Currently working on a new federal report requiring us to send 7 fields to them yearly. They have provided a 1,670 page document to 'help' us send them the data.
I'm somehow positive that the folks that fix the things that break are thrilled on the daily that someone did something quickly, without really understanding the ramifications, when they could have asked about it first. ;)
You have a valid point about red tape, but does it really amount to 2 steps forward, or is it the same one step, but 2 forward, 1 back?
I work in environments where moving fast is usually bad (Enterprise/Healthcare), so I'm honestly asking.
IMO, the step analogy breaks down fast. Almost like comparing dancing to hiking. Eg: you can take a lot more steps dancing and get nowhere…
Knowing where you want to go and keeping your focus on that direction is probably the most important aspect of any environment. Iterating fast is a double edged sword that both allows quick fixes to happen while also encouraging an environment where those quick fixes are needed.
Iterating more meticulously feels a lot slower but can produce just as fast… sometimes a lot faster. For me, there is also an inherent stability component to slower iteration.
Perhaps, the best is neither approach on their own but a clever combination of the two?
