Compromising software quality is a leadership choice, not a team one. Lowering standards carries business risks that should be openly addressed by decision-makers.
Would your CFO sign off on a financial report that was “mostly accurate”? Would your legal team approve a contract that “should be enforceable”? No?
Then why do organisations think it’s acceptable to compromise on software quality?
A strong Definition of Done prevents cutting corners. It ensures every increment meets the same professional standard. Reducing quality to meet deadlines is a financial decision, not a team decision. If leadership wants to change the quality bar, they should sign off on the risks—not sneak it past teams under the banner of “Agile.”
Scrum teams don’t get to lower quality. And if your teams are being asked to, the real conversation should be happening in the boardroom.
Has your leadership ever knowingly shipped bad software?
[the article is linked in the comments]
If you've made it this far, it's worth connecting with our principal consultant and coach, Martin Hinshelwood, for a 30-minute 'ask me anything' call.
We partner with businesses across diverse industries, including finance, insurance, healthcare, pharmaceuticals, technology, engineering, transportation, hospitality, entertainment, legal, government, and military sectors.
Workday
New Signature
Schlumberger
Lean SA
Epic Games
Akaditi
Milliman
Xceptor - Process and Data Automation
Big Data for Humans
Alignment Healthcare
Slicedbread
Boxit Document Solutions
Freadom
Emerson Process Management
NIT A/S
Boeing
Qualco
Hubtel Ghana
Royal Air Force
Washington Department of Enterprise Services
Washington Department of Transport
Department of Work and Pensions (UK)
Nottingham County Council
Ghana Police Service
Graham & Brown
ProgramUtvikling
Akaditi
NIT A/S
Slicedbread
New Signature
