Re: Client from Hell redux

["Sharon Burton-Hardin" <sharonburton -at- earthlink -dot- net>]

We are in a similar position. The client did not read the outlines - but did
approve them! - and so we delivered manuals they did NOT like - but were
written to the outline! They would not give us detailed reviews about what
they did not like and were very vague about what was wrong. After the second
failed shot at it, we have agreed to let them draft the manuals and then let
us take it from there. They also ignored the review time periods in the
proposal and then express unhappiness about the fact that we are running
late with the manuals they don't like.

I am due to talk to them today. I will politely stress the contract and the
specifications. And that a large part of how we got here was because they
ignored part of the process. And we got the result that we defined, which
was not what they wanted. Ignoring the process ensures a result we don't
like. That is why we have the process.

You have to do the damage control, explaining that they are deviating from
the contract and emphasize that the contract is very important to ensure the
result we are all after. I have found even in a house with no process, the
contract provides you a way to make a process happen.

sharon

Sharon Burton-Hardin
Anthrobytes Consulting
909-369-8590
www.anthrobytes.com
Vice-president, Programs of the Inland Empire chapter of the STC
www.iestc.org



| Hello whirlers! I've agreed to perform a contract for a client who has
begun
| ignoring contract agreements almost from the git-go. This isn't due to
| unscrupulousness, but to poor (nonexistent) processes in place in their
| business, and a fragmented decision-making structure. The upshot of this
is
| that their failure to provide me things like software for research and an
| approved outline jeopardizes the success of the project. In addition,
| decisions made on one day are ignored or countermanded a day or two later,
| forcing me to lose time in changing direction.
|