How to Address Unusual Client Requests Without An Automatic “No”

LIKE

4

LEAVE COMMENT 0

8 min read

All clients have personal requests; some are entirely reasonable while others fly in the face of your firm’s existing protocol. But not all unusual requests are unreasonable. How do you tell the difference? Say, a client wants to purchase furniture directly for the credit card points. Another wants to use a brother-in-law as the contractor. A third wants to source vintage pieces through 1stDibs. Someone else asks whether presentations can be skipped entirely in favor of text-message approvals. Then there’s the client who wants all communication routed through an assistant.

At first glance, some of these requests seem reasonable while others seem quite bizarre. Purchasing furniture for airline miles doesn’t sound particularly controversial; neither does communicating through an assistant. Even using a family member as a contractor could work under the right circumstances.

The primary issue here is that unusual requests often create consequences that aren’t initially obvious. There’s an unintended snowball effect. A client who purchases furniture directly might also inherit responsibility for receiving, damages, returns, and storage. A client who makes some selections by text and others by email might create confusion about what they actually approved. A client who wants to split a project into unconventional phases might unintentionally complicate scheduling, procurement, or installation.

Business coach Sean Low addressed a more limited version of this question in a Business of Home advice column when a designer asked whether clients should be allowed to purchase furnishings directly for the credit card points. Rather than rejecting the idea outright, Low argued that designers should “never say no, and instead always find a way to say yes, but on your terms.” But what exactly does “on your terms” mean?

Sometimes an unusual request actually reveals a better way to structure a project. Other times, agreeing to an exception changes responsibilities, liability, communication, profitability, or scheduling in ways neither the client nor the designer fully anticipated. Before deciding whether a request is reasonable, you need to look down the road a bit at what might change as a result. 

Start by Understanding What the Client Wants to Accomplish

Before deciding whether a request is reasonable, you need to figure out why the client is making it in the first place. Two clients might make the exact same request for completely different reasons. One might be trying to reduce costs. Another might be looking for more control. A third might simply be looking for the fastest path through the project.

Are They Looking for More Control?

Some unusual requests stem from a desire for greater involvement in the project. A client who wants to purchase furniture directly might want visibility into every transaction. A client who insists on using their own contractor might trust a relationship they’ve built over many years. Someone sourcing furniture independently through 1stDibs or local antiques dealers might simply enjoy hunting for certain pieces themselves.

However, increased client involvement can feel particularly challenging because it impacts part of the process the designer normally manages. The client’s objective might have very little to do with challenging the designer’s expertise. They might want additional flexibility, more transparency, or greater participation in certain decisions. Understanding that distinction is key. A designer who immediately focuses on whether a request violates firm policy might miss the concern that prompted the request in the first place.

That said, it’s important to consider your working method and how that working method supports team structure, project flow, and more. Protecting your protocol and how you like to work might be worth more to you than keeping this client. 

Are They Looking for Convenience?

A client who wants to approve selections by text message isn’t necessarily trying to change your process. They might be traveling constantly. Another might route communication through an assistant because they manage multiple businesses or properties. Someone else might ask to skip formal presentations altogether and review everything on their own schedule.

The difficulty is that many of the systems designers rely on were created to prevent confusion later. Presentations provide context around selections, budgets, timelines, and priorities. Texts are great for quick questions, but they aren’t always the best communication method for major decisions. That same issue can arise when communication flows through a client’s assistant. Even an excellent assistant usually isn’t making the final decisions, and information can change slightly each time it’s passed from one person to another.

At the same time, a client who asks for these accommodations might not be objecting to your process at all. They might simply be trying to fit a large project into an already packed schedule. Understanding that distinction should help you determine whether you can flex to accommodate this client, or whether maintaining your existing workflow is the better option.

Are They Looking for Cost Savings?

This is the big one. A client might ask to purchase materials during a sale before selections have been finalized. Another might propose self-procurement because they want to avoid markup. Some clients suggest reduced design fees in exchange for publicity, referrals, or future exposure.

Maybe you consider it. After all, a sale creates urgency. A trade discount creates an opportunity to save money. Publicity sounds valuable. The big complicating factor here is that the financial benefit isn’t always limited to the line item the client is focused on. Purchasing materials before the design has been finalized might limit future selections. Self-procurement might create additional coordination work for the design team. Publicity might generate business, or it might amount to very little.

If expense is the real concern, your conversation with the client needs to focus on the overall budget itself rather than the specific solution they’ve proposed.

Take a Close Look at What Will Change If You Agree to Accommodate the Request

Once you’ve identified what the client is trying to accomplish, the next step is determining what actually changes if you agree. The request itself might be perfectly reasonable, but the implications attached to it might not be.

Who Handles Procurement?

A client who wants to purchase furnishings directly for the credit card points isn’t necessarily creating a problem. Sean Low addressed this exact scenario in a Business of Home advice column. Instead of rejecting the idea outright, he suggested the arrangement might work perfectly well if the designer adjusted compensation elsewhere.

A client can absolutely place the order and collect the points. Someone still needs to track shipments, coordinate receiving, inspect merchandise, manage damages, arrange storage, and oversee installation. 

The same issue appears elsewhere. A client might source vintage lighting through 1stDibs, purchase furniture independently because they found a better price, or buy a piece they discovered while traveling. None of those decisions eliminate the coordination work surrounding the purchase, so if those responsibilities aren’t discussed beforehand, each person might be completely confused.

Fuel your creative fire & be a part of a supportive community that values how you love to live.

subscribe to our newsletter

_{*please check your Spam folder for the latest DesignDash Magazine issue immediately after subscription}

Subscribe

Who Assumes Liability?

A client who wants to use a brother-in-law as the contractor might have very good reasons for doing so. They might trust the relationship, appreciate the quality of the contractor’s work, or simply want to keep the project within an existing network of people they’ve worked with before.

The conversation changes once something goes wrong. Perhaps a contractor misses deadlines. Maybe a client-sourced fixture arrives damaged. Maybe a vendor you’ve never worked with delivers the wrong finish. At that point, responsibility can become surprisingly difficult to untangle. The designer might not have hired the contractor, purchased the fixture, or selected the vendor, but clients don’t always separate those distinctions as clearly once a project encounters problems.

That doesn’t mean family contractors, unfamiliar vendors, or client-sourced products should be avoided, but everyone benefits when responsibilities are discussed before you hit a stress point instead of after.

Who Handles Communication?

A client who wants to communicate through an assistant might be trying to protect their already packed calendar. Another might prefer text messages because they’re easier to answer between meetings. A spouse might attend presentations and relay information afterward because coordinating schedules is way too difficult.

Those accommodations can work, but most communication systems weren’t established arbitrarily. Presentations allow designers to explain how selections relate to one another. Email creates a searchable record of approvals and revisions. Meeting notes create documentation that can be referenced months later if questions arise about scope, budget, or specifications.

Once decisions are dispersed through assistants, family members, text threads, emails, and meeting conversations simultaneously, keeping track of those decisions becomes impossible. So, before accommodating a communication request, you should consider whether the adjustment simplifies the project or complicates it.

What Happens to the Project Schedule?

A client who wants to purchase materials during a sale before selections have been finalized is usually thinking about price rather than scheduling. Another might ask to divide the project into phases that don’t align with your normal workflow because it feels more manageable. Someone else might purchase furniture independently before the design has been fully developed because they’re worried the item will sell out.

Each decision can influence a surprising number of decisions that follow. A fabric selected later might not work with the furniture purchased months earlier. Materials purchased during a promotion might limit finish selections that haven’t been developed yet. A project divided into unconventional phases can create procurement deadlines, installation sequences, and construction timelines that weren’t part of the original plan. As a firm owner, you know that’s how interior design projects work. Every decision is the catalyst for a cascade of other decisions. So, too, if there is an error or a delay.

But most clients aren’t looking several months ahead when they make these requests. They’re responding to an opportunity that’s directly in front of them. Part of the designer’s role is understanding how today’s decision affects the rest of the project, particularly when procurement, construction, and installation are closely connected.

If You Make an Exception, Define New Expectations

A client who purchases furnishings directly should understand which procurement responsibilities remain with the design team and which become their own. The same principle applies to communication, contractor relationships, and client-sourced products. Many problems that surface later in a project aren’t caused by the exception itself but by two people operating under different assumptions about who’s responsible for what.

Adjust the Scope of Work

An unusual request can change the amount of coordination needed. A client who wants to self-procure might still expect assistance with tracking deliveries and resolving damages. A client who communicates primarily through an assistant might require additional follow-up and documentation. If the project no longer resembles the original scope, the agreement should reflect that reality.

Confirm Financial Implications

Additional work deserves additional pay. A request might be perfectly reasonable and still create new responsibilities for the design team. If accommodating the request requires more project management, coordination, meetings, or documentation, those expectations should be addressed before anyone moves forward and a new budget should be created if necessary.

Put It in Writing

Many unusual requests start as casual conversations. A client asks a question during a meeting. Someone suggests an alternative approach over email. An exception is approved quickly because everyone seems to be on board.

The problem with this is that memories change over the course of a long project. If responsibilities, communication methods, procurement obligations, or scheduling expectations have changed, those changes should be documented. A written agreement gives everyone the same point of reference six months later.

Remember, Consistency Has Value

Sean Low’s response to the credit-card-points question shows us that unusual requests don’t always need an automatic “no”. Sometimes, a client identifies an opportunity the designer hadn’t considered. Sometimes, an exception improves the experience for everyone involved. At the same time, many firm procedures exist because previous projects exposed weaknesses, inefficiencies, or confusion. Before agreeing to an exception, ask yourself…

• What problem is the client trying to solve?
• What changes operationally if I agree?
• Who assumes any additional responsibility created by this request?
• Will this improve or complicate the project?

Those questions won’t produce the same answer every time, nor should they. You’re just trying to get to the bottom of exactly what you’re considering before you say yes (or no).

Written by the DesignDash Editorial Team
Our contributors include experienced designers, firm owners, design writers, and other industry professionals. If you’re interested in submitting your work or collaborating, please reach out to our Editor-in-Chief at editor@designdash.com.