The Paradox Of The Iron Triangle In Application Development

Recently, Technavio published a report where their procurement specialist forecast the global enterprise application market to grow at a CAGR of 7.6% during the period 2017-2021. The report is based on an in-depth market analysis with data and insight from leading industry experts. Enterprise applications are evolving at a quick pace to meet every company’s digital strategy regardless of its size or geography. With the ease of creativity and access to technologies such as .net development, enterprise apps have mushroomed over the past few years. Enterprise apps have increased transparency and also accuracy levels that have resulted in better business decisions. The digitization of data has made access simpler, cut endless red tape and paper work and added momentum to business processes and dealings. However, digital disruption dominates every conversation and is the daunting reality that CXOs struggle with. As businesses strive to be more competitive, more adaptable and end-user focused, the boundaries of application development are constantly being pushed. In order to remain relevant and even profitable, the apps are required to do more, at a faster rate and be more futuristic. But the enterprise application development ecosystem has undergone a transformation and the delivery model struggles with the triple constraint triangle. That is modem apps need to look great, be robust and scalable and should be deployed and delivered ASAP. Meeting these three requirements simultaneously is easier said than done. There is the law of finite resources and many other variables that decree that any given time there will be a tug of war between the requirements. The triple constraint triangle lets you pick any two from good, fast or cheap. Strong UX, Robust architecture or Speedy Development. Paradox of the Iron Triangle: The paradox of this triangle is that while all 3 are important, they often work against the other. If an application focuses on user experience and faster delivery times, then it may not have the best of architecture. While one that strives for robustness and UX may take a while to complete and might not be cost-effective either. In project management parlance, this is often known as the classic triple constraint triangle or iron triangle. The basic problem is that each stakeholder group has different and sometimes conflicting, set of priorities and expectations. The IT team will lean towards developing a high quality, robust app, while the finance team will veer towards a leaner budget, senior leadership will be focused on delivery schedules and the end-user on the scope. Is it possible to have all three? Unfortunately, you can’t have it all. rnHowever, you can find a reasonable middle path by prioritizing and communicating effectively to all stakeholder groups. It is a tight-rope walk and they key to success is prioritization. Ask these questions every time the iron triangle raises its head: 1. What elements are non-negotiable? 2. What aspects have a little more wiggle room? 3. Are there any milestones that can be phased out or delivered later? 4. Would the client like it faster but slightly less effective or highly effective with somewhat of a leeway on the time schedules? Summary By answering these questions, you will have a fair idea about how to build a quality enterprise app with conflicting tug of war within time, budget and resources. The Iron Triangle can become an Elastic one if you plan well and prepare contingent measures. Do you agree? Please share your views in the comments section below.