Avoiding documentation bottlenecks while maintaining quality? (take II)

[Beth Agnew]

I think the triangle, with its humorous variations, is meant to be more 
an aphorism than an axiom, a general rather than absolute truth. It's a 
good way to help people understand the factors involved in quality 
projects. We could just as easily hang our hats on scope/risk/resources, 
or any other threesome that makes sense for our situation. I've found 
the good/cheap/fast idea to be very useful in educating clients who 
don't seem to think a documentation or marketing project is an actual 
project where multiple factors must be managed. Once they realize that 
change in one area prompts changes in the other two areas, they start to 
understand the relationships among the variables and why some of their 
great ideas show up on their bill as an additional charge. :-)

Chris Borokowski wrote:
> It's important to remember the triangle isn't created like a
> three-position switch. It's a slider switch. If you want anything done
> faster, there are going to be tradeoffs. If you want it done more
> thoroughly ("better") there will be more time requirements. If you want
> good, cheap and fast, it will be possible, but material will by the
> nature of time be left out.
>
> --- Geoff Hart <ghart at videotron.ca> wrote
>> Several folks have written in to propose the "good/fast/cheap: pick  
>> two [one?]" problem.