The false promise of speed. How rushing to market could damage your software’s success

Today, the temptation to reach the market quickly is ever-present.

With competition intensifying and users expecting regular updates, the urgency of bringing software to market in a rush is real.

But there's a catch.

The rush to market can have catastrophic effects. Cutting corners on quality for the sake of speed can result in unpredictable failures, reputation damage, and financial loss.

Why it’s tempting to rush

• Competition - Everyone is racing to be first. When you're in a competitive space, the desire to outdo your competition is strong.
• Market demands - Users require the newest features right away. They're expecting regular updates, and the faster you release, the better you meet their needs.
• Stakeholder pressure - Investors and other stakeholders want quick returns and may push for quicker releases to show progress.

The cost of rushing

Quality assurance is compromised

Skipping rigorous testing may appear to be a time-saving measure, but it is risky. Flaws or glitches missed in the rush to release could annoy customers and damage your business in the long run.

Bug-free products are not a luxury - they are vital.

Would you rather release something with substantial flaws or spend the effort to make it reliable?

Technical debt develops

When rushed, code shortcuts can result in technical debt - a rising pile of inefficiencies that develop over time.

Rushed code can function initially, but it is usually a half-baked solution. This type of shortcut makes scaling and maintenance difficult, resulting in additional effort down the road. The longer you delay fixing them, the more severe the problem gets.

User experience is impacted

Rushing through user testing and feedback can rob you of vital information that can improve the user experience.

Think about it: have you ever had a frustrating experience with a poorly designed app or slow features?

If you do not assign high priority to a seamless user experience, your product might frustrate users.

Long-term delays and failures

A quick release often results in more delays in the long run. Once launched, you will inevitably need constant patches and fixes, dragging your product through an endless string of delays.

What begins as a sprint to market can quickly become a lengthy, excruciating process that actually slows you down more than it gets you moving.

Real-life example: The Knight Capital Group Trading glitch

Knight Capital Group's 2012 trading glitch is a typical example of rushing to market with severe repercussions. Knight Capital, a financial services firm, released a software upgrade to its algorithmic trading system without enough testing in an attempt to remain competitive in the hectic financial markets.

Here's how it happened:

• Under the urgency to deploy the new trading algorithm in a timely manner, Knight Capital deployed the update without adequate testing.
• The software update, which reused an old and deprecated “power peg” flag in the code, inadvertently triggered a critical bug, which caused the algorithm to make over 140,000 incorrect trades in 45 minutes. The trades, made at incorrect prices, created massive disruptions in the stock market.
• The error resulted in $440 million in losses in about an hour, causing an extremely rapid financial catastrophe.
• Not only did the failure of the software cost Knight Capital financially but it also seriously damaged its reputation. Within less than two months, the company had been taken over by one of its competitors, and its independent life had come to a close.

The Knight Capital disaster is an excellent example of what goes wrong when speed comes ahead of QUALITY in software development. In this case, hurrying had disastrous consequences - financially, operationally, and reputationally.

Practical insights on how to balance speed and quality

Prioritize testing

Make testing a key component of your development process. Automated testing might save time, but manual testing is still necessary, especially for vital features.

Early error detection is cost and time-efficient. It's usually cheaper to correct errors during development than after launch.

Don’t rush the MVP

A Minimum Viable Product (MVP) should be focused but not sloppy. Do not rush it without rigorous examination.

Plan in advance what features are absolute necessities and test them thoroughly. A functioning MVP is much superior to a crashing or annoying one.

Address technical debt early

Track your technical debt and address it on a regular basis. This will save it from escalating into a larger issue later.

Schedule frequent refactoring sessions to keep your codebase clean and efficient.

• Gather user feedback early

Gather user input early to avoid missing out on valuable insights. Involve users at the beginning of the process and adjust according to their requirements.

User satisfaction should be a top goal, not an afterthought.

A word of caution

Have you considered the risks of speeding up your software release?

Speed looks like progress but can also become a bitter disappointment and result in enormous delays.

The Knight Capital example should serve as a wake-up call: taking corners might result in far higher costs in the long run.

Ask yourself: Is it worth the risk of rushing, or can you work out a method to introduce a robust, tried-and-tested product with long-term success?

Lastly, spending the time to infuse quality into your software will pay you back in the end by saving you time, money, and reputation. 

Quality today equals fewer headaches tomorrow.

You might find this interesting: Could a single software bug wipe out your company?

👉 For more in-depth content on the tech side, we recommend checking out our BLOG

Software development is an evolving journey, and we’re here to help navigate the ups, downs, and everything in between. If you have questions, ideas, or need assistance with your own projects, don’t hesitate to CONTACT US.