The forces against an agile contract
The power of Inertia
People don’t change easily. The fact that our industry has been using a “Fixed …” contract for several decades now goes against trying anything else. Especially if that something else is substantially different. An agile Contract is exactly that. Different.
An agile contract puts the risk on the paying side (the customer), he is going to pay for the work done, even if that work is of lesser value. Naturally if its value is low enough he can bail out. But still the risk is on him. While a “Fixed …” puts the risk on the development team. they need to fulfill their part before they get paid.
Trustour industry has not been that great at delivering working software. (to say the least). Most software projects either fails completely or significantly does not meets expectation (either they miss the timeline, exceeds the budget or reduce scope)Potential Profit. An agile contract actually says exactly that. By going for a flexible scope (or time) we actually say we don’t know exactly what will happen, we don’t know what we can deliver (or when). That’s a hard message to tell the one who is paying.
Potential ProfitThis one is a little elusive. One of thing we do as a development team when we go for a “fixed …” is add buffers to mitigate our risks. At one place I used to work I saw a two days chunk of actual work being priced as 11 weeks for the client. And he was willing to pay (there is a cost for putting the risk on the developers). For us as a development team this represent a significant potential profit. If we could just estimate accurately and actually finish the work in the time we say we can. The buffers just become easy money. No matter how many times we under estimate work, every time when we do a new estimate we are always sure that this time it will be different. This time we have considered everything. After all we are smart people.
As you can see there are strong forces affecting both side to resist going for an agile contract. Can you think of more?