With a software development project, decision-making may become overwhelming as several aspects and endless scenarios determine the project’s success. Businesses must consider the scope, timeline, milestones, architecture, methodology, legal requirements, etc. Now add the pricing model to the mix, an element worth keeping in mind as it can greatly govern the outcome of software. The pricing model is the approach utilized by businesses to set the cost of goods and services, influencing their value, generated revenue, and payment conditions with their customers. In this blog, we’ll go over two of the most popular alternatives for software development: Time and Material (T&M) and Fixed Price (FP) projects.
As we explored in our agile methodology blog, there is no one-size-fits-all tactic for software projects, this too applies to the selection of pricing models, as each of these two options entails its unique advantages and drawbacks.
When considering Time and Material (T&M) and Fixed Price (FP) projects, it’s important to remember each model presents a different way of managing costs, risks, and project scope, and choosing the right model can significantly alter your software’s journey.
II. Time and Material Projects. Balancing pros and cons.
Time and Material projects stand for their flexibility and adaptability. With this pricing model, the client pays for the actual time and resources invested in the project , leaving room for unforeseen modifications and catering to evolving needs. For clients that are struggling with their project’s scope or intend to provide feedback and make changes along the way, T&M may be the ideal path.
T&M projects foster collaboration and transparency between the client and the development team. The client has more visibility into the project's progress and, thus, the time and resources that are invested in it. He can also maintain constant communication with the team and provide timely feedback.
However, this same adaptability comes with potential disadvantages. Certain clients may not feel at ease with the vagueness of the final cost and open-ended billing. Such uncertainty may also lead to clients constantly evaluating the project and its expenses, generating distrust. A team without a predefined budget may struggle with budget allocation as well. Finally, one of the big drawbacks of T&M is that it can foster scope creep, as it enables an expansion of the project’s objectives with added features that are not adequately evaluated.
III. Pros and Cons of Fixed Price Projects. The exact opposite
The other side of the coin is precisely the contrary, Fixed Price projects are characterized by their predictability and defined budget. Clients who prefer to know costs and deliverables upfront, find themselves at ease with FP projects setting agreements at an early start that convey stability. This model is more suitable to manage expectations and allow for clear contracts and payment conditions.
FP fits projects that are well-defined, with no foreseeable major updates or core rethinking. A client who is confident of what the scope of the project is and has a defined agenda because of time and budget constraints might be inclined towards this pricing model. It’s also ideal for busy or unresponsive clients that struggle with keeping in touch with the dev team and would rather let them do the job and just meet for milestones or final outcomes.
Again, what works for some, won’t fit others. Creative projects or projects with less rigid scopes can find themselves damaged by a fixed budget, where unexpected work orders can strain relations with stakeholders and prevent the software from reaching its full potential. Furthermore, development companies may find themselves limiting available resources to stay within costs and ensure their margins are met as expenditures can’t be revisited. Consultancies achieved the highest margins with Time and Materials at 38.7%, surpassing the 36.9% margins attained through Fixed Price models.
IV. Consider budget, risk, scope, and customer service when choosing.
The best pricing model must be chosen after an analysis of many criteria. Both T&M and FP projects have unique risks and advantages, and understanding the project's particular requirements is crucial to make an informed choice.
Project Scope: Fixed Price models work best for projects having a distinct and well-defined scope. T&M projects, on the other hand, give additional flexibility if the project's scope is clearly expected to alter or if the needs could change.
Budget and risk: Fixed Price projects may appeal to clients who have a strict budget and a short timeline. To account for potential changes and creative opportunities, clients with greater resources and risk tolerance may choose T&M projects.
Customer Service: The intended amount of collaboration and communication with the development team may also have an impact on the selected price model. While FP projects could see fewer interactions between the customer and the development team, T&M projects encourage a deeper relationship and more open communication.
V. Some more insights: biases and hybrid models
Pricing models frequently have built-in biases that affect client perceptions in addition to the known benefits and drawbacks of T&M and FP initiatives. The choice of a pricing structure may affect how clients view the knowledge and skills of the development team. As an illustration, some clients could connect T&M projects with more seasoned developers, feeling they are more suited to manage complex issues and several moving pieces. FP projects, on the other hand, can be viewed as a simpler choice, attracting clients looking for manageable risks.
However, stakeholders that may be less tolerant of risks, but that do know how to prioritize and stay open to suggestions during the process, may find that scope creep is not a threat. The project might, in fact, be simplified by removing features that are not exigencies during development, leading to clients paying less than expected for the hours and resources invested if they were to pick T&M, even if their unwillingness to take risks would make them good candidates for FP. This serves as an example of how different variables and unfounded predispositions affect the potential of both alternatives.
Furthermore, there is an increasing interest in hybrid and unconventional pricing models. An approach for this combined method divides the project into different phases, each with a fixed cost. Adaptative and scalability are afforded by this model, as changes can be introduced after phase completion and the development team is able to offer businesses a clear cost for each stage of the project.
Hybrid pricing models give customers a balance between flexibility and predictability by embracing the best of both worlds.
Realistic expectations for project outcomes can be created by clients and development teams by addressing these biases and preventing any misunderstandings in time.
At Geonovation we’ll dive into each project's particularities and offer the best pricing model for your software development.