

Some clients are evil and their work is toxic - j4mie
http://hossgifford.com/fast-good-cheap/

======
jasonkester
I've found that the best thing to do with these people is send them offshore.
Let them see what cheap, "fast" work looks like. Let them have all their
preconceptions shattered, and their sense of what it takes to build software
modified towards reality. Let them get all the frustration out of their system
until they're ready for you to show them what _good_ , genuinely fast work
looks like.

The quickest way to accomplish this is to tell them your rate upfront. They'll
go "ouch", at which point you can gently point them towards rentacoder, safe
in the knowledge that they'll be back in 6 months time with a bit of
perspective and a willingness to pay your extortionate rate so long as you
promise never to put them through anything like what they just suffered ever
again.

~~~
nadam
I think smart offshoring can be a good idea. If they want the stuff for 1/10th
price than they will not get quality. But if they want the stuff for half
price they in fact can have at least as good qualty if not better. You can
find the top talent here in Eastern Europe for half of the salary usual in the
U.S. I know this, because I've already worked in the 'West' doing absolutely
the same work for much more money than I can earn here. Honestly the real
bottleneck of (smart) offshoring is communication. If communication is solved
then it can work well.

~~~
jsankey
_If communication is solved then it can work well._

That's a big _if_. For most projects, the work is not that difficult in a
technical sense. The hard parts are accurate communication and managing change
over time. IMO these factors are much more likely to cause project failure
than some pure technical hurdle.

------
rmoriz
I once made the mistake to work as contractor (Ruby) for a company that fits
in the article's description. The customer was unable to deliver me input for
serveral months but begged me to sit in their office all day. Just sit there
and do some research (no kidding). Then around 6 weeks prior the launch date
(which was not communicated to me upfront) the hurry started and it was
totally rediculous: No specs, no clue, no decision making. I spent 4 weeks
(including weekends) working ~10 hours (+1.5h commuting) per day to fix the
sh*it as far as I could so that we had something to launch. Code quality was
horrible of course.

I felt totally burned out after the launch and there was not even a big
financial neither emotional reward in doing this exhausting mess to save my
customer's back from his angry client. Three days before my contract ended,
the general manager had a conversation with me in his shiny office. He told
me, that they wanted to extend the contract for 6 months (~60.000€).

I answered: Thank you, but not under this circumstances.

Best decision for my physical and mental health in the last 5 years. If you've
a choice: DONT DO IT.

Life is simply too short do work for such types of (in the end) losing
companies and ruin yourself.

~~~
eru
Did you give the general manager a feedback like this in the end, or did you
think it more prudent to keep your cards closer to your chest?

~~~
rmoriz
I gave (naive) feedback how they should improve their work with their
customers, improve hiring people, make sure employees are motivated and
whatever.

The general manager even told me that most things I said were true but he's
not able to change it. As the company is inside a large publishing group and
they've some large portal sites running, they're quite job-save for the next 5
years I guess.

------
slantyyz
Interesting article but the title is a little misleading.

Before I clicked, I thought they were talking about doing work for cigarette
or oil companies. I worked at a company that was pitching services to a
cigarette company, and --nobody-- involved felt good about doing the pitch.

But back to the point, one of the speakers at the Business of Software series
once said "When someone tells you the work you do is easy, they probably have
no idea what they're talking about". Being in services, I think there's at
least one person at every client who thinks that everything I do is overpriced
and easy.

You can't blame clients for wanting to get the 'most for the least' from their
vendors. Interesting that they know they're not capable of doing it themselves
to hire a vendor. Yet after that decision, they don't seem to know enough to
not disrespect the work you do.

~~~
brudgers
I agree. High client expectations are hardly evil.

Without a patron, everyone competes on fast, good, and cheap. It drives
efficiency and innovation, e.g. Google.

The responses to clients with unrealistic goals is the same as to those with
practical ones -- find out the "why?" and provide a detailed proposal with
realistic terms.

If your proposal is rejected,being indignant is counterproductive. It's just
business.

~~~
slantyyz
Actually I would argue the market winners tend to be at the opposite ends of
the spectrum. The best (arguably the most expensive) and the cheapest
generally have the easiest time.

Everyone in the middle is fighting for the rest of the market, which, as the
Jersey Shore boys put it, is full of grenades.

------
dolinsky
While we've all come across these kinds of clients and it is probably in our
best interest not to become involved in a working relationship with these
clients, I disagree with his classification of them being 'evil' and
'douchebags'. I've found that many of these individuals are just naive to the
effort involved in taking their (website|product|application|widget) from an
idea to a tangible working product. They are able to envision 'something' in
their minds, and because they are able to do that they consider the job at
least partially done. Many of them have never done our jobs, and even those
that have probably fall at the long tail end of the hockey stick and can't
appreciate the difference between someone that learned HTML in 24 hours and
someone who can create a design that creates value to their product (same goes
for us backend folks).

If someone says to me 'I'd like to build X, and my budget is Y, and my
timeline is Z' and they're not completely obnoxious in their approach, it's
not very difficult to have a conversation with this individual, ask a few
questions, and get a better understanding of what 'X' really is and how 'Z'
came to be (assuming Y is either non-negotiable or you don't have the
experience to know what you're worth). You might find that this individual
isn't even aware that a product (yes I'm mostly talking web properties here)
can be broken down into pieces to fit into a continuous timeline, where those
smaller pieces are easier to manage and deliver on.

With all this in mind, I've avoided doing consultancy work for the better part
of the past 6 years because I got worn out at the time of dealing with what
the OP had described about. After 6 years, I have learned a lot more about
myself and have acquired soft skills that I didn't have before (and learned
from a great PM). Those 6 years have also helped me realize that humility,
when used properly, can help distinguish between the arrogant and the naive
client.

~~~
eru
And the naivety works the other way, too. I had a friend who organized big
company events, setting up sound systems, light, hiring catering, and
musicians, getting an ice castle for the lobby, such things.

Clients had absolutely no ability to gauge what stuff should cost. So the
company overcharged heavily on a lot of technical stuff (like renting out
lights or speakers), but could offer a supreme service. (One other `trick' was
to make sure that their hired hands always wore suits, did not smoke, and
looked respectable in general. They hired the same students as anybody else,
but could charge much more for their work.)

~~~
dolinsky
Without a doubt your 'appearance' can go a long way towards dictating your
rate. Your appearance can be comprised of:

\- How you dress \- The language you use \- The presentation of your proposal
\- Once you have the gig, the manner in which you conduct business

It's no secret that if you want to charge more than your competitors, one of
the best ways to do so is to build an image that compliments that idea.

~~~
eru
Yes. And the clients where happy with them, because they also went the extra
mile and gave top-notch service for the whole event (and not only dumping some
equipment on them) --- but they charged a top-notch price, too.

(And on of they ways to charge the high price was not too charge a high price
only for the staff that really matters and costs, but may not be visible to
the client beforehand---but they charged a lot for the stuff where the naive
client can _imagine_ that it's expensive. If they did not offer the high
quality in the rest of what they did, this would have been a rip-off, but it
turned to be more of a cross-subsidy. (And since they only sell packages
anyway, it does not really matter, how the invoice explains the high fees.))

------
johngalt
As an IT Director I apologize and here's why:

I will outsource anything that the stakeholders are being unreasonable about.
Specifically to show what an "easy/quick" project will cost. I won't throw you
to the wolves but there are many IT people that will.

So always protect yourself, even from the in house technical staff. Yes
they'll understand the challenges you face, sometimes all too well.

------
edw519
Wanting it fast, good, and cheap is also a red flag for lots of other little
bonuses, such as:

    
    
      - You will constantly wait for them to make a decision.
      - It will be your fault they took so long to make a decision.
      - They will have emergencies of their own making.
      - It will be your fault they have emergencies.
      - They will commit to little or nothing on paper.
      - It's not their fault because they never committed to that.
      - You think you have specs; they think you're prototyping, so...
      - You will do much work 2 or 3 times.
      - They will constantly change priorities.
      - They will forget they changed priorities, so...
      - They will complain when a lower priority isn't done.
      - You won't get paid on time.
      - You will spend lots of time trying to get paid.
      - They will always find some excuse to not pay.
      - You may never get paid.
      - If it's good, it's because they thought of it.
      - If it's bad, it's because you suck.
      - You can't win.
    

Honestly, I wish we could tattoo these people to save the next developer all
the heartache. Listen to OP; as soon as you realize they want it fast, good,
and cheap, _run_ the other way.

~~~
slantyyz
When you're dealing with anyone outside the Fortune 10,000, money is still not
something that is just thrown around willy nilly. So, in the grand scheme of
things, --everyone-- wants it fast, good and cheap, __if it's possible __.

If you can educate your prospect on why it's not possible, they'll usually
come around and even be reasonable about things.

So I would say if the prospect wants it fast, good and cheap, and it smells
like they're going to be __clueless dicks __about it, then run the other way.

With respect to many of the bullet points above, I would also say that you
have to vet your prospects just as much as they are vetting you, and protect
yourself with a contract that isn't heavily in favor of the customer (i.e.,
you're entitled to stop work if you're not paid on time, that you have an exit
clause, etc., etc.) More often than not, you also have to put your bad cop hat
on and manage the customer. I've seen so many projects fail because the
Account Manager or PM was too scared to say anything to control the scope of
the project.

~~~
gaius
You're correct, but you're missing the point that many clients interests are
not aligned with either yours or even their organizations. When someone
_refuses_ to commit to decisions in writing, even in an email, then you are a
pawn in some game they are playing. You're being set up to fail and to be
scapegoated because they believe that this will advance them in the
organization quicker than you succeeding (e.g. the project's sponsor is a
rival of theirs). That is why they are best described as toxic.

~~~
slantyyz
I would agree. Client interests are rarely aligned with yours.

If the economic relationship, however, between you and the client is genuinely
fair (i.e., they need you as much as you need them) then you're actually in a
position to push back and get balanced results.

I tend to find that most services companies are more obsessed with the 'close'
than they are with making sure the relationship is going to work (i.e.,
vetting them, asking tough questions back) before signing on the dotted line.
You also have to acknowledge that a high percentage of those who take on toxic
clients and projects did it to themselves.

------
sunkencity
And he didn't even go into mentioning that these people that want fast, good &
cheap are experts sneakscope ops, it's totally right to pull out or severly
limit the deliverables.

~~~
gaius
_experts sneakscope ops_

What does this mean?

~~~
JoachimSchipper
"Scope creep" - adding more and more work.

~~~
sunkencity
Yep also was a little typo, I meant "expert sneakscope ops" not experts. My
bad.

------
eplanit
I have to ask, do you really use phrases like "nurturing ecosystem where all
parties benefit and grow from their relationship" with your clients? Are you
referring to their relationship to their customers, or your relationship to
the client?

'Fast', 'good', and 'cheap' are all subjective terms. Each one works against
the other two, for sure. That's a fact that your client will have to discover.
I completely agree with the suggestions in other comments to prompt your
client to use offshore talent -- then they'll truly learn that Fast+Cheap !=
Good.

I've worked with these kinds of clients, and their opposite: large,
established financial institutions who insist on working with 'Big Name'
consulting firms: IBM, Accenture, etc. These firms make projects that would be
6 months of interesting effort into 2 or 3 year-long efforts, costing multi-
millions, with a ratio of documentation/artifact to useful code being about
5:1. In the end, the deliverable is generally of mediocre quality. Great
software does not come from financial institutions, nor from those operating
on the fast and cheap. You won't change that reality, and I think you'd grow
weary trying to do so.

I'll warn you now: 90%+ of your clients will be some combination of the above
-- mostly the fast/cheap type. You'll learn, over time, how to work these
kinds of gigs. Think of your bottom-line (money, experience) gain. Don't look
to your client to fulfill your career goals -- 'tis not their role. Apply your
own sense of 'fast' and 'good', and remind your client that your expectations
are to be paid in-full and on-time, every time.

...and keep looking for that next gig.

------
iuguy
It sounds to me that he doesn't see this from the toxic client's point of
view, and is at risk of passing up work that he views as toxic, but really
isn't.

We just had a quote in for some mailshot work for us that looked awfully
highly priced for what it was as everything on the quote had things that we
could do ourselves with mailchimp, but the key thing that we would've relied
upon for them to do that we couldn't do ourselves (mailshot template design,
modifying the content to maximise attention) wasn't even mentioned on the
quote.

When bidding, it's sometimes easier to justify your prices by highlighting the
value in the things your potential customer _can't_ do, rather than the stuff
they can and try to do it cheaper than their internal guys. There are toxic
clients out there and they should be avoided, but sometimes cheap, good and
fast means cheap enough, good enough, fast enough and (most importantly) takes
care of my pain.

------
bwooceli
However accurate this post is, it represents something I don't understand at
all. How often do we see posted here a rant about how terrible it is to deal
with some clients. That in and of itself is not bad. A venting space is
necessary. That said, I don't care how good you are, if I was a prospective
client who a) was savvy b) had heard of you c) read your personal blog which
you maintain as part of your professional profile... I would personally not be
excited about doing business with someone who called a business opportunity a
douche bag (/prick). I know that "hacker culture" prides itself to a certain
degree on counter-culturalism, but isn't there a place for class any more?

~~~
chc
I'm not sure I understand. Is it the language that offends you, or the venting
about a client? Because you already said the latter is "not bad" and
"necessary." But getting that upset that somebody uses very mildly offensive
swear words in an informal, personal setting seems a bit petty and kind of
juvenile, certainly not something I would expect from most adults. I don't
know, maybe the words "douche" and "prick" are more severe in some places than
in my neck of the woods? Because over here, they're roughly on par with
"jerk."

------
8ren
Larry Niven said there are two bumps in a writer's career:

\- In the beginning, a writer should accept all work he can get, because he
needs to develop his skills, and any work will do that, regardless of how well
paying etc.

\- But then the writer needs to learn to turn down _bad work_ \- that's the
first bump.

\- And later, he needs to learn to turn down _good work_ , because there's a
limit to how much you can handle - that's the second bump.

The submission here is talking about the first bump. It's not necessarily
right for everyone, at every stage; though of course it's good advice and
worth knowing about (btw: I always interpret the "fast" as meaning performant
- ie. fast software not fast development - but the latter makes more sense for
work in general.)

Note that most writers have a day job (or are independently wealthy, as Niven
was - for a year), so it doesn't apply to a professional full-time
contractor... but it may apply to you if you are a student, hobbiest or moon-
lighting contractor.

------
mfukar
I wish I could upvote this multiple times; the article is spot on.

------
ora600
Why not set a minimum price per hour, and if the customer can't afford you,
then say good-bye with no hard feelings?

He is not evil and toxic, he just needs someone cheaper and may need to adjust
his definition of "good" and "fast" accordingly.

There are good reasons to take work for less than your normal fee. I do it to
learn sexy new technologies I would not have access to otherwise. (i.e. if you
have Exadata and need a cheap, good and fast DBA send me and email!) As long
as you know what you are getting out of the deal, all is good.

Calling someone a douche-bag, evil and poison because he asked for reduced
rate? Giving a condescending rant about it? I don't think its professional and
I'd never treat potential customers like this, even if I disagree with their
way of doing business.

------
lukev
Let's just slow down a minute.

Any manager who _doesn't_ want work done fast, good and cheap is a bad
manager. Fast, good and cheap are all good things and something that everyone
involved should strive for on all projects.

You can't have them all in the real world, of course. And good managers will
be realistic - I think that's what this article is saying. But even given that
you have to trade off some of these points doesn't still mean you don't want
it as fast, cheap or good as possible _given the constraints_.

Even if you decide to sacrifice "cheap", for example, there's nothing wrong
about negotiation to still get the best rate possible.

~~~
gaius
Actually no competent manager thinks in terms of "cheap" but in terms of ROI.

~~~
seunosewa
"Cheap" implies "high ROI".

~~~
gaius
No it only implies low initial cost.

------
narrator
The best thing to do to avoid crap like this is charge a decent hourly rate
and don't let the clock run too long before you get your first check. They
will not waste your time.

~~~
slantyyz
It depends on the situation.

Oftentimes the people you're working with don't know how much you're being
paid (their superiors don't talk to them about how much you're paid because
they're afraid members of their team will just want to leave because they
think they're underpaid). Those people will still waste your time.

At the end of the billing period, you'll be asked to shave hours because you
didn't notify someone higher up that your time was being wasted.

------
mattm
I accepted a job at a company where, during the interview, one of the
interviewers said "we are looking for someone who can do work fast, good and
cheap and we don't want any excuses."

I was thinking of bringing up the point that it is impossible to get all three
but didn't and accepted the job.

What a big mistake. I ended up leaving half a year later although it was a
good experience learning the types of people I don't want to work with.

------
shfshfh
I've always lived by this - [http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/clients-
or-grinders-...](http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/clients-or-grinders-
understanding-the-three-market-types) \- which says much the same thing.

------
eru
Off-topic: I like the look of that page.

------
TheSOB88
Am I the only one who finds those left-side magazine-style quotes from the
article distracting? I don't think they add anything to the article.

~~~
qjz
I like the format, but agree it could have been done better in this particular
case.

