[cushpush]

>So it’s about being reassuringly expensive.

> It really is. You have to actually be good at what you’re doing too, of course, or the whole scheme falls apart. What the client’s money really buys, though, is that delightful feeling of making the thing somebody else’s problem. You know, we’ve turned it all over to a top-tier expert, and now we just don’t have to think about it anymore. The more that person charges, the more reassured the client feels.

Great advice.

[mr_toad]

> making the thing somebody else’s problem.

Do you keep a gardener on staff? Or hire one every couple of weeks? Or do you do it yourself? It all depends on the size and frequency of the job, your skill set, how much your time is worth, how old you are etc.

The same applies to nearly every economic transaction on the planet. It’s always more expensive to have someone else do it. IT contracting shouldn’t be any different. Sometimes there’s a job that it makes no sense to try and do yourself, or have permanent staff do.

[dgfitz]

I don’t know why, but I wish the author had done an sed s/scheme/concept

Edit: to be clear, it’s a fine word choice. It just jumped out at me.

[gausswho]

My understanding is this preference is a little known schism in Britishisms and American English.

In American English, a scheme is an unscrupulous, nefarious plan villains make. Often accompanied with riotous laughter.

In British English, it's more general. Like a plan, but with superficial consensus and often spreadsheets. Trees die, but people don't. You see this neutral usage in government discussion regularly.

It also reminds me: Europeans speaking English often use 'simple' before they start demonstrating things. Often painfully non-obvious things. Really boxes my ears. If it was simple I wouldn't be asking for an explanation and now you're insulting me.

[alphabetter]

Exactly this. As a British English speaker that works a lot with the US it was an early learning.

In British English a "scheme" has no negative connotations. It's commonly used in all kinds of legitimate places - for example the company you work at will have a "pension scheme".

In U.S. English it has a connotation that it is nefarious in some way.

[sentientslug]

Yeah, this always throws me off. In American English I’d always use the word “program” instead.

[codersfocus]

Neither concept nor plan are appropriate alternatives for scheme. Let's not argue with the inventors of the language on word choice.

[dgfitz]

I have no desire to argue. I like understanding things and I was hopeful to understand why I felt the way I did when I read that sentence.

I learned a lot! I’m really grateful that people-who-weren’t-you read my question impartially and contributed their experiences.

[mstade]

I agree. Scheme sounds like its some kind of evil plot, but truly it’s just a matter of mutual respect between the consultant and client, and – crucially – the consultant’s self respect.

Poor word choice aside, the advice really is solid. I’ve been a consultant for nearly 20 years, the last 10 as an independent, and it took many years of screwing this up before coming to mostly the same conclusions.

[dceddia]

I felt the same. I took that as a bit of the author’s impostor syndrome showing through (perhaps feeling, even after all this time, that charging what he’s worth feels dishonest somehow).

[hn_version_0023]

Schemes are inherently dishonest IMO. That’s the entire reason.

[mrob]

The references to Land Rover and Doctor Who make me think the author is British. In British English, "scheme" does not usually have negative connotations.

[hn_version_0023]

Looks like I’ve outed myself as a provincial rube! Fair point; thanks

[hiatus]

At least in the UK people use it to describe things like pension plans. I don't think it's inherently unsavory.