AronMcD said:
How about "not to exceed" quotes? The internet warns against them...
As do I. I learned this same thing, far too late, by way of those PSMJ project management seminars. And, now that I'm on my own, I that thank the powers that be for the revelation almost weekly. Some of what I'll say here will ruffle feathers so just imagine there being a perfunctory "in my humble opinion" in front of every damn thing.
1) Hourly not to exceed sucks because you've basically given away all upside and assumed plenty of downside. Kick some ass in terms of hours? Too bad, you just get your "fair" rate which is only fair if you don't ever loose money on any of your other jobs which, of course, is false probably 1/3 of the time. Get slaughtered in terms of hours? Tough, you'll eat them anyhow. It's not as though just failing to complete a project is ever a viable option and most clients will perceive "not to exceed" as "I'm getting it done for that much unless somebody gets hit by a comet". No doubt this is what you read online.
2) There's only one
real pricing algorithm in effect and it is this: WHAT. THE MARKET. WILL BEAR. The end. Everything else is just an indirect exercise to arrive at this. As mentioned above, when you calculate your effort x rate, what you're
really doing is estimating your competition's likely fee. Like everything else in the world of economics, your fees are really a reflection of supply and demand. If you were the only SE in town, you'd be tripling your rates to get to doctor/lawyer numbers in a heart beat and you know it. As would I. So, often, I don't screw around with trying to carefully estimate effort on small projects. I ball park it and multiply it by 1.50 or 2.00 and go for the jugular. This has the advantage of not having to spend a lot of time sweating over your fees.
3) Engineers, by their very nature somehow, are hopelessly optimistic with their hours pretty much without fail. And this only get worse with time rate jobs in my experience. When I do lump sum on little jobs with scary, ill-defined scopes, I find that this happens:
a) It forces me to not undervalue my services because I want CYA for contigencies. I routinely come up with numbers so large that I'm embarrassed to present them.
b) 95% of the time, nobody bats an eye at the numbers that I'm embarrassed to present.
c) 2/3 of my little jobs work out great financially and, frankly, outperform my larger jobs by a huge margin.
d) 1/3 of my little jobs still go south but that's okay because I still garnered the upside from the 2/3 that didn't.
e) I have fairly happy clients because, often, clients value cost certainty as much as cost itself. They'd
rather pay me more and not have to worry about me making a play for extras later. And this, conveniently, is s service that I
can provide. Ultimately, all business is about trading risk for profit. And this is that. If you're just trading effort for hourly, that's called having a job, not being in business.