Improving Project Quality vs Lowering Project Costs [closed]

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;







up vote
-4
down vote

favorite












Is it possible to do both these things:
To improve the quality of the IT services delivered
To reduce the long term cost of service provision



To improve quality you need to spend time or money.
If you reduce costs, you reduce quality either directly or through increase in response times. Or another way: fast, good, and cheap, and pick any two?







share|improve this question











closed as off-topic by Chris E, DJClayworth, IDrinkandIKnowThings, jimm101, mhoran_psprep Aug 11 '16 at 17:25


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "Real questions have answers. Rather than explaining why your situation is terrible, or why your boss/coworker makes you unhappy, explain what you want to do to make it better. For more information, click here." – Chris E, DJClayworth
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.












  • Hi, This site isn't really for questions about 'how to do your job'. This is for HR-like stuff. You could try asking this on our Project Management or Programmers sites.
    – DJClayworth
    Aug 11 '16 at 16:33






  • 2




    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is not about navigating the workplace as described in the help center
    – IDrinkandIKnowThings
    Aug 11 '16 at 16:46

















up vote
-4
down vote

favorite












Is it possible to do both these things:
To improve the quality of the IT services delivered
To reduce the long term cost of service provision



To improve quality you need to spend time or money.
If you reduce costs, you reduce quality either directly or through increase in response times. Or another way: fast, good, and cheap, and pick any two?







share|improve this question











closed as off-topic by Chris E, DJClayworth, IDrinkandIKnowThings, jimm101, mhoran_psprep Aug 11 '16 at 17:25


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "Real questions have answers. Rather than explaining why your situation is terrible, or why your boss/coworker makes you unhappy, explain what you want to do to make it better. For more information, click here." – Chris E, DJClayworth
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.












  • Hi, This site isn't really for questions about 'how to do your job'. This is for HR-like stuff. You could try asking this on our Project Management or Programmers sites.
    – DJClayworth
    Aug 11 '16 at 16:33






  • 2




    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is not about navigating the workplace as described in the help center
    – IDrinkandIKnowThings
    Aug 11 '16 at 16:46













up vote
-4
down vote

favorite









up vote
-4
down vote

favorite











Is it possible to do both these things:
To improve the quality of the IT services delivered
To reduce the long term cost of service provision



To improve quality you need to spend time or money.
If you reduce costs, you reduce quality either directly or through increase in response times. Or another way: fast, good, and cheap, and pick any two?







share|improve this question











Is it possible to do both these things:
To improve the quality of the IT services delivered
To reduce the long term cost of service provision



To improve quality you need to spend time or money.
If you reduce costs, you reduce quality either directly or through increase in response times. Or another way: fast, good, and cheap, and pick any two?









share|improve this question










share|improve this question




share|improve this question









asked Aug 11 '16 at 16:18









user127379

1124




1124




closed as off-topic by Chris E, DJClayworth, IDrinkandIKnowThings, jimm101, mhoran_psprep Aug 11 '16 at 17:25


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "Real questions have answers. Rather than explaining why your situation is terrible, or why your boss/coworker makes you unhappy, explain what you want to do to make it better. For more information, click here." – Chris E, DJClayworth
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.




closed as off-topic by Chris E, DJClayworth, IDrinkandIKnowThings, jimm101, mhoran_psprep Aug 11 '16 at 17:25


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "Real questions have answers. Rather than explaining why your situation is terrible, or why your boss/coworker makes you unhappy, explain what you want to do to make it better. For more information, click here." – Chris E, DJClayworth
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.











  • Hi, This site isn't really for questions about 'how to do your job'. This is for HR-like stuff. You could try asking this on our Project Management or Programmers sites.
    – DJClayworth
    Aug 11 '16 at 16:33






  • 2




    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is not about navigating the workplace as described in the help center
    – IDrinkandIKnowThings
    Aug 11 '16 at 16:46

















  • Hi, This site isn't really for questions about 'how to do your job'. This is for HR-like stuff. You could try asking this on our Project Management or Programmers sites.
    – DJClayworth
    Aug 11 '16 at 16:33






  • 2




    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is not about navigating the workplace as described in the help center
    – IDrinkandIKnowThings
    Aug 11 '16 at 16:46
















Hi, This site isn't really for questions about 'how to do your job'. This is for HR-like stuff. You could try asking this on our Project Management or Programmers sites.
– DJClayworth
Aug 11 '16 at 16:33




Hi, This site isn't really for questions about 'how to do your job'. This is for HR-like stuff. You could try asking this on our Project Management or Programmers sites.
– DJClayworth
Aug 11 '16 at 16:33




2




2




I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is not about navigating the workplace as described in the help center
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
Aug 11 '16 at 16:46





I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is not about navigating the workplace as described in the help center
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
Aug 11 '16 at 16:46











1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
-3
down vote



accepted










As long as you are looking at long term costs Improved Quality can decrease the costs. Spending more on development of software to ensure that the software is well architected, should be easier to extend/fix and is as bug free as possible can cost more up front but save money in the long run. Things like documentation, comments in the code, good requirements, unit tests, etc all cost time/money up front but produce much better software in the long run. Often times ignoring these things completely leads to project failure or ballooning costs much quicker than you'd expect.



On a less software development side of things building infrastructure anticipating growth can be more expensive up front but save money down the line when that growth does occur. Buying a more capable SAN up front costs more but you avoid having to buy a second one when you max out a smaller SAN.



From an IT help desk perspective it can hold true too. Spending more to develop good tools, build good processes or even train the users more costs something up front but can save money in the long term. We've all seen the disasters that IT departments can become when they are running from emergency to emergency just trying to keep things afloat because someone years back decided to save a little money then. Money spent developing an automated process to handle something, should when done right, end up saving money long term as that process no longer needs to be handled manually.






share|improve this answer




























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    -3
    down vote



    accepted










    As long as you are looking at long term costs Improved Quality can decrease the costs. Spending more on development of software to ensure that the software is well architected, should be easier to extend/fix and is as bug free as possible can cost more up front but save money in the long run. Things like documentation, comments in the code, good requirements, unit tests, etc all cost time/money up front but produce much better software in the long run. Often times ignoring these things completely leads to project failure or ballooning costs much quicker than you'd expect.



    On a less software development side of things building infrastructure anticipating growth can be more expensive up front but save money down the line when that growth does occur. Buying a more capable SAN up front costs more but you avoid having to buy a second one when you max out a smaller SAN.



    From an IT help desk perspective it can hold true too. Spending more to develop good tools, build good processes or even train the users more costs something up front but can save money in the long term. We've all seen the disasters that IT departments can become when they are running from emergency to emergency just trying to keep things afloat because someone years back decided to save a little money then. Money spent developing an automated process to handle something, should when done right, end up saving money long term as that process no longer needs to be handled manually.






    share|improve this answer

























      up vote
      -3
      down vote



      accepted










      As long as you are looking at long term costs Improved Quality can decrease the costs. Spending more on development of software to ensure that the software is well architected, should be easier to extend/fix and is as bug free as possible can cost more up front but save money in the long run. Things like documentation, comments in the code, good requirements, unit tests, etc all cost time/money up front but produce much better software in the long run. Often times ignoring these things completely leads to project failure or ballooning costs much quicker than you'd expect.



      On a less software development side of things building infrastructure anticipating growth can be more expensive up front but save money down the line when that growth does occur. Buying a more capable SAN up front costs more but you avoid having to buy a second one when you max out a smaller SAN.



      From an IT help desk perspective it can hold true too. Spending more to develop good tools, build good processes or even train the users more costs something up front but can save money in the long term. We've all seen the disasters that IT departments can become when they are running from emergency to emergency just trying to keep things afloat because someone years back decided to save a little money then. Money spent developing an automated process to handle something, should when done right, end up saving money long term as that process no longer needs to be handled manually.






      share|improve this answer























        up vote
        -3
        down vote



        accepted







        up vote
        -3
        down vote



        accepted






        As long as you are looking at long term costs Improved Quality can decrease the costs. Spending more on development of software to ensure that the software is well architected, should be easier to extend/fix and is as bug free as possible can cost more up front but save money in the long run. Things like documentation, comments in the code, good requirements, unit tests, etc all cost time/money up front but produce much better software in the long run. Often times ignoring these things completely leads to project failure or ballooning costs much quicker than you'd expect.



        On a less software development side of things building infrastructure anticipating growth can be more expensive up front but save money down the line when that growth does occur. Buying a more capable SAN up front costs more but you avoid having to buy a second one when you max out a smaller SAN.



        From an IT help desk perspective it can hold true too. Spending more to develop good tools, build good processes or even train the users more costs something up front but can save money in the long term. We've all seen the disasters that IT departments can become when they are running from emergency to emergency just trying to keep things afloat because someone years back decided to save a little money then. Money spent developing an automated process to handle something, should when done right, end up saving money long term as that process no longer needs to be handled manually.






        share|improve this answer













        As long as you are looking at long term costs Improved Quality can decrease the costs. Spending more on development of software to ensure that the software is well architected, should be easier to extend/fix and is as bug free as possible can cost more up front but save money in the long run. Things like documentation, comments in the code, good requirements, unit tests, etc all cost time/money up front but produce much better software in the long run. Often times ignoring these things completely leads to project failure or ballooning costs much quicker than you'd expect.



        On a less software development side of things building infrastructure anticipating growth can be more expensive up front but save money down the line when that growth does occur. Buying a more capable SAN up front costs more but you avoid having to buy a second one when you max out a smaller SAN.



        From an IT help desk perspective it can hold true too. Spending more to develop good tools, build good processes or even train the users more costs something up front but can save money in the long term. We've all seen the disasters that IT departments can become when they are running from emergency to emergency just trying to keep things afloat because someone years back decided to save a little money then. Money spent developing an automated process to handle something, should when done right, end up saving money long term as that process no longer needs to be handled manually.







        share|improve this answer













        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer











        answered Aug 11 '16 at 16:33









        Evan Steinbrenner

        76539




        76539












            Comments

            Popular posts from this blog

            What does second last employer means? [closed]

            Installing NextGIS Connect into QGIS 3?

            One-line joke