Client refusing to sign contract over project suspension point.

[BrilloPad]

This would be our example of micro-managing:

The project manager meets with the graphic designer and tells them to open Illustrator. The project manager shows the designer a drawing they did and tells them to reproduce it. The project manager specifies fonts, background textures, and filters. They hover while the graphic designer begins. The project manager leaves for a period of no longer than 10 minutes before returning and monitoring progress.

I understand. Does the client understand what your concerns are? And have an alternative form of words?

[Lance]

Thanks for your advice. We'll take a look. The client themselves are very vauge on the deliverables and we have charged them a fixed cost for the years contract which is what they asked for.

If it's fixed cost then they should not be micro-managing. An IPSE contract will cover against that to some degree. Using a term like 'micro-managing' in a contract probably isnt helpful as it's wooly and has no legal bearing (mind you 'deliverables' doesn't either)

This would be our example of micro-managing:

The project manager meets with the graphic designer and tells them to open Illustrator. The project manager shows the designer a drawing they did and tells them to reproduce it. The project manager specifies fonts, background textures, and filters. They hover while the graphic designer begins. The project manager leaves for a period of no longer than 10 minutes before returning and monitoring progress.

If they do that when you're on fixed price then they've lost the plot. Do you actually think they will? I doubt they'll do that unless the PM doesn;t understand fixed price. You do need to get some clear deliverables defined though, perhaps against payment milestones.

[designer14]

I understand. Does the client understand what your concerns are? And have an alternative form of words?

We're not sure they do understand our concerns as they don't really take our points. They keep explaining that they think it's fair to accept feedback which we're obviously more than happy to accept of course as design projects are a collaboration after all. We've explained that our point about Micro-mangement doesn't mean that they can't give feedback it's more about treating us as employee's and having excessive control over us.

We're just not sure where to go from here as we're stuck with them refusing to sign and we're not sure how to respond now without obviously just taking the whole point out of the contract.

[designer14]

If it's fixed cost then they should not be micro-managing. An IPSE contract will cover against that to some degree. Using a term like 'micro-managing' in a contract probably isnt helpful as it's wooly and has no legal bearing (mind you 'deliverables' doesn't either)


If they do that when you're on fixed price then they've lost the plot. Do you actually think they will? I doubt they'll do that unless the PM doesn;t understand fixed price. You do need to get some clear deliverables defined though, perhaps against payment milestones.

Exactly what I thought! I agree that Micro-managing is an unhelpful term, we're just not sure how to make it more specific. We've worked with them before on previous contracts and they have Micro-managed in the past so to speak so to be honest we're not at all surpised they've picked up on the point this time around. In our project proposal and in our contract we've outlined deliverables such as leaflet design, posters, social media artwork, web design elements etc. and have added a break down of costs for those elements over the year.

[NotAllThere]

Rather than say "no micro-managing", say "creative freedom". Replace the negative with a positive. Don't state what you don't want, state what you do want.

Fact is, as a client, if I received a contract with your gubbins about micromanaging, I'd be pretty annoyed. It's patronising. I've contracted out to graphic designers - maybe some dumb clients thing they can specify fonts, but most of us are well aware that we need you to get on with it, and only comment on the look as a whole.

If you don't want their money, just say so.

[designer14]

Rather than say "no micro-managing", say "creative freedom". Replace the negative with a positive. Don't state what you don't want, state what you do want.

Fact is, as a client, if I received a contract with your gubbins about micromanaging, I'd be pretty annoyed. It's patronising. I've contracted out to graphic designers - maybe some dumb clients thing they can specify fonts, but most of us are well aware that we need you to get on with it, and only comment on the look as a whole.

If you don't want their money, just say so.

You are right to be fair, I agree with that! And of course most of our clients are very accepting of our expertise and guidance and they do as you say allow us to get on with it. We're definitely going to need to adapt the wording and I appreciate everyone’s help and suggestions for that.

[mattfx]

As others have said join IPSE and their boilerplate contract is meant to be pretty good.

Other than that I agree with what others have said - everyone's interpretation of Micro-Management could be different and therefore it'd have no legal standing in court anyway.

I'd take the clause out, ensure you have clearly defined deliverables and milestones, with a clause in there to something like "opportunities for The Client to review the ongoing design work will be given at suitable times as defined by The Company." - You may want to add bits to it, but you're taking control of the situation, saying you'll give them an opportunity to review at stages you find appropriate. If they then start coming over and messing with your flow, you have the freedom to say "Look, i'll let you know when this piece is ready for review, we can discuss it then" - that to me seems fair.

[billybiro]

Join IPSE. Get a basic contract from there.
Create a schedule of deliverables. Invoice against that. It works for any business you just need to agree the deliverables.

How are you charging? If it's fixed price then they probably ought to not care, but if it's T&M then they'll want more control so you don't pull their pants down.

Or ask them to provide a contract they're happy with.

The issue is defining micro-managing

The issue is indeed defining micro-managing but also in defining those deliverables. The client is likely to identify your deliverable as something like "a design that we are happy with", which is just as woolly and wide-open to interpretation (or re-interpretation) by the client meaning that you're really no further forward with a contract that both parties can agree on.

In my experience, clients such as this can be more trouble than they're worth as they will indeed want to micro-manage but in the worst possible way - i.e. they'll tell you exactly what they don't want, but rarely what they do want. If this were me, I might agree to removing the clause or re-wording it to the clients satisfaction if I really wanted the gig, but either way, I'd be making sure there's an awful lot of contingency time added to the overall contract as they're likely to mess you around with a lot of back-and-forth reworking, taking up more and more of your precious time which you'll have to be sure you're compensated for.

[malvolio]

Perhaps move from "stopping micro-management" to saying you will use an "agile approach" to drive a continuous interaction between your work and the client's requirements....


But certainly use an IPSE contract as your baseline.

[billybiro]

Perhaps move from "stopping micro-management" to saying you will use an "agile approach" to drive a continuous interaction between your work and the client's requirements....


But certainly use an IPSE contract as your baseline.

Ah yes... Clients who are all giddy about you offering to "use Agile" because they've read that it's the best thing since sliced bread and are really happy with "an iterative approach", but still insist on fixed timescales and fixed budget up front.