Balancing Act
When commissioned to undertake projects, what really is the best way to balance the need of … putting one’s effort in producing something that one can be proud to share and use as future project references, versus doing exactly what the client paid in terms of proportion of work hours and budget?
In all sense of financial pragmatism, this should only be approached with creative prudence.
If that were the case, nearly every single project would be bland and lacking in depth to say the least. And having most projects this way, there wouldn’t b much to show for as a collective portfolio. And without a strong collective portfolio, future projects would all be based the same in terms of value and execution. Also having projects executed in a similar way as other competing practitioners, puts one in a level playing field. A level playing field would then mean that clients would decide on which vendor to engage, based on what they can do in giving them the maximum value for the least expense… generally speaking. It does sound like prostitution to a certain extent. There would be projects no doubt, more than ad-hoc, but of lower value in terms of budget and very run of the mill.
But on the flip side, over-indulgence (with the ability and skill sets to do so)… would produce projects that look better, both for the projects themselves and as project references for the self/company. With time and practice, skill sets also improve and the collective project references would improve exponentially. That enables for pitching at a higher level and commanding more than the level playing field. Such opportunities are much less as projects and clients that are more discerning, are more scattered and few.
So what’s the real solution?
Walk away, never look back if you can feed yourself by other means!
But if that’s not a possibility, then the challenge would always be keeping that balance while engaged in facilitating each project’s requirements and fulfilling one’s creative narcissism.
