SQL Clone
SQLServerCentral is supported by Redgate
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 


Better, Faster, and Cheaper


Better, Faster, and Cheaper

Author
Message
Andy Warren
Andy Warren
SSChampion
SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)

Group: Moderators
Points: 14881 Visits: 2730
Comments posted to this topic are about the item Better, Faster, and Cheaper

Andy
SQLAndy - My Blog!
Connect with me on LinkedIn
Follow me on Twitter
jonathan.d.myers
jonathan.d.myers
Valued Member
Valued Member (51 reputation)Valued Member (51 reputation)Valued Member (51 reputation)Valued Member (51 reputation)Valued Member (51 reputation)Valued Member (51 reputation)Valued Member (51 reputation)Valued Member (51 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 51 Visits: 369
I'd always been of the impression that the "faster" portion of the saying was more focused on time-elapsed, in the context of how "soon" you may have the completed product, effort, project, etc. Therefore, the laptop from your example is surely a better & cheaper laptop, but was not available for purchase until 5 years after the one to which you're comparing it. Better, faster (in the context of relative performance), and cheaper IS the norm for computers. laptops, and smartphones, as advances in technology inevitably lead to such.

In the same vein, a "superstar" may be able to provide a solution that's faster and better than an "average" team. The "superstar" may cost more per a productive hour (in the short term) than an "average" person providing the same/similar solution at a lower cost in twice the time. When "time is money," managers may opt to go to the superstar for a solution. When "cost savings" are the focus, or a solution may not be needed immediately, the lower-priority projects may be pushed to the "average" team. I prefer a balanced approach, as the "average" tech may become a superstar with time and experience, and the current "superstar" can best focus their time and effort on critical projects.
eric.notheisen
eric.notheisen
Old Hand
Old Hand (311 reputation)Old Hand (311 reputation)Old Hand (311 reputation)Old Hand (311 reputation)Old Hand (311 reputation)Old Hand (311 reputation)Old Hand (311 reputation)Old Hand (311 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 311 Visits: 296
Faster, Cheaper, Better -- Perhaps you can get all three but I have found that when dealing with my customers I need to have a tool to communicate the cost of a feature. Yes you can bring in a superstar at a higher rate for a shorter period of time but there are costs associated with recruiting and placing the superstar. Also, when it comes down to faster or cheaper -- most project leads do not address the necessary rework and remediation to be done when going for faster or cheaper.

Project architects and leads need to address the cost of each feature so the customer can at least be aware of the cost they are incurring with each additional feature (bells and whistles). When the cost of additional features exceeds the costs of all the previous features, customers tend to reject the new features.
lshanahan
lshanahan
SSC Eights!
SSC Eights! (890 reputation)SSC Eights! (890 reputation)SSC Eights! (890 reputation)SSC Eights! (890 reputation)SSC Eights! (890 reputation)SSC Eights! (890 reputation)SSC Eights! (890 reputation)SSC Eights! (890 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 890 Visits: 436
I'll throw in with Jonathan here in that the "Fast" aspect has to do with the concept-to-production timeline, not so much the performance aspect of whatever it is.

The point of this saying - though admittedly the shorthand version states it inelegantly - is the three elements are interrelated and optimizing them for any project involves making decisions and accepting certain trade-offs between them. Changing any one will affect the other two to some degree or another. The effects may be negligible, significant but acceptable or simply unacceptable for that project, but the effects are there.

____________
Just my $0.02 from over here in the cheap seats of the peanut gallery - please adjust for inflation and/or your local currency.
Andy Warren
Andy Warren
SSChampion
SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)

Group: Moderators
Points: 14881 Visits: 2730
lshanahan, I know I pushed the example by using "fast" the way I did:-) But are you really, really sure that the triangle is always true?

Andy
SQLAndy - My Blog!
Connect with me on LinkedIn
Follow me on Twitter
Robert.Sterbal
Robert.Sterbal
SSC-Addicted
SSC-Addicted (433 reputation)SSC-Addicted (433 reputation)SSC-Addicted (433 reputation)SSC-Addicted (433 reputation)SSC-Addicted (433 reputation)SSC-Addicted (433 reputation)SSC-Addicted (433 reputation)SSC-Addicted (433 reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 433 Visits: 2000
The triangle is a reliable indicator of how projects go. The counter example isn't perfection, it is a project out of control - delayed, late and of poor quality.
Dave62
Dave62
Hall of Fame
Hall of Fame (3.3K reputation)Hall of Fame (3.3K reputation)Hall of Fame (3.3K reputation)Hall of Fame (3.3K reputation)Hall of Fame (3.3K reputation)Hall of Fame (3.3K reputation)Hall of Fame (3.3K reputation)Hall of Fame (3.3K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 3343 Visits: 2794
... what I’m challenging you to do is to avoid reducing conversations to “pick two” when sometimes the right person with the right idea might well be able to see a way to achieve all three.

I think "sometimes" is the key word in that statement. There may be a very limited number of edge-cases where all three have been achieved. But I wouldn't go changing any rule based on edge-cases.

We should try to keep an open mind towards the possibility of achieving all three, without fooling ourselves into thinking it is always going to work that way.

"Pick two" becomes more than just a myth, perpetuated by those who don't want to do work, when it is backed by decades of common experience, amongst a large number of project managers from all over the world.
Andy Warren
Andy Warren
SSChampion
SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)

Group: Moderators
Points: 14881 Visits: 2730

We should try to keep an open mind towards the possibility of achieving all three, without fooling ourselves into thinking it is always going to work that way.


Nicely said!

Andy
SQLAndy - My Blog!
Connect with me on LinkedIn
Follow me on Twitter
Andy Warren
Andy Warren
SSChampion
SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)SSChampion (14K reputation)

Group: Moderators
Points: 14881 Visits: 2730
Dave, I hear you on the PM's, yet PM's are just as fallible as the rest of us. How many use/repeat that phrase just because? Which is perhaps doing a disservice to PM's - I know a lot of good ones.

The problem (or greatness) of the phrase is the mental image of the triangle. The triangle can turn dogma into physics. See - I made this side longer, see how it changes the triangle?

Andy
SQLAndy - My Blog!
Connect with me on LinkedIn
Follow me on Twitter
Nevyn
Nevyn
SSCommitted
SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)SSCommitted (1.9K reputation)

Group: General Forum Members
Points: 1934 Visits: 3149
Yeah, the laptop example was not the best.

Anyway, the point of the triangle (if there is one) is an easy to remember example to show that the 3 factors are "related".

Of course you can get all 3. You just need to have a loose enough requirement for all 3 relative to the difficulty of the task/project.

But what happens when we are planning out your project and you say "any way you can finish it sooner?", or "can it also do this", or "can you put a faster processor in it (a measure of 'good' ...), or "that's outside our budget, get it done for 5k less". The point is that to get more of one, you need to sacrifice one of the other two (usually money or time). That is usually true enough, and even when its not is useful to keep people from pushing unrealistic demands on a project team.

The falsehood of the example is really in the assumption that you'll get even two of those satisfied. Too many projects come in slower and more expensive and still don't deliver quality.

Anyway, it kind of reminds me of a dialogue quote from the film "Idiocracy"


"Every time they asked me to Lead, Follow, or Get out of the way, I got out of the way"

"You're not meant to choose that. The statement is meant to shame you into leading or at LEAST following"


The triangle reminds me of that. No one is ever meant to sacrifice on good. Reminding them of the relationship is meant to get you more money or at least more time to finish.
Go


Permissions

You can't post new topics.
You can't post topic replies.
You can't post new polls.
You can't post replies to polls.
You can't edit your own topics.
You can't delete your own topics.
You can't edit other topics.
You can't delete other topics.
You can't edit your own posts.
You can't edit other posts.
You can't delete your own posts.
You can't delete other posts.
You can't post events.
You can't edit your own events.
You can't edit other events.
You can't delete your own events.
You can't delete other events.
You can't send private messages.
You can't send emails.
You can read topics.
You can't vote in polls.
You can't upload attachments.
You can download attachments.
You can't post HTML code.
You can't edit HTML code.
You can't post IFCode.
You can't post JavaScript.
You can post emoticons.
You can't post or upload images.

Select a forum

































































































































































SQLServerCentral


Search