Replies

1. 
   UncleDunc | Apr 26, 2005 09:29am | #1

   You mean like this?

   View Image

   The one sentence summary is, good, cheap, or fast. Pick any two. The more nuanced version is, you can't maximize all three. Sometimes you can't even maximize two, but you can never maximize all three. The more formal sounding way to say it is, wherever you are on the chart, you can't move closer to one of the corners without moving away from at least one of the other two corners.

   
   

   ---

   Edited 4/26/2005 2:40 am ET by Uncle Dunc

1. 
   jjkaz | Apr 26, 2005 05:17pm | #2

   Aha

   This is getting somewhere. If you pick one of the items as a constant, say the cost, and move to a shorter completion time, you move away from quality. If you keep the quality the same and move to a shorter completion you move away from the cost base (cost increases). Thank you.

2. 
   CapnMac | Apr 26, 2005 05:23pm | #3

   The more nuanced version is, you can't maximize all three.

   Ah yes, the wonders of truly understood logic.

   Which works just fine until the customer just assumes that the triangle is really smaller than it is. 

   Usually that Time is too long cause your padding it, and cost is too high 'cause y'r bilking 'im; therefore any estimate you give is inherently wrong.

   Worst part is that he's real reasonable, he keeps agreeing with you--he's just seeing a different triangle than you do.

   Just one of the albatrosses we get to wear as bling . . . Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)

3. 
   Pierre1 | Apr 27, 2005 05:38am | #10

   I drew that triangle for the first time at a lunch meeting with a demanding and wealthy customer. The look on his face was priceless... 

   He wasn't pleased as he had in the past been able to convince other trades to deliver all three - at a loss to them of course. It all worked out well in the end: the job got done on a reasonable schedule, I made money, and the work still looks good years later.

   I've used it a few other times, to help potential customers understand why they can't have it all in a jiffy and for cheap. If they can't choose 2 out of 3, and stick to it, then I'm on to other things.

2. 
   pickings | Apr 26, 2005 10:36pm | #4

   Old Archi I learnt it from called it "the impossible tr-iad". Good, Fast, and Cheap....You can have any two, but never all three.

3. 
   john | Apr 26, 2005 11:29pm | #5

   So, for this theory to be correct, it has to be possible for the job to be both good and cheap as long as slow is not a problem. So has does building something slow make it cheap? Same amount of work has to be done

   John

1. 
   RW | Apr 26, 2005 11:45pm | #6

   Easy. Convenience factor. I might be able to save a couple hundred bucks on the garden shed if time isn't an issue. I can work on it when I have time, using it as filler. I can wait for my friend to finish a roofing job so I can scavenge the tarpaper leftovers. I can wait for virtually everything involved to go on sale, and it probably will, sometime within the next year. I can con my BIL into helping me when I pour the concrete pad, thus saving labor costs.

   I think we gotta look at it as a theoretical model though. Theories work because they tend to explain a majority of instances. "If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and a man." - Mark Twain

1. 
   john | Apr 27, 2005 12:22am | #7

   Going to have to disagree with you RW. We are talking hear about putting this idea forward to a paying customer. He should be paying the same labour rate whether there's one guy on the job or ten. Waiting til the materials go on sale is perhaps stretching the idea as is waiting to get help from your BIL , who presumably is cheaper than another employee?

   The only way I see this idea working is if the workers go on overtime to get the job done quick, and the work that needs to be done actually does cost more per hour

   John

2. 
   jonblakemore | Apr 27, 2005 01:30am | #8

   Maybe "cheap" should read "without a premium for speed"If a customer has a specific time frame need and sufficient funds I might entertain performing the work *if* I know the job will be very profitable. The extra profit is for:Added strain to employees
   Possible losses on other jobs that may suffer slightly
   Because we can.Money may be thrown at problems where time would usually be sufficient. The same amount of work does have to be accomplished but approach might be more costly. 

   Jon Blakemore

1. 
   RW | Apr 27, 2005 03:12am | #9

   Good point. I'm reminded of a recent occurance. "Can you do this . . . yesterday". I'm thinking well, things on the schedule that aren't time sensitive could bump a few days. Add in hassle factor to the bid, and voila. Exactly what you're talking about."If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and a man." - Mark Twain

2. 
   john | Apr 27, 2005 10:08am | #11

   Maybe "cheap" should read "without a premium for speed"

   That's a much better waay of putting it. 'Cheap' is quite misleading in this context

   John

1. 
   pickings | Apr 27, 2005 05:48pm | #13

   "cheap" was just part of the quote from the old timer. But since it is 2005.....let's be PC.

   "It is extremely difficult, but not entirely impossible, to attain the highest standard of construction (with premium materials), done in a timely and efficient manner, for a minimum of expenditure."

   That ought to cover it!

   Although it is easier to quote , "good, fast, and cheap".

1. 
   LisaWL | Apr 27, 2005 06:56pm | #14

   Or another easy way: speed, quality, price - pick two. That's the sign we had up in our store.Whether I'm in the role of consumer or in the role of supplier, I'm never looking to maximize all three. Instead I'm looking for the most reasonable balance I can strike between them. It's not an "all or nothing" deal for any of the three, just a balancing act. When a customer demands the maximum of all three (which in my experience is pretty unusual) I advise them that I can not help them and redirect them to my competition. :-)"A completed home is a listed home."

2. 
   pickings | Apr 27, 2005 07:04pm | #15

   Exactly.

   I saw a funny sign in a store the other day.

   Said"Complaint dept. take a number" under the sign was a WW2 grenade and the only avail number was attached to the pin.

   I thought it was original and funny as heck.

   "Funny store signs" could prove to be an entertaining thread.

3. 
   EricPaulson | Apr 27, 2005 07:16pm | #16

   Was at the Vet with Kitty yesterday...............on a shelf to the rear of the reception area was an urn marked; 'Ashes of problem employees'.I Love A Hand That Meets My Own,

   With A Hold That Causes Some Sensation.

   [email protected]

4. 
   pickings | Apr 27, 2005 07:53pm | #17

   Good one.

   Another favorite......

   "You want me to rush your rush job ahead of the rush job I am currently rushing to rush?"

3. 
   pickings | Apr 27, 2005 05:41pm | #12

   Not "building slow" but waiting for a cheaper sub to "fit it into his schedule", or waiting for sales on materials. Emergency calls always cost more, and subs charge their prime rate to show up on the exact schedule when the GC wants them there. However.....the mor flexable you are with the time.....the better the price.

   Or you could do it cheap and fast, but it will not be good.

   Any way you cut it, virtually impossible to build a house good, fast and cheap. Try it.

4. 
   DML | Apr 28, 2005 02:37am | #18

   Or as I like to put it to me clients 'We're slow, but we're expensive!'

1. 
   byrnesie | Apr 28, 2005 05:06am | #19

   "The last person who told me that was broke.... but that's not your fault!"