• Home
  • Topics
  • Articles in Domain
  • Authors
  • Articles by T. O Donnell
  • Feed 
  • Sitemap



  • Partners:

    Articles on PDA
    Submit your software
    TNX.net: Sell links on every page of your site to thousands of advertisers!
    Sape.ru: Sell links on your website
    LinkFeed.ru: buy and sell links on your website




    Translations:

    How Not To Get Web Design Work

    by T. O Donnell

    I get the occasional from my . I wanted to find a I could these onto. So I an ad on a . It specified the qualifications needed, stated that the successful should have good , and was for companies only.

    The replies I got were enlightening. So much so, I made a of things applicants did wrong. Here it is.

    I should out I was initially prepared to give a fair go. After the first twenty-odd emails, my attitude changed. I was looking for reasons to delete applicants. I only needed one successful one; with 100 replies it was getting to be a headache, so I decided a brutal was needed.

    1. Failed to the spec.

    Many applicants couldn't properly in the . Many were individuals only. : instant deletion.

    2. Failed to the spec's criteria.

    Applicants bragged about how great they were. Many -and-pasted standard guff about 'solutions' and 'partnerships' into their emails.

    To engage anyone's about a you need to less about yourself and more about the to *them* of using you. One of the first things I about applying for is you need to how you meet the criteria in the ; see if you can find the 's wavelength.

    3. Lots of .

    You quickly tune this out. Anyone dealing with companies probably gets a of this. Applicants should to the about *the 's* and *their* needs, and avoid techno-babble.

    an . it for a while, then edit it. Brutally. Short punchy , no guff. Talking convincingly about how you can make the would be an -getter.

    4a. 'Coming soon' - pages.

    You say you've done for lots of clients, then up a 'coming soon' on the where your is supposed to be. Hmmmm.

    4b. 'Under ' pages on your .

    This looks bad; something you'd see on an amateur's . Another to bin your .

    4c. Only up pictures of sites you've done, rather than links to the actual sites.

    I'd have liked to see some sites. Pictures can be faked, and they don't .

    4e. No mention of your main URL.

    Let guess where your own is (if you have one). It's more ! I tried guessing from the . After a while I didn't bother.

    4f. No hyperlinks at all.

    Just a short spiel saying "I am great , me". Next!

    5. Using .com or .com for your .

    A pro shouldn't a freebie . Basic hosting costs $5 a month these days.

    I can conceive that a might a freebie for some special purpose, but your own is a basic advert that goes out in each you send.

    6. Bad and .

    Western civilisation is doomed, if using SMS becomes the standard to to . It 't impress old frts lik me, fr strtrs :( Especially if you're looking for where good and are important.

    7. -loading designs.

    I admit it, I don't like . I especially don't like it when it loads slowly on my . I suppose it might impress an ignorant , who 't know the economic consequences of having a -heavy .

    8. Don't the up.

    Unless they say 'canvassing will disqualify', 'phoning the is a good . Why? Because geeks are famously introverted and -tied, supposedly. So if a can communicate clearly over the telephone, that, coupled with a good , puts you streets of the -only applicant.

    No need to jabber. A polite enquiry to establish will do. "Just checking you've got my CV", that sort of .

    9. Keep yourself mysterious.

    Emails are impersonal. that can establish you as a human , a , a potential ally and , is good. It'll make you more memorable. No need to jump out of a giant , 'though!

    However, you have to fulfil all the other criteria as well. However great a you are, if you're a Unix and they want , forget it.

    10. Leaving unclear messages.

    One chap left a message, in which he mentioned his , twice, but not his ' . His pronunciation was bad, so I guess I'll never know how good he was.

    11. Too far away.

    Most replies were from , , etc. Anyone who was closer to (the ) stood out. I mention it simply as a winnowing criterion.

    Also, I needed who could contracts from residents; good , written and oral, was important.

    12. Give your rates per hour.

    Forget that. You're not a . can be clearly defined, in terms of time, and required. A definite can be agreed on in . It's called a contract. Otherwise, you the to escalating bills, and yourself to mission-creep.

    13. applying.

    The first few applications were more scrutinised. After that, set in. After one hundred, only an applicant who seems a real would be given more than five seconds' scrutiny.

    About the :
    T. O' Donnell ( http://www.tigertom.com) is an and curmudgeon living in , . His latest is an on conservatories, available at http://www.ttconservatories.co.uk.T. O' Donnell may be downloaded at http://www.ttfreeware.co.uk.

    Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


    Comments

    There are no comments so far.