An Agency for Web Freelancers?
November 4th, 2010Ok, maybe ‘agency’ isn’t the best word but bear with me. I see a lot of job openings, whether for freelancers or full-time position, and at the same time I know a lot of freelancers, who by the nature of their profession are (almost) always looking for work. I love helping my friends and have helped out several friends, on both sides of the equation, in the last few weeks. However, I’m wondering whether I could step this up and be more useful to everyone by setting up something a little bit more formal. I’m particularly interested in focusing on freelance tech positions like PHP programming or iPhone app design.
At the same time, I’ve had friends work in ‘ICT’ recruiting (I use that hated word because that’s what those companies use) and it is completely scummy and unethical. How traditional recruiters or agencies work is by taking a cut off the position’s rate. So, let’s say a company is willing to hire a Ruby on Rails programmer for a project and is willing to pay €100 an hour. The recruiter will make their money from the difference between this ceiling and what a RoR programmer (that the company accepts!) is willing to be paid. So, the recruiters lie. Yes, straight up lie, and to the best people! “Oh, I’m sorry, it’s a great company but it’s a new startup and they really don’t have much of a budget. Could you lower your regular rate from €80 to €50? You’ll really enjoy it!” Et voila, the recruiter has more than doubled what they’ll make thanks to lying.
That’s horrible and I’d never want to go there. At the same time, I’d like to have a database of a 100+ freelancers and regularly match them to cool programming gigs. To do this well takes some time, particularly because I really believe that you need to know both sides well (most recruiters don’t, they’re just humanities graduates straight out of university) and to make good introductions. This would be just a thing on the side of my regularly web and mobile programming work, so I’m thinking more like being paid a few hundred per position per good sized project.
I don’t know the fields well, but I like the idea of how I think agents operate, working for the talent, not the money. The incentives are such that It is in their benefit to get their clients the most money possible, not low-ball them. It seems to work for actors and writers and I even know some designers in similar situations, so why not programmers?
So, what do you think? Let me know in the comments if you’re interested, on either side of the equation. And I’d be very happy for you to say it’s horrible idea, so don’t hold back.
November 4th, 2010 at 10:04 pm
I’m in. However I’m more a designer. This is what I did so far http://justusbruns.com/index.php/overview/category/web
I think it’s a good idea and we could help each other a lot: one name with a group of cool web-geeks working under that name. Together we make the web a better place. Yes let’s give it a spin!
November 5th, 2010 at 7:57 am
Are you sure there’s a need though… I like your proposed style of financing your talent agency, that would be a big step up from the current recruitment agency model. And for fixed positions if you could actually deliver those people business will be knocking down your door in no time. For freelancers I think the story is different though. If your a programming talent you will almost never be looking for work, you’ll have work lined up for the next few months in most cases. Plus there is already a model in place where no money exchanges hands at all namely freelancers referring each other for jobs they get offered where they don’t have the time or the right skill set to take it up themselves. I ref er somebody maybe every week and most freelancers I talk to, including you, do the same.
So could it work? Yes. But you’d have to probably find a more specific niche:
– placing good people at fixed positions for your friendlier fee
– somehow finding the (new) programming talent that does not have work lined up yet
– focusing on a market that is a bit harder; i.e. design instead of programming
– finding talent not just a gig but the awesomest gig ever
That said; I’d love to hear the first programmer say “talk to my agent” to a potential client :)
November 5th, 2010 at 9:39 am
I’ve done something a little like this for a while with Termie’s Talent Agency ( http://term.ie/blog/termie-talent/ ), however of late it has been much more company heavy with many more people looking to hire than people looking for work.
I still think it is a great idea, but it can be a little difficult to get the ball rolling as far as people caring enough to mail you information. It seems to work better if you are already high profile enough that your initial call for proposals gets some traction.
That said, I have been thinking about putting a month or so into my project and developing it into something a bit more full fledged and I wouldn’t be against joining forces with somebody in Europe :) Ping me by email if you are interested, I can describe my business plan and maybe I’ll be motivated enough to put stuff together.
November 5th, 2010 at 9:54 am
Thijs, agreed. Nothing better than letting your agent negotiate for you if they truly operate in your best interest. And yes, I sign up for the most awesomest gig ever! I am a designer and been prototyping interfaces for product design and greatly enjoy conceptual work on product ecosystems as well. My professional interests range further than the web or mobile app design and there seems to be no agent for that. I know a view professional design recruiters like IDIS but they are more looking to find people for permanent employment lately. A web freelance agent is not particularly interesting for me but I truly believe in collaborating with other people that complement my skills..
November 5th, 2010 at 4:24 pm
I’ve had a similar idea to this several years ago when I got frustrated with the recruitment agency model and was getting much better referrals through my network.
I think the idea of an organized network of freelancers who can collaborate to run/staff projects would be good and yes it does take somebody to do the organize them, the agent(s).
ITC recruitment is broken. The agencies skim too much money from the rates and do not provide much value beyond a CV matching database for client requirements. Most of them don’t even care if the candidate is a good match, they just want their commission and leads for the next placement. For at least the past decade they have owned the relationships with the companies and made it difficult for freelancers to find work directly unless they had a direct connection via their network.
What we need is a Federation of Freelancers with a team of agents working for the group, a win win situation for all.
November 6th, 2010 at 2:10 am
Hi all, thanks for your comments.
As I see this it would just be a way for freelancers to know that someone else is thinking of them and working their (bigger) network in their favor. There wouldn’t be any sort of exclusivity where all deals would have to go through the agent or use their branding or anything. On the other side companies could be confident knowing that they will get someone great helping them out without a long search or the BS that a ‘digital agency’ often includes.
Generally it would be a 1-to-1 thing, client + talent, though throwing together whole times for larger projects would naturally also be possible. However, I’m generally wary about trying to develop any sort of common ‘brand’ that would take projects from start to finish, as I’ve tried that and it’s A LOT of work and requires a much more pro-active project sales approach. Doing such a thing was just discussed at CocoaHeads on Wednesday and I’m not convinced it can work, partially because you’ll probably never have the scale that the big companies want in order to feel comfortable. And philosophically I think there’s a lot to be said for embracing the whole freelancing approach, rather than just mimicking the ‘digital agency’ system.
I think there’s a critical mass of both freelancers and companies required for it to work and then once it’s reached it can work really well. Because projects are so diverse and all sorts of skills are needed, I definitely believe there to be just as much place for a graphic designer like Justus or an interface designer like Alexander as for programmers like Feargal. I think the only criteria for a person to be added to the list should be:
1. They’re awesome and do great work.
2. They’re a freelancer.
3. Their skills are somehow related to technology. Heck, even a patent lawyer or a writer covering technology companies could be a nice fit if they’re got the right mindset.
November 6th, 2010 at 11:41 am
Hi Peter,
It’s a worthy idea and i mirror tijs’ analysis regarding that many programmers are just overloaded with gigs, therefore not on the lookout for new work. I would nevertheless, love to share a document with a list of talented friends and people a step away from me, recommended by people i know (yeah sounds like Linkedin, but simpler). From my perspective, i get interesting assignments offered reasonably regularly, so would be interested to broadcast these opportunities to a small group of talent.
James
November 6th, 2010 at 2:50 pm
I agree that the good freelancers are overloaded with work. However, ideally the arrangement I’ve been outlining can help in several ways: First, the freelancer refers all job ‘pings’ to their agent and let’s them deal with the sometimes tedious dance of figuring out the company’s real needs, timeframe, and budget. Second, the agent gets the freelancer better gigs (in timeframe, compensation, and interest), so the freelancer can be pickier and be confident about holding out for only the best projects. Because of that they don’t need to say yes to everything. Likewise they know that if an old client they like comes to them with a project but they’re pretty busy that there’s another good freelancer in the network that can pick it up.
November 7th, 2010 at 9:32 am
I think it could make a great new model for recruitment, essentially formalizing what’s been happening through peer referrals for some time now. Companies go to recruiters to help them get the right candidate from the sea of CVs out there. If you build a network of vetted & capable freelancers it can become a powerful force.
I’ve worked on both sides of the IT recruitment fence. Initially I went through recruiters when I was looking for perm and freelance work. Then later in team lead positions I was trying to get the right people for the team and had to deal many IT recruiters.
I found that it was strange that we could get better candidates through our personal contacts. but if you look at the economic incentives in the recruitment industry they are not in directly rewarded by providing the best candidate. They make their money by providing the candidate that they can make the best margin on, i.e. one willing to work for the least money while they pocket the rest (as you already pointed out Peter). What I started to suspect was happening was that the good candidates who knew their value in the market places were not getting past the filter of the recruiter as they did not like the lower margins. So in basic terms of economics the incentives are wrong. The recruiter is working for neither the candidates nor the employer. Fix this and you will really have something.
November 9th, 2010 at 6:09 pm
I am for. I do not think it is a horrible idea to do something like this, when it is done right.
As usual I have a lot of stuff in my mind. So brace yourself.
I think it could work as a “virtual agency” where everyone can plug anyone else. I also think that it should help facilitate people to achieve personal goals in their work (as the added value). As a freelancer it can be easy to get stuck in a specific corner of your profession and get stuck in your personal growth. If you have others to help get out there, that is a big bonus.
As all, it usually hangs on:
1: A handful of key people with the right social skills, mindset/focus and connections to keep it going
2: A group of people / friends who can do the job and are willing to participate, to feed the needs from the market
3: The added value of the thing itself (how does it help you to do stuff better?)
This is not the first proposal I see to cut the middle man out of the loop. Including sites like “Freelancer.nl” which soon grew to: “who is willing to under-bid and do stuff for me as cheap as possible?” and Barcq which unfortunately never saw the light due to a wrong partnership.
There are also some ZZP and payroll organizations acting not quite as an agency, but close enough.
And yes, in many cases they ask more than the 16% to 25% that is considered to be “normal” and tell you a story about the client and budgets that is a blatant lie. Working for direct clients and via agents I have seen different shades of color. Also alternatives in the sense of Professional Networks operating as a company and working together but where everyone is a Freelancer.
I like some of the concepts I heard about in the past years where:
1: I can be your “agent” and you can be mine, where you pay me a “finders fee” and vice versa
2: I recommend you for gigs to others and vice versa
3: Where the network as a whole is both the agent and the person doing the job
== Five main items
I think that for any freelancer there are five main items that define their work:
1: Recommendation – Who in the network knows you personally and can give me recommendations about you?
2: Skills – what are you capable of? What can and can you not do?
3: Availability – when does your gig end? Can I plug you to this new thing?
4: Legal protection – Are the conditions you work for clients covering you from legal and financial harm (law suits and non-paying customers)?
5: Income – Will clients pay?
== The business model
What is the revenue model?
Who will be the agent?
What if you get to work somewhere due to my recommendation?
It is hard to say. If you ask money for the service, I have to trust you that it will go to the right places. If you do it on a percentage / no cure, no pay base – only asking like “5%” on any of my bills sent for a gig gotten via the network – to keep the service going, what more will you add to what is there?
If we reward each other on the same basis (a percentage of the revenue from me to thank you for plugging me on a gig) how do we make sure this principle is kept alive?
And what will you or your network do to make my dreams as an independent professional come true?
== The network
How do you connect people?
What do you offer?
I think LinkedIn and Facebook are in many ways OK as a tool: they allow you to connect, build recommendations and extend your network.
What is missing is this:
1: No Filtering on skillsets
2: No info on availability
Additional this would be nice:
3: Recommended bookkeepers / accountants
4: Recommended lawyers and law firms
So if I have something for someone at some client, how can I find you?
If I am good at what I do, but still searching for my voice, how will that network support me? If I suck at what I do and still sell myself as a “professional” on that topic, then what?
== Facebook and LinkedIn
What I do not like about Facebook and LinkedIn is the “commercial” approach where “having a lot of connections” seems to be more relevant than who you connect to. I do not see the value of connecting to total strangers just for the sake of it.
For me a one to one relationship is more important.
== Trying to keep it simple
Some of these solutions offer also extra services like bookkeeping systems and time sheet systems. I think that should not be part of in-house development.
== The backup plan
What also counts here is the “backup plan”. I have been in situations where I had to do work for one client, while also working for another client. To have one or two people in my network able to back me up makes the service to my client better as well.
== The Agency
Let’s review the role of the Agency:
1: Has a network – via active acquisition
2: Does Client Relationship management and Client Acquisition
3: Covers the contracts between you and the end client
3.a: Protects you via that contract from any liability
4: Does the billing to the End Client / assures your income
5: Takes care of basic legal issues and disputes (as long as you did your work as a “good freelancer”)
6: In some cases pays you before the End Client pays them
= The Freelancer
1: Has a network – via old clients, friends and colleagues
2: Is doing most acquisition between gigs
3: Should have a “General conditions” and a documented flow including agreements and worked hours
3.a. Should have a lawyer and a bailiff in his list of contacts to check contracts and deal with legal disputes
4: Does the billing
5: Has to deal with non-paying customers him/herself / via a bailiff
6: Gets payed when the End Client pays
== The Agent
Supports the Freelancer on items 1 to 6.
== Needs?
As long as you as a freelancer have enough gigs and your clients pay, there is no need for anything. If you have more requests than you can chew you can always say no and pass the request to others in your network.
From that perspective I understand Tijs’ remarks. I am too in the lucky position to be fully booked, as my services are on demand in the current market.
There are also people in my network who are not that lucky.
My monthly revenue is currently between 12.000 and 18.000 euro, depending on the hours (160 to 240) worked per month. But that is not what makes me happy.
The assignments I do for these clients are commercial and in most cases set up by people who might better have done something else than designing these solutions. So on a personal development level I am very likely wasting my time.
Due to my personality I am not the networking “am at every party and know everyone” type of person. This means that I do not know a lot of people I SHOULD know.
I also feel that my lack of a bigger network is keeping me from the kind of assignments and Clients that make my heart beat faster and make me jump up and shout “YEAH!” when I invented some new solution for a problem never addressed before.
I want to be able to choose, to select the type of clients and gigs I want to work for, based on coolness and match with my personal interests. With deadlines and budgets which are reasonable and not insane or insulting.
I want to work with clients who understand that work done for them costs money and good people ask more per hour, but also deliver better results in shorter amount of time.
I want to work for clients who say “yes” when you need more time and more budget to finish it properly according to new insights.
I want to remain a free person, working independently and on my own terms.
I want to be able to bypass Agencies, work via reference, make sure the legal and financial parts are covered (contracts and incasso) and make incredibly cool stuff with two or more people in the team I know or which are recommended and which I can trust to do the right thing (instead of something stupid).
These fellow freelancers are out there.
These clients are out there. They have needs for professionals like us, who can do stuff on high levels in the time that is needed. They have budgets. They want to work with people who _get_ it. So if we can make that happen, I am for it.
November 11th, 2010 at 12:55 pm
Wow, Peter. First thoughts: you had a LOT to say and you’re doing very well for yourself. ;-)
But seriously, I agree with most of your points. However, I think the whole agency/network part is both a lot of work and something that’s really hard to make work. I’ve been part of some semi-official networks and they never really got off the ground because everyone was too busy and didn’t have the incentive to make it work. That being said, when an agency can handle contracts and billing, that’s a huge help for freelancers.
Because of these reservations, I am much more interested in restricting myself to the simple agent role, for the reasons I’m not wild about agencies/networks. That being said, recommendations should be encouraged and rewarded. It makes sense that if I ask that I be rewarded for getting someone a gig then I should in turn reward the person that told me about it in the first place. Perhaps the simplest way, and one that would hopefully keep the cycle of job recommendations going round, is a sort of ‘recommendation credit’. If you recommend a job to me that I in turn get for someone else in the network you get a credit. When you get a job that I introduced you for can chose to apply your credit to waive my fee. That’s it, nice and simple. And yes, this means that someone could recommend lots of little jobs and in turn use the credits to waive the fees on big ones. Hey, why not, I’m willing to eat the difference.
What does everyone think?
November 16th, 2010 at 4:26 pm
Hey Peter,
Here are my quick two cents.
First off, I think it’s a great idea and I agree that ICT recruitment is in a totally retarded state right now. I’ve had recruiters promise me its the creme-de-la-creme of tech in IT land only to find out that they were a “static HTML site factory”.
In a broader context, I think middle-man industries like recruiting are ready to be disrupted. But that’s a story for another time.
As a developer and entrepreneur who occasionally does freelancing, the following comes to mind:
- There are so many crappy projects out there (from both a business and tech perspective), I wouldn’t want to work on those unless “they” are looking to spend some serious money on getting stuff done. I will turn on my “hired gun mode” and get it done.
- On the other hand, there are also cool projects out there (haven’t seen many in NL yet tho) that I would be willing to work for in lower rates in combination with sweat equity. In such a case, the big tag cloud of such a project has to very accurately match my big tag cloud of interests (NodeJS, NoSQL, semantic web, API integration, dev platform, scaling, prototyping, MVP, etc.) or specialties I would want to acquire: marketing, bizzdev, bartending, etc.
- The odds of working on a project for only sweat-equity are very low, because very capable developers (like me, ahum) have a ton of their own business ideas that they want to build out and they CAN as long as they can survive and put in the time.
I can imagine that a lot of other folk that you would want to target might think the same way.
I’m not sure how that applies to setting up you’re agency, but my guess is that your main focus should be “saying no”. Saying no to both developers and clients, unless they’re respectively very good and willing to pay for the price for the top. A real high-end play. (In my experience, some developers (often multi-talented) can out-”produce” other developers with frighting differences in ROI.)
That said, I would be happy to be associated with such a group of kick-ass developers!
Cheers,
Dominiek
December 13th, 2010 at 12:53 am
There is general agreement among those at the receiving end of this system that recruiters are (on average) clueless and often rude parasites but their success in undeniable and certainly not accidental. Much of the scorn directed at them should be directed at their clients instead, i.e., the corporations that retain their services. They are obviously fine with the broken recruiting model. You’d think it is not in their interest to start on the wrong foot with a (potentially) long-term collaborator by screwing him, least of all for the benefit of a third party (on the face of it that seems insane), yet they do it all the time so why would they change?
December 13th, 2010 at 8:48 am
You’re right, Olivier. I think that many companies discount the importance of the hiring process and are generally content to abdicate the responsibility to recruiting companies. It’s funny but unfortunately you can also go too far the other way: the Google hiring process is just generally ridiculous, with tons of interviews over months.
January 18th, 2011 at 10:01 pm
I agree with the post, and consider me interested. :) I think the proposed approach is definitely feasible and has several competitive advantages over the described alternative, including, perhaps most importantly, improved trust.