Is overcharging rife among contractors?

Old age pensioners should always beware door-to-door tradesmen offering to fix the guttering or re-tarmac the drive, and must never ring the first plumber in the book without a recommendation from a friend. There is a name for the assorted collection of traders, rag-tag chancers and conmen that ply their wares and dubious services along the highways and Yellow Pages of England's green and pleasant land: The Rogue Trader.



Very often, what these cads have in common, is payment by the hour. Their businesses are dependent upon stretching work out as long as possible in order to maximise the time on the job. It is why consumers are advised to get a written, fixed price quotation so that only material changes to the specification can result in additional payment. The contractor takes a risk and must perform well to meet the delivery schedule and be paid.



So why is the fixed price contract not more prevalent in IT? It would protect the client, instil a sense of urgency in the contractor and assign IR35 to the dustbin.



The answer probably has something to do with teamwork. You could not expect a builder to charge a fixed amount if he was to be part of a team with other builders. He would have no basis on which to cost his part of the job and could not measure the risk he was taking on.



So it is with IT. A software development job, for example, can take years, be subject to myriad staff changes and alterations to requirements, and is still likely to be canned before it sees a roll-out to users. What self-respecting contractor with the interests of his shareholders (himself and the wife) could quote fixed price for such a position?



Of course not all contract jobs are for large teams, and fixed price work is common for website design; there is a sense that there is a finite workload and risks are limited.



But the vast majority of contractors continue to be paid by the hour, and so the temptation to stretch the work to increase the length of an assignment is always there. Is it ever done?



Robert Wallace doesn't think so. With over 15 clients and 18 years as a contract developer/designer he's never seen a colleague deliberately stretch a job or heard of such a thing. But when paid by the hour, he does see decisions being taken that might not be made if it was a fixed-price contract.



"There's a temptation to be gung-ho with new technology. I'm not taking the risk, the client is, so it's fine to muck about with the latest Java tool to see how it might work. Then it can go down on my CV as well. I'm getting paid to learn."



Wallace has also seen project-critical decisions taken because the architect was as interested in directing his future job prospects as he was in meeting the timescales of the project.



"I think it's common for decisions to be made on the coolness of the technology," he says, "even if there is a better, less sexy, solution."



While money is not the motivation, if a decision risks lengthening the project by introducing a CV enhancing technology, does it fall under the category of rogue trading?



Ben Straw, contract software architect, thinks it probably does. Straw believes that a professional contractor should always seek to minimise the project time, fixed price or not, and then the chances of a renewal and favourable reference are that much greater.



"I do not spin out work. I always take the view that if I delivery as quickly and correctly as possible, appropriate to the requirements, the client will provide more similar work. I genuinely don't think arch practices pay off."



Straw tries to make sure his efforts are recognised for the ultimate, long-term benefit of his limited company.



"My duty to my company is to continue to provide the best service so that I continue to get a revenue stream from the client. If I had more staff available, I could optionally offer them for work as well."



And yet one anonymous contributor is certain there is a common, hush-hush conspiracy abroad: not the making-up of work to increase contract length, but rather the creative completion of timesheets.



"It is very tempting to always round up to the nearest fifteen minutes." Over the course of an 18-month contract, he admits this could amount to a few weeks' pay. "I think everybody does it. It's just never talked about," he says.





William Knight