My argument also assumes that all contractors are a) competent and b) well intentioned and I think we all know that in the real world that is not always the case. Though it is a foreign idea to me personally, I can conceive of contractors that would, through either a or b above, over sell and under deliver.

Obviously, it the the opposite of this that the competent, well intentioned contractor continuously strives for.

My suggestion was that the way that things are often currently specified leads to a situation where clients are left with results that don’t function as advertised, and need to end up spending more than they expect in order to get a functioning product.

And although I do think that intents do shift during the course of the project, it is important for contractors to track and flag those changes in intent, and be clear with the clients when they are out of scope.

It is very possible (and I suppose too common) for a clients “intent” to shift as a project progresses. The contract should lay out very specifically what is expected of the contractor – this is the document by which they determine time estimates and resource needs. To hold the contractor to some expectation of fulfilling unspoken, undocumented and uncontracted intentions that the client may have is unfair. That would void the whole purpose of having a contract, wouldn’t it?

This isn’t to say that a contractor can’t or shouldn’t strive to go above and beyond. But to chastise contractors in general for not doing more than what was agreed upon does not seem right, or good business practice for either side.