Full-Timers vs. Consultants? (part 1)
February 14th, 2009
Back in December, I posted “11 Things To Keep In Mind During This Crappy Economy.” Here’s number 10:
Remember that every hardship also brings opportunity. Those articles in number four above have a lot of good stuff in them, but here a more practical way of looking at things. Yes, the economy is sucking wind. Yes, a lot of companies are freezing their marketing department hiring or maybe even doing layoffs. But guess what? Tons of work still needs to get done. So if you’re an independent contractor or consultant, you’re in pretty good shape. If you’re an independent contractor or consultant who isn’t part of the 90 percent that’s crap, you’re in very good shape.
It makes sense to me. If I’m in need of significant ongoing copywriting, for example, I have a choice: Bring on a full-timer or work with someone on a retainer basis. If I bring on a full-timer, I have someone in the office, but I also have to pay the cost of providing benefits. If I work with someone on retainer, I have to give up some measure of control, but I save some money and I probably get someone with deeper experience and expertise.
For my $.02, if I’m hiring, I’d prefer to go the retainer route. In this economy, deeper expertise at lower cost seems like a winner. But I wonder: Am I leaning in that direction simply because that’s the nature of my own business? Is something that seems to make perfect sense to me complete anathema to the world beyond my own virtual office?
So I decided to find out. Using the excellent HARO service, I posted the following query:
As a hiring company, you’re faced with a choice between retaining an independent marketing/PR consultant (greater experience, higher work quality, less time in-office) or hiring a full-timer (less experience, higher costs due to benefits and office space). Question: Which is your preference? More importantly: Why?
The responses started popping into my inbox just minutes after the HARO mailing dropped.
“My preference is for [independent contractors] and has been since 2000 when the trend seemed clear,” said Kathleen Carroll of The Branding Clinic. “Big companies are going to increasingly identify and focus on their core competency and outsource all those other activities.
“From a company perspective: It is better to hire independent talent –- you get the best talent at the best price,” she continued. “If a firm has someone on the payroll, they are most likely to staff that person to the job even if that person is definitely not the right person/talent for the assignment.
“IC arrangements assure the cream rises to the top. It incentivizes the IC to keep skills current and relevant so that companies continue to hire them. Sorta capatilism at its best!”
Donille Massa, Director of Marketing for Niagara Conservation, wrote to say that “having managed both independent and full-time PR consultants, there is no doubt that you get more results from retaining an independent consultant. In every case, they have always been more experienced, more focused, more knowledgeable and have had more PR contacts than a full-timer.
“Their use of time has always been much more efficient,” Donille continued, “and the cost savings is significant to say the least. I have also found that independent consultants are much more professional and their writing skills have far exceeded those of a full-timer. It has also been my experience that PR consultants work much better independently, rather than having to punch a clock.”
Those are just two of the many responses I received to my query. Tomorrow (since this post is already longer than usual for even a long LOHAD post) I’ll present (as radio legend Paul Harvey says) — the rest of the story.