In project management, there’s this thing (which is generally true) that you have three factors: cost, speed(of implementation) and quality - and you should pick the two that are most important to you.
In reality though, you don’t pick two - you pick a blend that emphasises two, without completely neglecting the third. Mundane and pointless it is, but this bit - the outcome of the extreme cases - had escaped me until just recently.
If you pick two (and insist on them being absolute), the following happens:
[li]If you insist on absolutes for speed and quality - that is, shortest possible time, highest possible quality - the cost increases exponentially. You will choke when you see the budget. You can’t afford it.[/li][li]If you insist on absolutes for quality and cost - that is, highest possible quality, lowest possible cost, the time required to implement it increases exponentially - You’ll never get there. It cannot be achieved.[/li][li]If you insist on absolutes for cost and time - that is, lowest possible cost, shortest possible time, the quality drops to near zero. You will not be able to use the end product. It will be broken by design.[/li][/ul]
In my experience - the third category is the most common - i.e. “do it fast and cheap - we’ll come back and beat you up about the poor quality later”