How should the software development process be sequenced in a proposal — which step comes first?

Don't work with an agency that doesn't deliver formal analysis documentation. If the second agency hands over the system architecture and functional specifications at the end of those 4 weeks, their offer is far safer. Having that document in hand means that even if you part ways with the agency down the road, you can easily carry on with another team.

Three years ago, on a similar warehouse software project, we chose the agency that told us "let's start coding right away, we'll finish fast." What started as a 150.000 TL project went through 11 scope changes, ballooned to 260.000 TL, and took 9 months instead of 3. The price of skipping analysis is always way steeper.

The Database Schema and API Contract must be defined before design and coding. If these steps are skipped, the mobile developers won't know what to expect from backend services. Both teams end up waiting on each other, and the project timeline gets completely stuck.

When evaluating proposals, make sure to check for these three sequencing rules: 1) Visual design shouldn't begin before wireframes are approved, 2) Backend code shouldn't be written before the design and data model are finalized, 3) You shouldn't go live before User Acceptance Testing is done.

The second agency's approach is right, but get the contract to clearly spell out what exact deliverables they will produce over those 4 weeks. Sometimes agencies bill for "analysis" without generating any tangible documentation just to burn through time.

Haste makes waste, especially in software development. Dont let the longer timeline in the second quote put you off; I bet you anything the 3-month job promised by the first agency wont be done in under 6.

edit: typed from phone, sorry for typos.

An agency that skips analysis starts cheap but ends up being the most expensive option; the methodology in the second proposal is far more professional.

Same here. Most time waste accumulates in tasks waiting for approval.

I'm also curious if anyone does it differently.

Exactly, and not many people know this. When making a decision, first look at what data you have on hand.

Weekly written progress reports are much more useful than asking for dates.

The discussion got scattered let me summarize. Hasty decisions become decisions you have to fix six months later.

Just leaving this note, it might be useful.

I'm curious too.

I feel the same way. In legacy systems the most expensive thing is unknown dependencies.

Just leaving this note, it might be useful.

There's a part I don't understand. Ask who prepared the quote and who will actually do the work.

Of course, it varies if your situation is different.

This is exactly what we experienced. Hasty decisions become decisions you have to fix six months later.

If you have questions write them; I'll answer as best I can.

Let me speak from the other side; I'm on the supplier side. Processes without records never improve, because you don't know what to fix.

The real issue isn't the number, but what it's based on. If I were you, I'd go this route.

correct in theory, but it doesn't work that way in practice... i mean hasty decisions become decisions you have to fix six months later.

when making a decision, first look at what data you have on hand. honestly if I were you I'd go this route.

I went through the same thing.

I have a question. Ask who prepared the quote and who will actually do the work.

Correct me if I'm wrong.