Revisions are a normal, expected part of client work — no one gets it exactly right on the first pass, and a client is entitled to ask for adjustments to what was actually agreed. The problems start when "revision" quietly becomes a word for "unlimited new work."
| This is a revision | This is scope creep |
|---|---|
| "Can the logo be a bit bigger?" | "Can you also design a business card while you're at it?" |
| "This paragraph doesn't quite match the tone we discussed" | "Can you add a whole new page we didn't talk about?" |
| Adjusting something already covered by the agreed scope | Adding something never in the agreed scope |
Stating a number of included revision rounds (commonly 2-3) in the proposal or contract isn't stingy — it's normal industry practice, and it protects a fixed-price project from quietly becoming unbounded. Revisions beyond that limit are simply billed as small add-ons, the same way scope creep is handled.
A real trap worth naming
Never say "unlimited revisions" in a listing or proposal to sound more appealing — it's the single most common way a fixed-price project turns into a loss.
Acknowledge it without defensiveness, ask a clarifying question if the request is vague, and confirm the turnaround time for the revised version. A revision request isn't criticism of the whole project — treating it that way makes an easy, normal exchange feel tense for both sides.