In my last post I did some maths, based on various published averages, that suggests that an average, medium-sized project that allows change will take roughly 13.5 times longer to complete than if it didn't. So, for project X, if we built what was asked for it would take (say) 1 month, but if we allow changes, then it will take (about) 1 year.
Hmmm: 1 month vs 1 year. That doesn't sound right. I think I'm missing something.
Proposal:
But ... when I think about it backwards, that means that if we took a completed project that took 1 year and rebuilt it, as is, we should be able to rebuild - from fresh - in just 1 month. Still doesn't sound right.
If only we could conduct an experiment or two to test this ...
- Has anyone just completed a 6-month project?
Do you have 2 weeks to spare?
Could you rebuild what you've just built - How about a 3 month project, with 1 week spare to rebuild it?
- Or even a 12 month project, with 1 month spare to rebuild it?
Does anyone think this is possible?
Have I gone wrong somewhere?
