Does it make sense to degrade the performance of good software teams because bad software teams exist?
Ideally we’d always have good software teams, but in the real world sometimes you have to build software with bad teams.
Leaders have options, they can do things like reduce scope, increase budget, increase schedule, or full on abandon or cancel the project. These are all options available to leaders, but they require tradeoffs and decisions to be made on a project by project basis.
It is scalable to have a strict process that everyone has to follow, then impose a watchdog to enforce it on a wide scale. It may not be better to have separate QA, but it is easier for those in charge.
Ideally we’d always have good software teams, but in the real world sometimes you have to build software with bad teams.
Leaders have options, they can do things like reduce scope, increase budget, increase schedule, or full on abandon or cancel the project. These are all options available to leaders, but they require tradeoffs and decisions to be made on a project by project basis.
It is scalable to have a strict process that everyone has to follow, then impose a watchdog to enforce it on a wide scale. It may not be better to have separate QA, but it is easier for those in charge.