As Sajid explained, the success of this project would be based on ensuring there was full agreement from all parties on the scope, responsibilities and a realistic plan. So, he required the client to conduct a stand-alone, multi-week engagement to detail out every aspect of the project. For Qlik time & materials projects, this wouldn’t have been necessary, but for fixed price, it is an absolute necessity to protect both the client and Qlik.
Once the plan and scope was agreed upon, the project began and – as expected – challenges did come up. Most were caused by data not being of sufficient quality, the responsibility of the client, which they chose to engage Qlik Consulting to address with separate engagements. But, when all was said and done, the project was a success and the client was extremely happy with the result.
Did the client benefit from requiring a fixed price approach? Did it cost them more money? Yes, due to the multi-week scoping engagement and the contingency. Did it enforce all parties to stay to the initially agreed scope? YES! So, in the end, it may have saved the customer money.
The one disadvantage a time & materials project can create is the ability for the client to add or change scope. Especially with Qlik, clients can get caught in a cycle of constantly doing “one more thing”. However, this can be easily remedied by taking a little bit of time up front to define and agree on scope, and then manage the project with the same degree of discipline as IF it were a fixed price project. But some clients feel like this may inhibit their flexibility.
So, in the end, it’s a question of the client’s tolerance for risk and their ability to apply the same rigors of scope management that decides what is the right project approach.To learn more about how Qlik Consulting can help you manage your Qlik projects more effectively, visit us here