It's been months since my last entry. But an interesting situation arrived in my email box the other day and wanted to pass it on.
Scenerio: Client signs a contract for a basic project. My staff start breaking in the creative eb & tide of the job and what they are to do. Several weeks later the project is ready for its next review.
The client is notified, then the email I mentioned earlier is upon me. Seems as though the client wants more work done but is not willing to pay more because it just is not what they are loking for. BUT they knew that the initial stage was set when they agreed upon an idea... why are they changing their mind now?
We learned about an effective interpretation known as "scope creep". It's an effective clause in progressive work that prevents clients from "skimming" the required amount of work time. In otherwords charging for what you initially agree with means that there is a set limit on work to be performed. However if te client wants more, then they need to pay for that luxury. Introduce them to the scope creep claus, have them sign it and you won't get stuck in an uncomfortable situation.
As one very good web site stated "Scope creep is the pejorative name we give to the natural process by which clients discover what they really want."
Comments? I know some hate this claus, but should'nt we just talk about it?