We talk to dozens of companies in Colombia and the pattern repeats: they came to a software agency with a clear budget, a defined project and reasonable expectations. Months later, the project was unfinished, the budget was gone, and the delivered system had to be rebuilt.
It doesn't happen because companies are naive or because every agency is bad. It happens because of three specific, avoidable mistakes that repeat with alarming frequency.
Mistake 1: Hiring on price, not technical judgment
The costliest mistake in the medium term. A company receives three proposals for its system: USD 8,000, USD 25,000 and USD 45,000. The superficial logic says "pick the middle one" or "the cheapest one if the scope looks the same".
The problem is that budgets aren't comparable if the team behind them is different.
An agency quoting USD 8,000 for an inventory management system with integrations has to cut corners somewhere: it uses junior developers, takes shortcuts in the architecture, writes no tests, doesn't document. The system works in the delivery demo, but at 6 months it has frequent bugs, can't be maintained without the same vendor, and any change has a disproportionate cost.
How to avoid it: Ask for a code sample from a previous project. Ask for references from clients who have been using the system in production for more than a year. Ask which framework they use and why (and if the answer is evasive, that's a signal). The low price doesn't exist: you either pay it in the contract or you pay it in maintenance.
Alternetica
Are you evaluating development proposals?
We help you technically compare the proposals you're receiving. No cost, no obligation to hire us.
Request a technical review →Mistake 2: Defining the scope without a discovery process
"I need a system to manage my customers, my orders and my invoicing. How much does it cost?"
The right answer from a serious agency is: "we need to understand your operation better before giving you a number". The answer from an agency that wants to win the project fast is: "we'll do that for you for $X".
The second kind of answer sounds better in the moment. The problem shows up in week 8 when the client says "but I assumed the system also handled dispatching" and the agency says "that wasn't in the scope". Extras begin, the budget balloons, and it ends in conflict.
A scope document written in a hurry, without a requirements-gathering process, protects neither party.
How to avoid it: Insist on a paid discovery phase (usually USD 3,000-8,000) before development. At the end of that phase you should have: a detailed requirements document, wireframes or prototypes of the main screens, a proposed architecture, and a firm price for development. If the agency doesn't want to do this because it "takes up their time", that's a signal.
Mistake 3: Not having access to the code during development
Some agencies hand over the system at the end of the project, and only then does the client see the code. This creates total dependency: if something goes wrong, only they can fix it. If you want to switch vendors, you don't have the code.
The right approach is for the repository to be in a GitHub or GitLab account owned by the client from day one. Not the agency's. The client's. That way, at any moment, the client can see what has been built, hire an independent technical audit, or simply know that the work is moving forward.
How to avoid it: As a non-negotiable contract clause: the repository belongs to the client from the start of the project, and the client has permanent read access during development. If the agency pushes back on this, it's an important red flag.
The underlying question
These three mistakes have something in common: all of them can be prevented in the vendor evaluation phase, before signing anything.
The questions you should ask in that first meeting:
- Do you do a discovery phase before development? How does it work?
- Can I talk to two or three clients who have had systems in production for more than a year?
- Does the repository live in my account from day one?
- What technology stack do you propose and why for my specific case?
- What happens with post-delivery support? Is there a maintenance contract?
An agency that answers these questions clearly and without defensiveness is a good sign. One that evades or downplays any of them is not.
If you'd like to talk about your project or ask us these same questions, we're available.