Large Project? Cheap and Good: Pick and two. Sorry, no fast.
Fast, good, cheap: pick two. Common mantra, right?
However, I'm really starting to believe that when it comes to large projects, you can only really have two options: Cheap and Good.
Reading about large project failures is a hobby of mine; like the Denver airport automated baggage system and now healthcare.gov
The solution to building these complex projects is often adding more complexity with teams running into hundreds. To me, adding more complexity to an already complex problem seems... uhh... what is a PC way of saying retard dumb?
Maybe the solution is to eliminate "fast" from that triangle for large projects?
It's my opinion that the only answer to these routine failures in complex projects is a small team of dedicated, knowledgable individuals that are not required to deliver fast.
It'll take a lot longer, but at least it'll be done right -- and for a shitload less money.
(Admittedly, most of these huge failures stem from the process of gov't contracts, but I think my point remains valid)