Having a bit of a conflict with a client at the tail end of a long, long project today… Part of the issue is that this client is upset about how much review and copyediting he’s had to do.

I’ve found that the majority of clients, probably 2/3 or more, don’t realize that they’re going to be required to provide written content to me in the course of their web design project. I’m not sure where this mistaken belief comes from, because most web sites I’ve seen have some amount of content (<sarcasm>) but as a rule the more complex or obscure their business, the less I’m going to be able to write on their behalf. I’m willing to take a stab at any topic, but I’m not a _______ (insert your favorite technical specialty here) and won’t pretend to be.

It’s important to me that content be accurate and credible (it’s important to Google too, btw). When my client is an expert in his/her field, they will write for me, whether that’s a talent of theirs or not. I can clean up bad writing, but I’m not going to pretend that I’m an authority in a complicated field with which I have little or no familiarity. It’s just not an efficient use of my time or the client’s money.

I found a great post this morning entitled “50 Things Your Customers Wish You Knew” on remarkablecommunication.com’s blog. I need to take some time and read this very carefully and I’ll probably print a copy and hang it up next to my client contact calendar too.

In the past few weeks I’ve gotten two new clients simply by being first.

These clients either had had problems with their current web designer or had been trying to create site themselves and finally determined that that wasn’t a good use of their time as business owners. So they called me…

Both told me that I was the designer they picked in part because I got back to them immediately. I was first and that made it seem like I was the most interested. And they are good clients, one site is already up and running and paid for.

I don’t always jump when the phone rings, but I try to get backto them as quickly as possible. I don’t have a crackberry (yet) but I’m using Google Grand Central, which routes calls to the number on my website right to email and my cell, so I can stay on top of callers. I’ve found that just responding quickly, a simple thing, can make a big difference in the way clients deal with you (and refer you too).

I got a very interesting post on one of my mailing lists this morning; because it’s a private list I’ll paraphrase.

The thread began about SEO predictions for 2008 ala Bruce Clay a few days ago and another member added some thoughts that I appreciate, particularly since my clients are mostly microbusinesses with not a lot to spend on what I think is an essential component for their business.

Paraphrasing: “The current economic atmosphere will drive smaller businesses to seek out less expensive, more basic SEO services from those with a reputation for honesty and good results.”

Good for me! I offer the basics. I’m a web designer/developer but I’m also very experienced in SEO. I include basic SEO services with every site I build (included in my pricing), because it’s simply part of the total business website package. SEO is a necessity and not a frill anymore, even for microbusinesses.

I don’t run $100,000 campaigns, I just work hard to get my small clients noticed and I get generally get very good results. I’m open with my process and I involve my clients as much as they want to be involved, with the eventual goal of turning over the SEO work to an in-house person - if they want it that way.

It’s part of my ‘educate the client’ theory of partnering, where in my view a client that understands even the basics of how to leverage their website as a business tool is going to do better, feel more in control, and be far happier with the whole package than those who don’t invest the time to learn.

I’m thinking about adding website checkups as a freebie for existing clients, either on an annual or biannual basis. They would include a speed test, valid code/CSS check, accessibility check and general observations about the site.

I think it might be good because it would put my business name in front of them again, but the problem I foresee is if I check a site I did two years ago and find that it’s not valid or lacks some accessibility features or has some element that now looks dated, will the client think I should fix those things for free since I’m responsible for them?

I definitely don’t want to do that; my primary goal with this would be getting back on their radar (and possibly getting more business from them as a result, but that’s secondary).

I’ll have to give this one more thought. Is anyone else offering this type of thing for existing clients (not prospective ones)?

I read a good post this morning in Robert Middleton’s More Clients blog about avoiding bad clients and the huge amounts of time and energy they consume as you try to pursue their business. This has become more of an issue lately - after I relaunched my website, I see I’m getting more quote requests and consultation requests but most of those people turn out to be tirekickers.

How am I dealing with them? For one thing, I’m not doing any more placeholder pages. I did this for a few people and none of them have ever expressed anything but disappointment in their ‘websites’ and don’t understand why they’re not showing up on the first page of the search engine results. This has been a waste of time and money for me, so no more of those.

My minimum project is now a solid, basic 6-page site. That’s enough to get a small business started at least, and most prospective clients feel pretty comfortable with being challenged to produce that small amount of content in the beginning.

I’ve also made a change to my quote form. Under ‘Budget’ I had a ‘less than $500′ category but that’s now gone. The minimum amount is now $750, and hopefully this will dissuade the tirekickers who are looking for a $200 website.

This blog post ends on a positive note with which I agree - my favorite kinds of clients are ones mentioned, the troubled ones who are looking for reasonable alternatives and a company that can help them solve a problem, people that have been frustrated with their experiences with other web professionals, and my favorite of all, the strongly growth-focused client who has an eye on the future and will wield their website for all its marketing value. They’re willing to look at the big picture and tend to make good, long-term decisions. These are long-term clients and that’s the best kind of client to have.

One of the things that I find disappointing about what I do is that the care I take in creating clean, valid sites pretty much flies right out the window once the site is launched and in the hands of the client.

It’s not their fault, usually. Even when I build a site in a CMS and take a lot of time setting up the WYSIWYG editor to guide and specify the types of content they can add, it still gets screwed up and it just gets worse over time.

I’m a regular reader of 456 Berea Street and last night I found this excellent post about helping clients keep their markup clean. This is a really great idea, and I plan to implement it on the next site I build.

Basically what it does is insert some styles into the CSS that make any deprecated elements (like font tags or centers) show up as big and red so that the client can see them (and actually know they’ve done something that has a negative impact on the qualit of the code).  This visual is critical because no matter how many times I tell someone, even a very savvy client, not to use that but to use this instead, sooner or later they’ll do just that. But being able to see it, that’s big. And helpful.

My client Rob Palmer, an exceptional wildlife photographer who specializes in birds of prey, is taking an extended trip across Europe and the Middle East over the next three months. He’s just started posting photos in his blog - check it out and keep checking back, there should be new photos every day or two.