Comments for Needling the Haystack

Comment on The Financial Fallacy of a Services Business by Julie Crabill

Julie Crabill — Wed, 05 Oct 2011 01:04:46 +0000

Totally agree, Marie. I’ve tried different ways to quantify this particular services business – the only way is to tie the success of work to actual business metrics for success (making money, selling things, etc.). The older I get the more I realize that there are enough people who “get it” to work with (and build a successful business around) and it’s better to just avoid the others entirely.

Comment on The Financial Fallacy of a Services Business by Marie Williams

Marie Williams — Tue, 04 Oct 2011 23:14:44 +0000

Great post, Julie. I think a lot of people only believe in the costs they can “see,” e.g. it has to be physical and tangible for them to recognize its monetary value. But often it’s the unseen costs, those intangible, fuzzy things we call services, that can have untold value. Relationship building, positioning, branding, strategic direction, can be invaluable to a company, and yet it is the purveyors of those types of services like PR that get the short end of the stick. We need to figure out a way (is it even possible?) to quantify the value of service-based professions.

That leads me to my next point. I completely agree with you that short-term thinking and successful services based programs just don’t go together. We are not magicians. We can’t magically snap our fingers and create media tours, brand awareness or customer/developer adoption out of thin air. They take time and emotional savvy. You’re trying to work with a tricky variable – those widely different, brain-possessing beings we call people – and it’s not a math equation with a simple formula and a certain answer.

Comment on Don’t Trade Up by Julie Crabill

Julie Crabill — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 19:13:51 +0000

Really good call re looking ahead, Carter – knowing there is great work to do still will not only keep the team motivated and happy but also ensure that the relationship continues to be successful. If you’ve played your hand entirely, it’s usually better to walk away from the table. Don’t wait for the relationship to jump the shark before you end things.

Comment on Don’t Trade Up by Julie Crabill

Julie Crabill — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 19:11:56 +0000

I hear you, Becky – and you know what, I am starting to wonder why PR types are so quick to avoid charging for their time directly. That is, after all, what we have to sell, right? Not to say that we should all be hard asses who won’t help a second more than we are paid to help but even the donut guy only gives you one extra donut – not three extra boxes. (was the donut analogy a stretch? maybe I am hungry).

Comment on Don’t Trade Up by Carter

Carter — Sat, 19 Feb 2011 17:11:13 +0000

Great post. I think this list is a great collection of things to evaluate in a sevice relationship, and if you’re covering off on all of these it’s tough to go wrong. Only thing I’d add is to look ahead. Certainly the work you’ve done is important, but so is the work you have yet to do. When you think about your client’s future, is there still great work to be done? Are there still milestones ahead, or have things graduated/evolved to a place where the only metric left is consistency? Much of the time a smaller client needs a lot of upfront work to get a basic platform in place and generate some early momentum. Once you’ve gotten past that stage, it’s time to think about whether you’ve done the job and it’s time to move on, or whether the real work is just getting started.

Comment on Don’t Trade Up by casacaudill

casacaudill — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 00:46:44 +0000

You’ve nailed it Coco. Regardless of the company – startup or Fortune 500 – if there’s a lack of mutual respect it’s never going to be a good fit. I think that mutual respect means the team does the work they’re getting paid to do and the client not abusing the “all you can eat” model.

Comment on Don’t Trade Up by casacaudill

casacaudill — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 00:44:43 +0000

I agree with you about the “all you can eat” model – it makes for very difficult conversations with the client (and your teams) when you want to talk about over-servicing … which is only exacerbated when the reports you get are weeks (if not months) old. Honestly, I had a MUCH easier time making sure my teams worked to budget when I was on a time & materials model versus the flat fee. I could make the call to stop work or push my team for more output regardless of whether they loved or hated the client because I always knew where we stood against the retainer. I had hard #s to back it up. If the client wanted more work, I could have a very honest, realistic conversation with them about what that would look like and I think they respected both me and the agency for it more. It wasn’t always perfect, but it’s hard to argue with someone when you say, “it’s the 17th of the month and you’re at $8k of your $10k retainer based on your launch early in the month.”

And yes I think I’ve gone off on a bit of a tangent with this one, but I think a lot of what happens at the outset of an account sets the tone for whether or not an agency will put itself in a position where they have to trade up to make ends meet.

Comment on Don’t Trade Up by Julie Crabill

Julie Crabill — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 23:51:55 +0000

Amen, Coco – mutual respect and understanding are so key. That’s a good follow up to this post. Profit without respect is just money. Respect without profit is not sustainable. Really need both to make it work.

Comment on Don’t Trade Up by Colleen Wickwire

Colleen Wickwire — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 22:59:44 +0000

You nail all the key points Julie. The grass is always greener (for both the client & provider) but there’s no way to know for sure. In terms of client size/budget, I think it’s good to have a mix of both to broaden the team’s experience and opportunities. Sometimes smaller clients are more demanding because PR is a major investment, but that can also be the case with a larger account too. Personality isn’t determined by the size of the budget.

I think the key is having a client that really understands PR and appreciates that it can be a long-term investment since there will always be an ebb & flow with coverage. Clients, no matter the budget, that have unrealistic expectations and need constant reassurance will never lead to successful growth for the points you mention. A relationship that has mutual respect & understanding is priceless regardless of the budget.

Comment on Don’t Trade Up by Julie Crabill

Julie Crabill — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 17:30:02 +0000

I see your point, Becky, and thanks for the comment. If the team was going way over budget because they love the account, it makes me wonder about a few other things. Was there a lack of time management from the team/the leadership to make sure this stopped? Did the other clients suck so bad that the team, no matter how well managed, would rather scratch their eyes out than do good work for them?

Not being able to “push back” or control the time spent on a client is endemic of an all you can eat model of PR – it doesn’t work – not for the firm, not for the managers/team, not for the bottom line.

And totally agree re would rather the client “pay what they should.” Unfortunately, most PR people can never be honest with them about what the work they are getting REALLY costs and/or have a tough time explaining to them why upping their output on marketing/PR would pay dividends. That honesty is needed to end the issues you mention in your comment.