There are those who think “projects can save money by going slow.” I’ve never quite understood this because the same things still need doing but even serious people say it (HS2 anyone?). Actually, they are trading reduced expenditure now for longer expenditure in the future. Maybe that means that less money needs to be borrowed now so interest payments are less over all, perhaps.
This kind of thinking also leads companies to split resources between multiple work streams: rather than having a team of 4 people work on 1 thing and get it done quickly the same 4 people work on 4 different things and all 4 get done slowly.
I’ve long argued that “shorter fatter” is better because that means the return on investment starts flowing sooner. It also means there is no “bulge” at the end when 4 projects complete and everyone is racing for the same scarce resources to complete.
This longer-slower thinking is common in the project mindset but is is absolute rubbish.
I see two reasons why people may choose to believe this.
One, people don’t like making decisions, and especially don’t like saying No. So rather than cancel a project it can be reduced in size so nobody is upset.
Two, people care far more about cost than benefits. Add to that, most people don’t understand cost of delay.
So what should teams do?
Recognise that when you start work on something you open a risk window. If you aren’t doing anything then there is no risk of doing – there may be risk of not doing but that is another story. Once you open the window you are at risk, at the very least you are at risk of needing to write-off expenditure in future.
The more you spend the more the more there is at risk. And the big risk is often that there is nothing to show for the expenditure.
What most people miss is: the longer the window is open the more chance you have of a risk happening. If your project last three months the chances of loosing a key member of staff in that time is low, if it lasts one year the risk is higher and if it lasts five years it will certainly happen.
Similarly, the chances of adverse weather hitting your construction site, a competitor launching a rival product, new technology rendering your work obsolete, a pandemic hitting or one of a million other things are all increased when your project take longer.
Once you start work you are in a race against risk.
Perhaps my industry knew this once upon a time and that is why IT projects used to have long drawn out requirements phases: low cost, low risk. Only when the coding starts and the costs go up does the risk get serious.
But we now recognise that the more requirements you gather the greater the risk that they change. The requirements risk window opens the day you start writing them. Only when you show customers working product do you know if you got them write.
Then, once work starts and big money is being spent go at it hell-for-leather. Concentrate your resources, aim to close the risk window but also deliver: early delivery further reduces risk but also increases the return-on-investment because there is no return, its not all spending.