Larry Bradley said:

>Having a detailed specification of what the customer wants, signed off
>by both the customer and you is the best solution, but frequently not
>possible, 'cause he doesn't KNOW what he wants. In a lot of cases, the
>final application is the result of a lot of trial an error on both
>sides. My clients are happy to work with me that way, because that way
>they get what they really need, rather than what they thought they
>wanted at the start. I charge by the hour, I don't use a fixed-price
>arrangement, and on the surface, the cut-and-try process sounds more
>expensive to the client. But in my experience it isn't.
>
>Larry
>
That's a frequent real-world situation. Not that you shouldn't nail down
everything possible, but for real consulting (not out-sourcing deals),
clients are naive by definition.  If they had enough background to know
what questions to ask, if they were in a position to draft a detailed
specification, then they probably wouldn't need a consultant in the first
place.

Reg Neale