I love the phrasing of 'barriers to anti-quality' as a way to bring attention to this particular category of (rampant) problem. It reminds me of that saying 'un

I love the phrasing of 'barriers to anti-quality' as a way to bring attention to this particular category of (rampant) problem. It reminds me of that saying 'under extreme pressure we tend not to rise to our ideals, but fall back on what we know.' I work on 3-12 month projects in an agency, we don't really do Scrum. It's mostly some version of waterfall, and occasionally dual-track agile. Generally the process of determining what to build is squeezed into the cracks. I just recently built about 40% of a prototype for a SaaS in a couple weeks with fractional team input, and then had to lay out the rest of the flows in a week. After that, more needs popped up (I can only imagine the shitshow that development will be). This is the worst case scenario. In less-worse cases, it seems like this becomes an issue of how to compare a requested change's value to its cost. Without enough data, this can be really hard to actually know well enough to have a grounded position on. It seems like consensus here is to focus on the cost of the change, rather than the potential value. It also seems like there's little faith in managers. I don't totally know what it's like out there for ya'll though.