Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a lot of work, but a lot of that work is generated by people doing the wrong thing too often. If we had a smaller and more competent team, the initial build might have been marginally slower, but we wouldn’t have to spend a permanent 50% to just keeping down the technical debt.
You’re working from a cost-efficiency / cost optimization perspective. That’s a great perspective in some contexts, for example, mature late-stage products, fully saturated markets, etc. Is cost efficiency an effective perspective for innovation or revenue growth? Mostly, no. As long as your risk-of-ruin is low, then you want to fail. Sometimes people misinterpret this as “doing the wrong thing”. But it takes doing a…
Ultimately you end up in the same spot, but one choice is fairly suboptimal there.