In my experience, if you're at this point, the conversation has already gone wrong. My antidote to this is to lay out the foundation to understand what the client needs (or says they need, and try to infer from it, as close as possible what they actually need). I always attempt to gate progress. E.g. if we set expectations in the beginning, we don't change them half-way through. We can, but that would imply anything after that is no longer valid, and we should start from the beginning, and charge accordingly. Also, paper (e-mail, any kind of record) trail of changes, so that inconsistencies and swerving left-right-left is recorded. If there have been too many changes, think about renegotiating. Alternatively: figure out underlying cause

Changes are inevitable, but a solid process prevents chaos. Gatekeeping Changes: Every request must have a documented impact (time/cost) and formal approval. Short Feedback Windows: Set a 48-hour limit. Silence = approval. Root Cause, Not Symptoms: Frequent changes often mean unclear scope, conflicting interests, or fear of commitment. Calculated Transparency: Show real impact: "This change will take X hours and cost Y. Confirm?" Golden Rule: "If stakeholder feedback never challenges them, you’re not managing—you’re being managed."

En la empresa en la que tuve a cargo la Gerencia de Producción y Mejora Continua, la empresa tiene como filosofía POR LO MENOS cumplir y en la medida de lo posible SUPERAR las expectativas del cliente, hablando del factor tiempo que es a lo que se refiere el punto, una vez que el proyecto ha sido definido y autorizado por las partes interesadas, cuando un cambio de un componente del proyecto que aún no se ha diseñado y está dentro de los tiempos acordados se atiende sin problema, solamente de atiende el control de cambios debidamente documentado y autorizado, en el caso de que haya una implicación de mayor tiempo se cotiza y se negocia el impacto para generar la procedencia del control de cambio.

When a client constantly changes feedback, the issue often starts with a lack of alignment early on. That’s why I set clear expectations from the beginning and explain that mid-project changes may require a full reassessment of scope, timeline, and cost. I always keep a record (e.g., emails) of all changes to avoid inconsistencies. If changes become excessive, I consider renegotiating or identifying the root cause to address the issue at its source.

Lidar com atrasos requer comunicação transparente, ajustes no planejamento e foco em soluções. Retornar feedbacks positivos reforça o comprometimento e motiva a equipe a seguir em frente com confiança.