[conductr]

In my experience, this is all disclosed (partner/manager/associate). Pretty much any proposal I've seen from the top firms includes a cost estimate built by using hours x rate for each respective job title and often further broken down by stage of the project. Time and material bids are most common so you should be asking for this up-front, I actually view it as a bit of a red flag if they don't voluntarily disclose/bid it this way (eg. if I'm paying for time, I need to know how much time is being planned for and by which rate level).

[smokefoot]

The more expensive the services, the less likely you are to get a bid in this format.

[conductr]

Very true. I regularly get it on $500k-$2m projects, that's probably considered small. Of course it's caveated to hell with talk of "projection", "risk", etc. But that's part of my job is asking questions so I can anticipate whether they can execute on this or if it's perhaps some ambitious low bidding techniques.

FWIW, I also don't work in tech. Finance/accounting/management consultants are my world. I could definitely see how software/tech is more ambiguous by it's very nature.

[squirrel6]

This is very true. The more ambitious the scope is, the more difficult it is to provide a bid in that format. Also, expensive engagements are priced on perceived value anyway.

[squirrel6]

In reality, we would usually take the value-based fee (how much we think it’s worth) and then allocate it down to scope bullets, which are also usually very vague.