Fixed price vs. agile / time-and-materials: what works for product development?

Why there is no single right answer 

Fixed price provides budget certainty within a clearly defined scope. It works well for known work with low uncertainty: a technical audit, a bounded integration, or an MVP where requirements are genuinely stable. 

Time-and-materials (T&M) or Agile with regular releases is a better fit when you are learning together during the build: user feedback, discovered integration quirks, changing legislation. You pay for capacity and expertise, and continuously adjust priorities. 

What often works in practice 

Hybrid models are common: fixed price for discovery or a first release with clear constraints, followed by ongoing development on T&M or phased budgets. The core is transparency: a clear backlog, visible progress, and agreements on how scope and priority changes are decided. 

Codana's approach aligns with this: Imagine to reduce uncertainty before committing large budgets, then Create and Evolve in rhythms that match your decision-making process. 

Read more: Imagine · Create