Per Word or Per Hour — Which Earns Writers the Most?
There’s a lot of discussion online about writers’ rates. What’s the best way to bid a project — by the word? By the hour? By the project?
They all have their uses, especially since some publications and businesses are kind of in the habit of using one or the other of these methods for deciding what they’ll pay.
But which is the best way to price jobs? To my mind, it’s by the hour.
Time is your most precious resource. You only have so many work hours in the year, so you need to make as much per hour as you can. Which leads me to my one important rule of pricing jobs:
No matter how you price the job, track your hours and figure out your hourly rate. Because if you don’t know your hourly rate, how can you work on raising it? How can you compare clients and know which to keep and which to drop?
Now, if you’re working for an ongoing copywriting client, I personally believe bidding by the project is best. Your client is happy because they know exactly what they’re going to pay, and you can budget for the amount you will earn.
The trick is creating a flat fee for that project that will give you the hourly rate you want.
You can only do that by getting some experience with how long it takes you to do things. Obviously, this setup rewards efficiency. If you’re unusually fast, you can bid on a par with other writers, but end up with a better hourly rate, and earn more over the course of the year.
Before the downturn, I thought high per-article fees were the answer to maximizing earnings. But I’ve learned that’s not always true. When I was scrambling around for a few new clients in late ’08/early ’09, I got an offer from an old editor friend to write some quick articles for $100 apiece, just based on my knowledge of business topics, supplemented with a little online research. (Hey, it’s above my $50 an assignment limit, people!)
At first I was appalled. Prior to this time period, about the very lowest article rate I took was $300. Then I thought what the heck, and gave them a try.
I found I could write them in an hour to 90 minutes. A little quick math and hmmm…that’s $70-$100 an hour. Not too shabby. I’ve kept this work as good occasional filler projects — a quick scan of my bills for this year shows I picked up $1,700 this way so far in ’10, in maybe 20-22 hours. So the lesson is: Any work that earns a high hourly rate is good writing work.
Of course, getting a client where they’ll let you simply bill for however many hours you’re spending on their projects each month is the ideal. Then you know you’re getting paid for every hour you work. I had a client like that at $95 an hour for more than a year, sending me work every month. I think right now, those gigs are harder to come by.
But billing hourly protects you against the evil that is scope creep — the situation where you bid a flat project fee, but then the parameters of the project keep growing, as does your time spent. Been lots of discussion of how to handle this sticky problem on LinkedIn recently.
Most publications tend to assign a price per word or give a flat article price. In which case, you may need to work on your efficiency to make sure your rate stays as good as possible.
But you can always ask for more money — I’ve gotten companies to add $50-$200 to an article assignment or more if they ended up wanting sidebars, or a longer length, or I knew they were a slow payer. More about screwing up your courage to ask for more pay over at my latest post on WM Freelance Writers Community.
What do you prefer — billing by the project, the hour or the word? Leave a comment and let me know. Also, have you asked for more pay lately? If so share your strategy!
Photo via Flickr user zoutedrop
Twitter
LinkedIn
First off, Carol, I totally respect your business savvy, since you’ve been freelancing for longer than I have. However, my issue with hourly rates is that it penalizes efficiency. I’m very efficient at writing press releases, so if I set an hourly rate, I’d only be able to bill for, say, two hours when I could have made a lot more from a flat rate.
Sure, when I accept a flat rate for an article, I’ll factor in how long I think it will take (so, a $100 article that takes two hours is better than a $300 article that takes 10 hours). But when you’re smart about setting flat rates you can sometimes make well over $100 an hour with clients who would balk at paying more than $50 or $60 an hour. They’re none the wiser that you’ve only spend a few hours on the project, and everyone is happy. Here’s a blog post I wrote last year on this very blog: The Great Debate: Flat Rates vs. Hourly Rates.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by . said: [...]
Hi Susan!
Of course, you are absolutely right. Bidding a project can open the door to an hourly rate no client would ever approve on an hourly bill — $200 or more! I usually find as I work accounts, I get more efficient and though project rates stay the same, my hourly rate rises over time. Personally, I usually bid press releases by the word or flat fee, not hourly.
I think many writers on hourly contracts pad their hours to earn more, a strategy I’ve really resisted. It’s such a widespread practice, I’ve had clients about have heart attacks when they got my first bill, because it was 30-50% less than they were used to paying!
I personally prefer project bids because tracking hours precisely is annoying, and I think the clients always wonder how many hours you’re REALLY spending. Where with a project rate, they know what they’re paying, period, the end…and you know how many hours you should get the job done in to earn your desired rate.
Thanks, Carol, for the important points. I started my business in April and am thankful for any work that comes my way. Yet I can’t stop wondering whether being paid by word, hour, or project is the way to go. You’re post helped.
Carol, I always bid by the project. I’m very fast and efficient at what I do in my writing specialty. I think if my editors knew how much I’m actually making per hour they’d be a bit cranky.
RIGHT ON, John!
Title…
Work from Home…