Hold on - I think I'm missing something here. Sure 'nuff the 5% of the job cost is $500, but what happened to that $50/hour? A typical 20 hour design (pretty much ballpark for an "average" site) adds another $1000 to the deal, which could be getting up there for some areas/clients, specially on a $10,000 job (pretty small, all things considered).

I don't know if this will work for you, but after a bunch of years doing this on my own, I never quote an hourly fee for design work - consultation and/or oversight, yes, but not for design. I've got enough under my belt that I am pretty well able to quote a flat fee that compensates me sufficiently for my time and experience yet doesn't break the client's bank. I do leave a loophole in my contracts that allows some padding/contingencies if things get carried away, as they sometimes do. Understanding the scope of the project, the budget and the client is essential.

I would assume then that you're also facilitating the install?

Typically I deal direct with the homeowner for the design fee, then work with the installer for 5% of the install in exchange for doing construction drawings, grading plans, permit plans, helping lay out the jobs and keeping the homeowner feeling warm 'n fuzzy.

Jenny,

Why not go with what is already working? What part of the $50/hr + 5% is not working for you?

If the 5% is paid to you because the deal was closed and without extra work time and responsibility beyond developing and producing the plan, you are doing well.

My guess is that the 50/5 deal is not working for you because there is not enough work to keep you. If that is the case, offering the same deal to other contractors might bring you closer to working full time. Full time at $50/hour is over $100k a year last time I checked. Throw on 5% of gross and you are very well of for just drawing plans. The question is how many contractors will give you the same deal. You are in a battle between pay rate and volume of work.

So, do you try to get a higher pay rate with the risk of sitting on the sidelines with a low volume of work, or do you go after volume to increase your annual income? Do you expand your billable hours, or try to upsell the jobs to get more out of that 5% (pay attention Gardengal)? My guess is that you would like to do both.

This is not a one sided relationship. The contractors only want you if you increase their bottom line. 'You start charging too much per hour, and they will find someone else to get the job done. 'You start taking them from $10k jobs to $20k jobs (or maybe $500k) and then you are both making more money (see where this is going, Gardengal?). A percentage is not a wage. It is an incentive. That incentive is the mechanism that will drive you toward going after higher end clients. After a while you will no longer be interested in spending your hours on a job that will land you 5% of $10k when the same time could have landed you 5% of $100k. That is the phenomenon that drives people who are serious about making a living as designers toward the higher end market - it is not elitist, snobbish, or kicking people of limited income when they are down. It is just reality.

If the contractors have other designers whom they work with, you can bet that they will be giving those of you who increase their bottom line more work than those who just tow the line. They don't care how many designs you draw up. They care about how many of those leads that they had and gave to you slip through their fingers and how much they net out of that job from how you addressed and influenced the client through your design process.

Jenny, you have an opportunity to increase your volume of work and open more doors. You can try to get more per hour and hope it does not scare off the new source. The percentage is your golden egg. As long as you get that, you are in the drivers seat.

If I new that I could have a steady stream of work at $50/hr and 5% without project management, I'd do it in a minute rather than charging $90/hour (I would not do it in a low rent neighborhood, though). I'd also be doing everything I could to lift those contractors into higher markets.

The reason for the contractor to have you on board rather than someone else is to increase their bottom line without having to increase their production.

Each contractor can only manage a certain amount of people, equipment, and jobs. This is the most overlooked fact about contractors that many of them tend to overlook as well. Few contractors can expand past a certain point even when there is lots of work out there. They reach a point where command and control falls apart and they can not just hire a "leader" to pick it up. They eventually settle at a size that is managable for them. Sometimes that is three workers, sometimes it is 63. But, eventually they realize that they have a limit to their production. They then look to apply that production to things that make more money and away from things that make less money.

The value of a designer to a contractor is not about colors, creativity, and pretty plans, but to move more materials and crafted items in the same time with the same people than would otherwise be done. If you do that you are in. If you don't you are out.

Andrew, I do understand what you are saying. I just don't agree entirely with your conclusions :-) Or let me put it this way - while this is definitely a business, it is an extremely creative business and somewhere in all the dollars and cents that has to be factored in.

The value of a designer to a contractor is not about colors, creativity, and pretty plans, but to move more materials and crafted items in the same time with the same people than would otherwise be done.

I submit that the value of designer should very much include these items (colors, creativity and pretty plans or however you like to describe it). A savvy contractor is going to understand that the quality and creativity of the designs they install are going to create and add to the client base and therefore the bottom line just as much as their technical expertise and efficiency in implementing them.

I have a different model than those mentioned above when working with contractors. Initially I did work for the contractor but found that it gave me very little say in the final outcome of the project with regards to materials and craftmanship. I still work with two contractors who don't have a design/sales staff. The emphasis there is 'with' not 'for'. My agreement with the contractors is that I work for the client and maintain autonomy. I manage the scheduling and I choose materials and spec the jobs and I bill for that time. In many cases I recommend specialty subs. The contractors I work with have seen steady growth in the size of the projects they work on and we refer each other back and forth. We estimate and bill separately. I would not want to depend on someone else's largess for my income. I also want the client to be able to refer me, not the contractors for other work.

No arguement here. I just thought this would clarify some points that I have had a hard time trying to make over several months.

I agree with you Gardengal (I find that I agree with you 99.9% of the time on anything you post, actually). The designer has to use the tools of design, first because it is what we are really all about, and it is what bridges the the clients needs to the contractors needs. All I am saying is that in txjenny's situation, which is "working for" contractors, awareness of serving the purposes of whom you work for is very important in order to remain in that position.

I believe that anytime you get your work from the contractor, they have the control, and you are in fact working for them and not with them. Until txjenny can get a steady stream of design jobs on her own, getting $50 per hour and 5% is pretty darn good without further responsibility than dealing with the clients and producing the plan.

I do not advocate this model on the long term, but it is the one that she is in and probably the best way for her to make a living while she builds a reputation, a portfolio of built work, and a few contractors who know what she is all about and will be interested in bidding to sub jobs from her when she does get her own design work.

Miss rumphius is doing what we should all be doing, but it takes a while to get there. You have to be the source of the project and not need the contractor to source your clients.

The source of the job has the power. When the designer is bringing work to the contractor, the value is high and they have to respect you in order to get that work or other work from you. If the contractor is bringing the work to the designer, the designer has to respect the contractor in order to continue to get that work. It is like drainage - it all runs down hill.

The catch is that potential clients, more often than not, look for the straightest line to the final outcome of the project. Everyone knows that when you trade in your car for a newer one, you get less for your trade in than if you sold it privately and you can get better interest rates if you shop around for financing. Yet most people will make the trade at the dealers and finance with them because it is simpler. It is the same with landscaping.

Until the designer is working as an agent for the client (which costs the client more), the client would rather deal with a designer who is either going to build the project or who is directly connected to the people who are going to build it. They seldom want to be left with a plan and then have to go through all of the hassle of finding a contractor after going through the hassle of finding a designer. This all leads up to the fact that the vast majority of people looking to have a landscape project done are going to go to a landscape design/build without ever thinking about looking for an independent designer.

That is not to say that no one looks for an independent designer. People with the means to pay extra for a designer who is working for them will (that means higher end) and people who want to buy their own plants and do some of the work themselves will (less money to be made for us - think of Jenny's $50/hr + 5% of nothing).

This is why I honestly believe that if you intend to make a good living as only a designer, you have to work the higher end or you will starve or have to supplement.

My guess is that Miss R is working the higher end. If for no other reason, the contractors would not care to go after her work if they were low budget. They surely would not want to be under her control for short money. Most likely they don't (none of us do) like being under her control at all, but something makes it worth it. That something is a better bottom line.

Everyone take note that there is a huge difference in the work that Jenny is doing for her money and what Miss R is doing for hers. Jenny meets the clients and works through design development to a plan and that is where it ends. It is the part that most people envision as the life of a designer. Miss R does all that and then the real work starts. She has to make (not ask or wish) the contractors and subcontractors do the work just the way she wants it to be done. She has to approve it, or not approve it to the contractors face and MAKE him fix it, do it over, or tell him he won't get paid (sounds like fun). Then she is the one who gets the call from the client who is not happy and is solely reponsible to that client. If she approved something that is not right, the contractor is of the hook and she's on it. These are hugely different sets of job skills, responsibilities, and pay scales (hopefully). Apples and oranges.

All roads lead to Rome. In the world of freelance design, Rome is the higher end market and a tough neighborhood if you are ill prepared.

Laag hit the nail on the head. Although size of a project isnt what attracts me to it, I have actively sought out high end clients. Not only are they willing to spend for an independent designer, they have the referral factor as do the contractors who work at level of craftsmanship.

The high end market is competitive and you have to build a solid reputation and contacts within your area. Spend the time doing the homeworkÂwhere are the best nurseries, masons, pool renovators, stone yards, blacksmiths, carpenters, etc. in your area. Who listens to you and can read and follow your plans? Who starts the job on time and finishes within budget. Talk to them. Treat them with utmost respect. Refer them and theyÂll refer you. Several years ago I called a local pool company to renovate a very old pool that would have been too costly to remove. They were quirky to deal with but did excellent work. They have since recommended me for several large projects and I have used them again. One hand continually feeds the other...

hey everyone, sorry i posted and then didn't respond to all the conversation! I actually had a family emergency soon afterwards, and haven't been online for several days.

I actually do some design/build work through my company--more like what miss rumph does--and then have started to do the freelance stuff on the side. I have done some work with Company #1 where i get paid the $50 an hour plus 5% commission of the builder's take, and then I was just approached by Company #2 (with whom I subcontracted with on two other jobs). I was thinking that i could just do a flat fee for the design (that really does produce more income than the $50 an hour, unless a design takes a super long time to do.) for my own clients i charge flat design fees beginning at $750.

I haven't done enough design work for Company #1 to know that it will be enough to make a full-time income on; i'm one of 3 designers, but with Company #2 i'd be the only one. I really appreciate the conversation on this, and it does help to think of different freelancing models. i don't think you have to have the same model with each company; it depends on how much volume you get, how big the jobs are, and the types of design jobs you can get.

By the way, what is the range in number of hours you all take to design a project? I confess that i don't really keep track since i usually do a flat fee and don't have to count hours, but with these new gigs, i'm starting to have to predict how many hours a design will take.

thanks for all your input--

Jenny

I'm bad about tracking my hours, but I usually end up with a breakdown like this: measure- 3 hrs (incl. drivetime); basemapping- 1.5hr; sketching concepts at the board- 2 to 3 hrs; refining in CAD- 5 to 8 hrs for smaller jobs, up to 24 if there are a lot of walls, carpentry, etc.; and color rendering, about 1.5 hrs. Actual construction drawings are outside the scope of my basic design agreement, but if I know I'm getting the whole enchilada I'll often just do all those while I'm "in the groove" on that job.

I'd actually be curious to know how this compares with the more experienced designers out there (I've only been back in the design world for about two years).

Dave

Doesn't sound too far off, Dave, with consideration for the size and complexity of the project. I'd consider this to be reasonable for the average sized suburban lot - I've been known to spend upto 12 manhours measuring larger properties, as well as the extra time that would be involved in developing a plan for considerable acreage. But then I hate measuring and am rather slow and painstaking about it. And I include the initial client interview/site visit and subsequent follow-up visits in my time estimate as well. Although sometimes it's a bit difficult at the outset to nail down how much hand holding or revisions will be required with some clients :-( I've had a couple that were so needy that I had to let them know that additional visits would be billed at my regular hourly consultation rate - that called a halt to unnecessary phone calls/visits pretty quickly!

Here's what's typical hours and flow for me. In hours...1--interviewing the client & walking the property; 1-4 site measurements for a flat lot with a few trees and regular property lines (grade issues and wooded lots increase this); 2-4 for conceptuals; 1 meeting w/client to firm up concepts; 6-40 for plan (depending on what it is 6 for a foundation plan/40 for a full landscape plan with hardscape and other features); 2 for coloring plan if necessary (an additional 2 for a mood board if necessary); 1-2 for presentation to client. This doesn't include a detailed planting plan or construction plans. I hand draw and use a cad program depending on the project. Gardengal is right about needy clients...

Right in there. Usually an hour, sometimes longer on the interview site walk with client. I can usually get a cad plan (you need a certified plot plan for building permits and septic work in my area, so recent survey work has usually been done) that will have the house, road, lot lines, septic, and often topo. Still I have to measure and locate plants and other things that did play into the reason that the survey work was done 1-4 is the normal hour range, I would agree.

I'm usually doing a full landscape plan for a new or heavily renovated house with walls, walks, patios, and often swimming pools (because of where I get my work from). The way that I write design contracts typically has a flat rate with a limited amount of revisions and then an hourly rate that kicks in when we stray from the contract (which I learned from others who I worked for). The result is that the clients get much more focused rather than chasing concepts in different directions. It really speeds up the process. Still, twenty to forty hours is the norm for a complete layout plan showing trees, shrubs, and hardscapes with spot elevations and contours when applicable. Annuals and perennials are generalized and construction details are extra.

The flat rate contract with the hourly rate when the scope creeps is really a great way to go. Hourly rates can scare clients into not hiring you and flat rates can have you dancing all over the place for a client for a shrinking return and open ended time frame. This way the client knows what it will cost and will go the extra mile to see that they get what they need out of you without having those hourly rates kick it. Again, this I learned from others along the way. I found it the most comfortable way to work and the most efficient way to get to a complete plan in terms of time, and cost. The biggest thing is that the client is more focused and forthcoming at the outset and much more easily turns the reines over to the designer once you get going.

I hope there are some non designers reading this thread.

I do charge by the hour, but I send the client an explanation of the steps involved, the scope of work and a breakdown range of hours for each step. This creates a similar situation as Laag describes above. I get clients involved before I even walk on to the property by sending them a checklist for their project that they must complete before our initial meeting. This allows them to clarify their ideas and think about the nasty bits like budget. I also ask for a site plan (often what they got when they closed on their house or one that was made when they applied for construction permits) that I can get from the surveyor via CAD or can scan and scale myself. This saves the client money by saving my time. I try to communicate with the client each step of the way so that when we get to the final presentation there are no suprises.

Everything is a balance. You balance your need to have an income and not have open ended commitments with a clients trust and confidence that the design fees won't get out of hand and they will get a design that satisfies them. The more you cover your end of it, the less the client feels his end is covered (end is such an appropriate word). The more his end is covered the more vulnerable you are. Contracts can only do so much because that client needs to feel like YOU will be able to get the design that they want within that contract. That is where experience, knowledge, understanding, and communication have to match your design skills.

You can be a great designer, but you have to have a lot of other skills to be succesful in the design business. Many people are completely unaware of that going into it. Lots of people appear to me to do everything to avoid having to develop those other skills.

You can have degrees, certificates, licenses, and memberships from every related source and you may still lose the job to a self taught person with those combinations of skills, experience, and communication which make clients more confident that the other person is a better fit. However, the experience you gain through getting the education, certificates, etc, ... factor into your skill set which will often put you ahead of a lot of the field. But, second place has no pay day. You need to be the Best fit for your potential client. If you are consistantly not the best for your potential clients (you are not getting the jobs), you can look toward a different type of client in which you will be the best for them just as you can improve your skill sets to be more competitive. The former is quicker, but it is much harder to climb up if you should so happen to want too. My belief is that economics will force you to move up, but that is only my opinion.

What really gives an edge, I believe, is a fast design system, so you can design, and not hand count and clipboard farm for data. I couldn't really find anything except LANDCADD, and some other stuff, which was 5% what I needed, and 200% what I did not, so I built my own systems and software, and before you know it, I was designing user interfaces instead of gardens, but either way, I share my tools, as concepts and products for other designers. This is an example, www.landscapeparkitect.com, www.gardendesignfx.com. Once I could design 5 times faster, I could double the free-lance, or private work, and had time to design other things also, as you may see on these sites. Sometimes it's a bit painful, but there are many tools now available, that were non-existant in 2004. These range in application and target, like irrigation and planting, or concept design etc, but it's growing monthly, I believe. Good luck