I don't know what law of physics governs this, but small changes are often more painful than big ones. (When it comes to creative issues, anyway.)
When a client provides a medium-size list of things that need fixing, give me an hour and I'll churn through it. But there are other clients who might give me an itty-bitty comment, one that's practically too small to even bother opening the file, and it gives me a migraine--because I know that there's no way that it's the only change. And the next change will be just as minute. And pretty soon we're on Version 8 with no signs of stopping anytime soon.
If any good comes from such a thing, it's a reminder to me to be vigilant of delivering clean, concise changes to my graphic designers, web designers, etc., etc.
The road to Hell is paved with incremental changes. 4vcxn7ae5t
Posts
I refer to that as "diarrhea of the edit" -- because it never stops.
ReplyDeleteIf you make a rule that there are 3 rounds, and then the job becomes an additional job, not just another round, that might affect the incremental changes.
ReplyDeleteQ:
ReplyDeleteIndeed, some people use that successfully. Early on, I used a line like "Includes two rounds of revisions" in my proposals, but I soon abandoned that tactic. My feeling was that it came off as too adversarial at a time early in the relationship--just when it's most important to build trust. Instead, I build in extra time in my estimated range--that way there's an incentive for them to not endlessly revise.
If someone gets out of control, I'll deal with it firmly but politely in letting them know that further changes will be charged by the hour. The odds are at that point I don't want them as a future client.