A recent Visual Studio Magazine article (The Cost of Static) hints that offshore development can have costly downsides hidden in the form of missed requirements or poor implementations. While I agree that offshore development (or any level of offshore/onshore/nearshore/remote development) can be costly, I think the author missed a bigger risk.
The real cost is the cost of “good enough.” When developers slack and deliver software that is merely good enough, companies lose the opportunity to capitalize on excellent work. Excellent work can attract new customers, lower operating costs, build brands, or help the companies achieve other critical objectives. Errors, re-work, or missed intent can cost companies dearly. Not only do these problems force businesses to invest additional funds, they also jeopardize organizational relationships and goodwill.
Good enough won’t cut it. Unfortunately, there are many developers who deliver “good enough” regularly. This article highlighted one such example. Similar results could have come from a local contractor or an offshore firm. Location is irrelevant. The real caution for businesses is to hire the best talent available to meet business objectives and deliver quality software.
Posts
1 comments:
Hi Jeff.
I understand your post but think that real issue isn't "Good Enough" vs Excellent but rather identifying the point of diminishing returns.
You can put different numbers in the equation but I believe there is data to support the contention that the last X percent of project's functionality requires XX% of the budget. I've heard numbers like 20 and 40 so restated it's 'the last 20% of a project is 40% of the project's budget'.
The goal then for us as business consultants is to try and determine the inflection point where additional effort and cost result in only marginal improvement. I am aware of one project methodology, 'Accelerated Valuation Methodology' AVM from Lotus/IBM that formalized that approach. Their approach also was based on an assumption that by the time a team gets to the 75% or 80% mark, its likely that some aspect of the business has changed so it's appropriate at that point to stop, check all assumptions and business drivers and only continue on to the remaining 100% only if it's warranted.
I know this puts me closer to the 'Good Enough' camp than the excellent camp but wanted to put it out there for your consideration.
Richard Echeandia
Post a Comment