Services | Contracts
We partner to share risks and the rewards of a productive effort.
We structure our agreements differently. We don't sign fixed requirement agreements. They create incentives for the other party to be short changed. When troubles arise, rather than focus on quality delivery, consultants have contractual incentive to under deliver; producing legally-correct but flawed product for the sake of protecting their liabilities.
Fixed fee and fixed time agreements are fine if they provide for real-time adjustment of requirements. Fixing all three misalign the two party's incentives to build quality systems.
Contract warning signs:
- Milestones or check-ins with principals rather than continual involvement
- Changes require modification of contract, specification, or "change orders"
- Consultants agree to set time, requirements, and cost
- Fees are based on prior customer experience, but the contract lacks specifics about your principal contributors (dates of meetings, expected output, etc.)
- A fee or time loophole if 'customer' is late with deliverables
- Lacks the names of consultants who are working on the effort and their role
- ...If it sounds to good to be true, it probably is
At Admios there can be goals and estimates, budget limits, time frames, and special conditions in any agreement we sign. However, any customer who wants solid software will likely share in the management of those risks, roll up their sleeves, and help make it happen. Using a contract as a shield when things go wrong may protect a job when things inevitably fail, but statistically, it doesn't make good software. Most of all we work together, to deliver the best systems possible.