Hi there,
I prepare material for training workshops I'm looking for guidelines for how much should I charge/get if I prepare the content and someone else gives the material as a trainer repeated times.
For example, if we agreed that I take 50%, I'm looking for guidelines for how much I should take the second time he/she gives the material even if I did nothing the second time.
I need neutral ways to decide job offers (especially free-lance work) such as "last offer arbitration".
So here's my question: Can you recommend individuals/ institutions who can work as third party mediators/arbitrators to settle how much each side should take (especially when the service is repeated)? In agreements in general and/or the specific case of preparing training content for trainers.
I could do that type of work. Please check out www.arbitrator.com.
Yes, I can do that type of work. Just to answer your question. Hypothetically, you have agreed to 50% as the fee for your intellectual property, for a win-win situation for all the parties, all subsequent use of the material will require a percentage discount from the 50%. What is the appropriate amount of discouragement?
Subsequent trainings involves costs for network, for business development and for other sundry expences. You are no longer to take such responsibilities.
My proposal is that all subsequent use of the content developed by you attracts a payment of 40-45% of the value as negotiated. Better to support this position with a signed Memorandum of Understanding.
If you require any further clarification, do not hesitate to reach me.
Thanks
Anthony Odiadi
I do have all materials you need, however it is in Portuguese language. Success.
Perhaps you seek proposals for value apportionment guidelines in relation to a particular type of cooperative venture; or perhaps you are running an informal experiment to assess how much value arbitrators are willing to provide for free.
I accept commercial arbitration mandates.
Considering that you seek a "neutral" process, final offer arbitration (FOA) apparently is not appropriate for your purposes. FOA is not neutral. It works by introducing uncertainty, thereby encouraging the parties to settle in order to avoid the risk FOA creates.
The situation you describe may more appropriately be approached as copyright license valuation task. If the parties in a particular case were to agree upon this modality, I would commence the process with a conference to understand the history and nature of the copyright material. At the conference you (as the copyright holder) would be required to present financial data, if any, associated with the copyright material. Each party would be required to state the envisaged number of instances of use of the copyright material and the time period over which such use may occur. Negotiation may be required to achieve agreement on this point - but to limit arbitration costs, the parties would be advised to agree in advance. I would prepare a conference protocol and require each party to sign it. Then I would proceed to craft an award informed by market-based information on sales, licensing transactions, royalty rates, and other data for comparable copyrights. Based on the circumstances of the particular case, I would project cash flows attributable to, and avoided due to, the copyright. I would then convert the projected cash flows to a net present value using a discount rate reflecting the relative uncertainty of the cash flows. The award could be, but need not be, in the form of a specified price per use of the copyrighted material. The parties may prefer to manage risk by agreeing to abide by an award in the form of a license agreement of specified duration at a fixed license fee.
To inquire further regarding my services, please message me.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Organizational Psychology
- Training