A common phrase captures the essence of the Project Management Triangle: “You can have it fast, cheap, or done well. Pick two.” This principle, widely recognized in project management, emphasizes the relationship between time, cost, and scope (or quality). Adjusting any one of these elements inevitably affects the other two.

In most business scenarios, time is the most valuable factor. A faster time to market means generating revenue sooner, gaining a competitive edge, and learning about your market faster. However, if you want to reduce time to market, you generally have two choices: reduce the scope or increase resources.

Reducing Scope or Quality

Sometimes, scope or quality can be reduced without jeopardizing the project’s overall success. For instance, when launching a new app, you may not need every feature at first; prioritize the essential elements and release updates more frequently. Occasionally, lowering quality can be acceptable if the speed-to-market outweighs the negative impact of minor issues. However, this is rare and requires careful consideration.

Increasing Resources

More often, businesses must maintain a certain scope, which leaves increasing resources as the primary option for speeding up a project. “Resources” don’t just mean hiring more employees. It can include upgrading tools that reduce development time or investing in training for your team to improve efficiency. 

For example, one team I managed reduced the time it took to compile code from forty minutes to ten by purchasing faster laptops. Each engineer compiled the app many times each day. Similarly, adopting a modular software architecture required upfront training but ultimately saved time in testing and development. Investing money upfront often pays off in the form of faster delivery.

The Myth of More People

A common misconception is that adding more people to a project will always speed it up. As the adage goes, “Nine women can’t have a baby in one month.” This assumption often comes from manufacturing, where adding assembly lines can increase output. However, in software development and other knowledge-based work, the situation is more complex. 

The key is understanding when adding people will actually help. If a single engineer is working on a project, adding more hands will likely speed things up. However, as teams grow, so do communication and coordination costs. These additional layers of complexity can slow progress, especially if work dependencies require tight collaboration between individuals or teams.

How to Assess Team Size

To determine the optimal team size, consider the dependencies in your project. Work is most efficient when one person manages both the enabling and dependent tasks, reducing the need for communication. As soon as dependencies are divided between individuals or teams, the need for coordination grows, and with it, the risk of slowing down the project.

To gauge the impact of team size on delivery speed, you can run an experiment. Track your team’s velocity with its current size and organization. Then, deliberately create dependencies that cross team boundaries for a Sprint or two, and measure the impact on velocity. If the additional communication costs are manageable, adding more people may be a good idea. If not, you have data to justify keeping your team size as is.

Additional Considerations

1. Form new teams instead of expanding existing ones. When adding people, it’s better to form a new team than to enlarge an existing one. Adding members to established teams can disrupt their workflow and slow progress, as each team will need time to adjust and rebuild cohesion. The existing teams will need to help bring the new team up to speed, but the new team is free to form itself and work out how best to work together while the existing teams keep moving forward.
2. Factor in supporting roles. Growing your team doesn’t just mean adding developers. You may need additional leaders, Scrum Masters, and Product Owners to support the increased workload. Make sure to plan for these costs as well.

Conclusion

The Project Management Triangle is a useful framework for balancing time, cost, and scope. While reducing scope or quality can sometimes help meet deadlines, increasing resources – whether through technology, training, or additional personnel – is often the most practical solution. However, be mindful of the diminishing returns that can come from adding more people. By carefully assessing your team’s needs and communication costs, you can strike the right balance to deliver projects efficiently.

Convincing your leadership team that your team is the right size, or that it needs to be expanded, can be challenging. How have you gone about making your case? What were the results? I’d like to hear your point of view.