Blog

App development takes time, costs money, and requires specialized teams for each stage of production. All of this has a single goal: delivering an excellent final product in the shortest time possible.

And to get there, there are two ways to manage teams: one that works with a fixed scope (the more traditional way to run a project, also known as waterfall) and one that works with an open scope (also known as “agile methodology,” SCRUM or iterative—splitting and revisiting each production stage while the application is still being built).

Both options are good and have the potential to deliver the expected results. That’s why the ideal is always to contact a specialized company to get more personalized guidance.

Still, if you’re unsure whether to hire an open- or fixed-scope project for developing your application, the information below will certainly help.

Open scope vs. fixed scope: pros and cons

There’s a “ruler” in Software Engineering literature used to define scope and the nuances of each approach. It’s more or less like this:

Fixed – Prioritizable – Negotiable – Flexible – Open

To better understand which scope to choose for your startup’s app development, imagine this ruler as a spectrum: the more flexible your delivery dates and internal changes are, the better the project adapts to an open scope. Otherwise, lean toward fixed scope.

Fixed scope is a more “traditional” way to run a plan, since it allows you to have a very detailed forecast of timelines and costs—precisely because delivery changes are not easily accepted and deadlines are strictly enforced.

With it, it’s easier to reduce costs across production stages, because a holistic view of the project shows how many people will be needed, for how long, and where you can save during the process—allocating resources that don’t need to be full‑time on the project.

The big advantage of fixed scope is predictability: a set completion date, a set budget, and close monitoring by a project manager to ensure the work is progressing at the right pace.

Another advantage is that it doesn’t require as much participation from the client or product manager. If they don’t have time to be involved in each app development phase, no problem: the hired team will deliver the product on time, with the defined costs, as agreed.

The not‑so‑good part is that you might discover a new feature along the way—or decide to change one midstream—and that can create bottlenecks at the launch stage and impact the schedule you already agreed on.

In short: in fixed scope, the client already knows the cost and timeframe and is exposed to (none or) few surprises.

The downside is that the final product can be outdated at launch or take longer to evolve—time that companies or startups often don’t have.

With open scope, on the other hand, there isn’t as much certainty about total cost and timeline, since this approach gives you the freedom to delay or speed up processes, change priorities, regroup teams, hire more people… and, if needed, even pivot the original idea entirely.

Because open scope is based on the idea of an agile team, you don’t hire a company “per project,” but rather by hours worked.

That gives you greater flexibility in product development.

The main benefit of open scope is receiving the product “a little at a time,” tracking deliveries regularly.

This allows many changes during development and enables faster feedback at each stage—ultimately preventing an outdated product from being delivered.

That’s because agile methodologies accept requirement changes even late in development. Agile processes adapt to change so the client can gain competitive advantages.

The downside is that the app always depends on the client’s approval: if each stage doesn’t get the necessary interaction, the project can’t move to the next team waiting for it.

If some external dependency appears midstream—such as integrations with other services—teams can also get stuck, and costs can increase compared to the initial expectations, especially if development requires full‑time professionals.

As you can see, both approaches work, and each is better for a specific situation.

If you need more freedom—either because what needs to be done isn’t clear yet or because it can change frequently—open scope can be a good idea.

But if you need more predictability and control of costs and deadlines, study fixed scope a bit more.

What cannot happen is trying to develop your application without using any methodology.

After all, any methodology is better than no methodology—especially when we’re talking about something that consumes money, time, energy, and dedication from so many people.

It’s important to choose the approach that makes the most sense for your project.

Want to know more about the best solution for your case? Schedule a free consultation with an X-Apps specialist.