Warning Signals to Watch For When Hiring an Offshore Development Team > 자유게시판

• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

An estimate that arrives instantly should be treated as a red flag rather than good service. A competent team responds with questions first: about who owns the data and what happens on failure. A provider that quotes before understanding the scope is probably working from a template, and the gap becomes a change request later — at your expense.

Be wary of a mismatch between the team in the pitch and those who eventually appear in the repository. Ask for the names and CVs of the actual dedicated team vs freelancers in the statement of work, with a clause that requires notice before anyone is swapped. A vendor that will only describe a pool of resources and never names specific engineers is preserving the right to assign anyone it likes.

Ask for the source repository from the start. A software development partner that shows a build only at the end of each phase expects you to accept a black box. Daily commits reveal who is really on the project far better than a slide deck. The same applies to the automated test suite: if there is no pipeline, quality claims are nothing more than words.

Ambiguous wording in the contract around intellectual property is not an oversight. The document needs to state explicitly that the code, designs and documentation become the property of your ai development company upon settlement of the relevant invoice. Look too at the governing law and the milestone terms: a request for most of the money up front with nothing due in return for weeks eliminates your only leverage.

Finally, examine communication. Ask what overlap there will be with your working day, which named person answers day-to-day questions and on what response times. Four hours of overlap is normally sufficient; zero overlap turns each small question into a lost day. Sloppy written English in the sales phase will not improve later.