| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision | |
| how_to_select_a_software_development_partner:what_to_verify_before [2026/09/25 22:05] – created juliannegaertner | how_to_select_a_software_development_partner:what_to_verify_before [2026/09/26 01:27] (current) – created juliannegaertner |
|---|
| |
| |
| Look first at domain experience, not the size of the portfolio. Request a couple of projects that match your technology stack, and then ask specifically which engineers actually built it. A serious vendor is happy to connect you with the engineers. Evasive answers at this stage generally mean the demo work came from somewhere else. | Look first at relevant experience, not the length of the client list. Ask to see three or four case studies that match your domain and your stack, and then ask specifically who actually wrote that code. A solid partner is happy to connect you with the engineers. Evasive answers at this stage generally mean the demo work came from somewhere else. |
| |
| |
| |
| The paperwork warrants more scrutiny than the proposal. Three clauses do most of the work: assignment of intellectual property, confidentiality, and termination and handover. Everything produced has to transfer to you as it is paid for, including documentation, pipelines and deployment scripts. Watch for wording that keeps framework code outside the transfer, because it is usually the part you cannot replace later. | The contract warrants more attention than the sales deck. Three clauses do most of the work: intellectual property assignment, the NDA, [[https://webparadox.com/hire/flutter-developers/|hire flutter developer]] and notice periods and handover. All the work product has to transfer to you on payment, together with source code, designs and infrastructure as code. Watch for any clause that leaves framework code outside the transfer, because it is usually the dependency that makes switching painful. |
| |
| |
| |
| Ask how they estimate. A credible estimate comes with the assumptions behind it, [[https://webparadox.com/compare/dedicated-team-vs-freelancers/|why hire a dedicated team instead of freelancers]] breakdown by feature or module and a best case and a worst case. A fixed-bid deal only makes sense when the scope is genuinely frozen; when the scope is still moving the vendor prices the risk in and [[https://webparadox.com/blog/ai-in-custom-development/|ai in custom software development]] you pay for it anyway. Hourly billing puts the risk on your side, [[https://webparadox.com/compare/livewire-vs-vuejs/|vue vs livewire]] so it needs visible weekly reporting and a spending cap. | Ask how they estimate. A credible estimate comes with the assumptions behind it, a task-level breakdown and a best case and a worst case. A fixed price works only when the scope is genuinely frozen; in any other case the provider pads the number and you fund the buffer regardless. Time and materials moves the risk back to the client, so it requires visible weekly reporting and a spending cap. |
| |
| |
| |
| Process matters more than headcount. Find out how change requests are handled, who writes the acceptance criteria and what the QA setup looks like. A well-run team can demonstrate a live build at the end of each sprint. Acceptance criteria in writing remain the only reliable protection against the it-was-never-in-scope conversation. | The delivery process matters more than team size. Find out how a new requirement enters the plan, who writes the acceptance criteria and what the QA setup looks like. A team should be able to demonstrate running [[https://webparadox.com/services/crm-erp/|erp software development services]] rather than status reports. Acceptance criteria in writing stay your only real protection against an argument at delivery time. |
| |
| |
| |
| Finally, plan for the day you no longer need this vendor at the start rather than at the end. Require that the code repository sits under your account from the beginning, and that the documentation is refreshed in every sprint. A vendor with nothing to hide accepts it without argument; a long negotiation over it says most of what you need to know. | Finally, plan for the handover while the relationship is still good. Require that the source repository stays on infrastructure you own from the beginning, and that a readme [[https://webparadox.com/compare/monolith-vs-microservices/|difference between monolith and microservices]] architecture notes are kept current as the code changes. A partner who is comfortable with this says yes immediately; resistance at this point says most of what you need to know. |
| |
| |
