but not wholly, and attempted to make it work. The client was still not happy with the mark, but for the sake of time, we pressed onto the website, naively thinking that it would be a better arena to work in, because we had specifically limited the scope. We were wrong.
“The site was even more of a disaster, and we couldn’t wrangle the client to choose specific items and commit to certain styles, and all pretense of goals-based decision-making went out the window. The client was picking what they liked, and what was ‘liked’ turned out to be terribly ugly. We protested and fought, but in the end, acquiesced.”
Hexanine was contractually bound to complete the website, and did so, but the studio will never attach itself to any of the outcomes.
“The work isn’t right for the specified audiences, and it ended up being designs that were dictated by one very opinionated client.”
The client treated Tim’s people badly. There was yelling, terse emails, blaming, and anger when Hexanine didn’t respond immediately to weekend emails. There were even accusations of spying via Skype because the client didn’t know how to use the software.
Tim later discovered that the team was actually treated much better than most of the client’s vendors. Several PR agencies had been fired and suppliers bullied.
“For some reason, maybe our desire to keep things civil, we were spared the worst of it. But of course, we heard later that the client had bad-mouthed our firm to others as well.
“This project might still be going on if not for our decision to bow out and end our relationship with the client. We did as much as we could to deliver on the client’s brand promises, but the working relationship wasn’t producing good results. We tried to exit amicably and with as much grace and care as possible, but the same fate seemingly awaited anyone who worked with this client.”
Tim learned these lessons from the experience:
“Be flexible, but don’t subvert your own time-worn process, even if a client seems like they will work with you on it. Our process is our safety net, source of strength, and the basis for keeping things on track. We diverge from it at our peril, especially if a client requests that we do so.
“We learned to always do our due diligence with clients. If we had spent some time researching, we might have found some of the negative online comments about this client, allowing us to approach the project with our eyes wide open. Now we make sure the things other people say about prospective clients are things we’re comfortable with.”
Mr. Wrong
In another example of a project gone wrong, Fiona Burrage of Norwich-based The Click Design Consultants shared a “firing” incident from some years ago when The Click was commissioned to rebrand a firm of estate agents. To give a little background, the studio’s usual payment terms were half on commencement and half on completion. The client agreed, but upon asking the team to begin, flatly refused to pay.
“At this point, it may have been best to stick to our principles and walk away. However, this was a prestigious client who promised further work, and we did not have the benefit of experience we now possess.”
The Click started work on the project, returning with several options. Finally, one was chosen after a period of negotiation. Shortly after and completely unannounced, the creative director at The Click received a startling and extremely rude email from a partner of the client who had not been involved in the project so far. The 15-point email stopped just short of demanding that the entire project be redone. Fiona remarked, “We were perplexed but told by our original point of contact to ignore it and carry on, albeit with a bitter taste in our mouths.”
Next came the second stage of the process, where preparations were made to roll out the rebrand. The Click team found themselves working to incredibly specific instructions provided by a client who was beginning to make design decisions on their behalf.
“When we did what we thought best, it wasn’t good enough; when we did what the client asked, it didn’t work and we were to blame. After several months of crisis meetings and numerous iterations of a particular two-sided document, we felt at a loss as to how to please the client. If we sent them an email, it would either be returned instantly with a barrage of criticisms or ignored until work was required for the next day. Each part of the project was subject to numerous rounds of amends containing increasingly proscriptive instructions. As a result, studio morale was at an all-time low. We felt our hand had been forced.”
At this stage, the team decided enough was enough, and for the good of their business they called a meeting to fire the client. They wanted to remain as professional as possible, agreeing on a mutually acceptable payment and offering to hand over everything that was created so far—InDesign files, notes and guidelines—to enable another agency to continue the work.
“Unfortunately, the client became rude and abusive, replying with words to the effect of, ‘You’re really starting to f**king piss me off now.’ Point proven, we quickly left their offices, settling the final invoice and transferring work at a later date as agreed.”
Other nightmares
The descriptions above certainly do not define the entire universe of problem clients. Ireland-based graphic designer Sheena Oosten shared five red flags she watches for.
1. Clients who are extremely slow to respond
Responses with short, monosyllable answers or project briefs that are non-specific or extremely abstract are early signs that the project could become difficult down the line. If a client is unwilling to answer a few simple questions regarding their business and their goals, then they’re likely just fishing for the cheapest quote.
2. Clients who micro-manage
Client input is vital, but some clients are merely looking for nothing more than a pixel pusher. The client knows what he wants in his head and is simply searching for a designer to translate an idea into a digital format. A popular response from these type of clients would be, “I’d do it myself if I had the time, but I’m just too busy.” These clients can be very difficult to please. Similarly, those clients who tell me how long the project/job should take and what they expect to pay are often clients who don’t understand the value of the services I provide or don’t respect what I do.
3. Generic emails addressed to multiple others
The client is simply looking for the cheapest quote. If they don’t have the decency to address me in their email, or if they call me by someone else’s name, or haven’t taken the time to view my work, then chances are good they’re not particularly interested in working with me.
4. Beware the clients who have fired other designers
It’s always best to determine why the last project didn’t work out, whether it was down to the client or if it was due to a “cowboy” designer. I always try to see it from both sides before agreeing to take on someone else’s project.
5. Clients who constantly question my rates
Those who haggle on price or expect a ridiculous amount of work for the cost of a small lunch are never worth entertaining. Similarly, those who repeatedly question a request for an initial deposit or those who are very slow to pay the deposit can often be difficult to extract final payment from.
It is never easy to walk away from a client, no matter what he or she has done. On one occasion it left me feeling anxious, as if I was doing my client a disservice, when in reality, I’d already done much more than we agreed upon, and had been much more flexible than with any other client. It’s important to remember that if you keep bending and bending to suit client demands, something will inevitably break.
With experience, you’ll be able to sniff out problem clients, too. Give it time. The unfortunate part is that it will take a few red herrings before you get really good at it.