![\"goodfastcheap1](\"https:\/\/berkonomics.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/goodfastcheap1-1.png\")
<\/a>delivered product than if offered as one or the other, but not both.<\/p>\n\u201cFast\u201d applies to either service speed (including delivery) or product manufacturing time.\u00a0 If you as a supplier have plenty of spare resources available, you might temporarily get away with adding \u201cfast\u201d to both of the other two attributes of good and cheap.<\/p>\n
[Email readers, continue here…]<\/em> <\/span>\u00a0But beware.\u00a0 Being fast usually requires having inefficient links or spare resources in the supply chain that can be stretched at comparatively low cost in terms of your overhead cash and offering quality.\u00a0 If it becomes a part of your long term sales message, there is risk that you will set expectations you cannot achieve.\u00a0 And a disappointment based on missed delivery or completion is as great as one based upon trounced quality or price expectations.<\/p>\n And if you are an Internet seller, \u201cfast\u201d becomes difficult to offer if you know that Amazon (and perhaps others) offer two\u2013day delivery at no charge \u2013 and at least Amazon is now providing two\u2013hour day delivery of many items in some metro areas.<\/p>\n So consider this:\u00a0 Make \u201cfast\u201d a tool for use as an inducement for particularly important customers or orders, or at times when resources are underutilized.\u00a0 Offer \u201cfast\u201d when it works for you to close a sale that would not have been likely otherwise.<\/p>\n Red Adair said, \u201c…pick any two.\u201d\u00a0 I think it more appropriate for most of us to concentrate upon \u201cgood\u201d (quality) or \u201ccheap\u201d (price) and add \u201cfast\u201d as needed to close the sale or fill the resource cup.<\/p>\n Our good friend Adam Miller, CEO of Cornerstone on Demand, uses words appropriate for software development when describing his version of this \u201cpick any two\u201d quandary.\u00a0\u00a0 He describes his choice as \u201ccost, quality or scope. Pick two. \u201c<\/p>\n <\/p>\n It is an excellent variation on the theme \u2013 selecting from a limited menu of the use of resources.\u00a0 Note that the only difference in Adam\u2019s shortlist is that he substitutes \u201cscope\u201d for \u201cfast\u201d \u2013 but we could just add \u201cscope\u201d to the three we dealt with above to demonstrate yet again that we all have limited resources from which to select our best path.<\/p>\n For software\u2013related tech businesses, scope always creeps, increasing the complexity, disturbing the planned progress, and increasing costs \u2013 sometimes dramatically, as projects fall further behind.<\/p>\n The lesson then is that resources are always going to be limited, and that management always must select the most important of the competing outcomes.\u00a0 It would be worth spending time with your team with someone volunteering to take the unpopular position just to explore the edges of this with speakers for each of the alternatives actively bringing the alternative views to the discussion.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" This one is attributed to Rod Adair, the famous oil and gas fire suppressing expert.\u00a0 And boy, does it apply to most of us and our offerings. \u201cQuality\u201d products and services should not be positioned as \u201ccheap,\u201d or your potential … Continue reading