What infuriates the customer

    Due to all possible circumstances, I encountered it myself and listened to a lot of friends' stories about the unsatisfactory work of web studios. I’ll try to generalize - what infuriates the customer in interaction with the developer.

    1) Opacity of pricing

    Many studios neglect the need to attach a table with an explanation to the spread - where does the price come from.

    It is important to understand that the customer must understand how much each stage, each module costs, how much the developer's day costs. Only in this case, the studio’s statements “the functionality has grown / your requirements have changed, which has led to an increase in prices”, can they have the right to life. If the compilation says "your project will take XX months and will cost XXXXXXXXXXXX rubles", then the studio gives itself into slavery. which of course, it will be unpleasant for her to admit subsequently.

    2) Disgusting comprades

    Comprades are often written as if the author wanted to write an article in a journal. Instead of a clear description of the project - a lot of words about the greatness of the development company, assurances of customer focus (99% false), and many other unnecessary words. Moreover, the project itself is often not thought out.

    An ideal commercial offer contains:
    - the most detailed description of the future project
    - the timing and cost of development with an approximation of 5-10% (of course, only according to the functionality described in the compd). This item should be divided into stages of coordination and individual modules - for greater flexibility.
    - a brief (BRIEF !!!) description of the company with the application of a portfolio suitable for this particular case.

    Yes, the specificity is such that after writing a technical task, the volume of work very often changes. But the compilation should contain such a detailed description so that the client couldn’t tell you “why did you promise me the same thing half as much a month ago?” No one will delve into the fact that by “integration” you meant “absorption” of a simple Excel tablet, and not full integration with 1C. No one wants to know that by "illustration" was meant a small drawing, without coordinating the plot, and not a full flash drive. Any ambiguity that you want to interpret in your favor will be regarded as an attempt to deceive the client.

    3) Optional and inaccurate
    Optionality and carelessness often manifests itself already at the stage of preparation of the compread - when even exact dates for receiving the compread from the developer cannot be achieved - "we need time to write an individual compread just for you."

    in the future, this also does not come to "no." Leaving the details of the counterparty with whom the agreement was concluded, which served as our template, is almost the rule. The lack of uniform design in the terms of reference is almost the norm, because of which it is impossible to make (already) a normal table of contents.

    Texts written “in a fit of inspiration” cannot be read.

    4) Failure to meet deadlines.
    Failure to meet deadlines is a total disaster for our developers. And this is the key complaint of all customers. No developer without a lot of pressure will not write a schedule in the paper. In exactly the same way, the developer leaves the time for processing “incoming” customer comments undefined. Meanwhile, often the timing, and not the price, are key when choosing a contractor for a particular project.

    And all the same, even the notorious “working days” are not kept. It is impossible to achieve a clear implementation of the plan. Neither penalties nor the signing of annexes to additional agreements to annexes to the agreement will save.

    The reason for this, as far as I can tell, is the total disorganization of the workflow in the studios, firstly, and the absolute lack of understanding by managers of the importance of observing the work delivery schedule for the customer, and secondly.

    The classic idea is the triad “quality-cost-time”, in which you can select only 2 points. Any sane person understands this - cheap, fast and good does not happen. But even if you pay above the market, the deadlines will still be disrupted.

    It is the failure to meet the deadlines that causes the majority of conflicts between the customer and the contractor. This reason is exacerbated by the fact that the manager often perceives the client not as a project partner, but as an enemy.

    5) Lack of normal interaction between customer and client managers
    At a recent gathering, where the relationship between the customer and the contractor was discussed, studio representatives massively complained about the following problems:
    - customer incompetence
    - changing requirements during the project
    - “consumer terrorism”

    Thus, often both parties see the only problem of successful completion of the project in the counterparty. Yes, there are identified problems with customers. They spoil a lot of blood to projects, increase the cost of the project and lead to the birth of crooked freaks, instead of the planned beautiful artifacts.

    On the other hand, the main problems of project management by the contractor (as they are seen by the customer) are:

    * lack of timely communication between the companies the

    client finds out about the problems when he is already getting angry and calling the contractor. This is already quite annoying person.
    It is important for the client to “keep control” over the project, to understand what is being done, where his money is going, and when he can wait for the result.
    Lack of understanding of the importance of this (albeit purely psychological) control on the part of studio projects turns almost guaranteed to turn any minor problem (and they are, of course, inevitable) into an occasion for an exchange of claims.

    Special mention deserves the excuses of studio managers. The illness of a key member of the team can meet the understanding and sympathy of the customer once, well, two, with a long project. But when the designer is sick for 3 days every week - the project loses the trust of the client, and forces him to tighten the requirements for control over the project. Which, in turn, causes dissatisfaction with the project, a drop in the quality of project management, and leads to spiraling conflict growth.

    Often you hear: “we discussed something about the project, we have changed our minds and we need time for rework” or as an option “we worked on your project for a long time, but the result does not meet our strict internal quality criteria, so we will do our best new, wait for a brighter future. ” This position, indeed, would be worthy of respect, if supported by facts. When concluding a contract, any client hears that the deadline is the risk of processing and rework according to his comments. At the same time, when it comes down to it, the deadlines break loose, as I wrote above. And the deadlines are broken, and the client does not see any result of the work, and listens to tales of “high standards”. In such cases, one always wants to answer: "a small lie gives rise to a great deal of mistrust."

    There is another version of the previous statement: “THIS turned out to be more complicated than we thought at the stage of compreading and writing TK, but we will do everything for free, just wait.” These kinds of things work well at the programming stage, but you have to hear them, unfortunately, more often during design.

    Finally, as a curiosity - the most absurd excuse for the delay in work: “well, the designer is a creative person, we can not drive him into the frame of the schedule.”

    Colleagues, timely informing the customer about the difficulties - you only contribute to building relationships.

    * Inaccessibility of the manager

    Genetically related to the previous problem. A person working for a client should be available during working hours - if not by ICQ, then by phone, or in extreme cases - by soap. And he should respond to emails and messages as soon as possible. well, at least to inform, they say, "received, I’ll answer your question then." It's a shame when you are ignored, they do not attach importance to you. you can relate to this with humor, you can not pay attention, but "the sediment remains." The studio manager should ALWAYS be available.

    * Blurred responsibility

    This is me in the case when the “main by design” or “main by programming” appear in the project. The project must be responsible to the client for everything. When you are forced to communicate with several people on your project, they say different things and there is no one to make claims, because they nod at each other - inhumanly drops the studio in the eyes of the customer.

    * Change of responsible persons leads to a revision of obligations.

    Such a situation, as a rule, arises due to undocumented agreements. “Your old manager promised” is a terrible phrase for anyone who accepted someone else's project. The situation is no less tragic for the customer: if verbal agreements were not passed on when the project was changed, the project can be considered practically inconsistent.

    Thus, my main thesis is: colleagues, let's talk with each other, but carefully record all our friendly conversations, and then adhere to our obligations :)))

    Clarifications, objections, additions and other comments are welcome!

    Also popular now: