Is charging by time (hour or day) for software implementation services fair?

Software companies (like most professionals) ought to charge for the project, because it’s a project the customer wants, not the time. In fact, its the working software, not even the project that you want!

Surgery, for example. I don’t want it to last a long time, I just want it to work. Same with servicing my car.

Or painting my house. I’m buying a painted house, not the decorator’s time.

Sometimes the time = the project. Then charging by the time is correct. Tennis coaching, say, or a head massage.

Many software vendors insist on charging on time and material for implementation projects. They argue this is another exception because the customer has the ability to change the spec, again and again. If they say this it can only indicate that they have an “off the shelf” product that is not really on a shelf, but in a development lab!

Flexible, configurable, truly off the shelf software, shipped with good configuration tools, can always be sold with a fixed priced implementation project. There are clear boundaries set by the configuration tools and platform capability. If the project stays within these boundaries there is no risk to either party. The project cannot bankrupt the vendor. The customer is not exposed to a secret R&D project.

And most importantly, you get to the value you were after (working software) much sooner and with much less hassle.