Because it's much easier to change software than for example a bridge. I don't see it as a bad thing as long as all sides are aware that changing requirements changes the deadline as well.
> I don't see it as a bad thing as long as all sides are aware that changing requirements changes the deadline as well.
In my experience, this could not be further from the truth. There is simply no awareness that change remains expensive it's just that now the process allows it without any fanfare whereas before a change was a big deal.
Not saying that change requests are the way to go but certainly an understanding that change is not free would go a long way
Change in a software project definitely isn’t free but I do think it’s fair to say it’s easier than changing a bridge design halfway through.
Maybe there’s not as big a difference as people think, though?
It occurs to me that is actually possible to change the design of a bridge late in the day. The extra dampers to fix resonance problems on London’s Millennium Bridge are a nice example.
Bridge tolerances are measured in cm, and I suspect that the contractor does make changes on site from the original design the consulting engineers delivered.
> I don't see it as a bad thing as long as all sides are aware that changing requirements changes the deadline as wel
It's extremely dangerous, and software is quite comparable to a bridge. Imagine starting at both sides of the river and the bridge not meeting in the middle.
Changin requirements / features is very simular. And while on paper it sound like no problem, thats when you need to push back against your PO/Whoever is pushing the change.
They are building a bridge over the river near me. Headlines a month ago where that the two ends were within half and inch (1.25cm) of each other - which was considered the best possible case. Last year the bridge contractor build a dozen different adapters plates so cover all possible mismatches so that construction wouldn't slow down when the two ends got close enough together that they could tell how far off they were. (the bridge was supposed to open 5 months ago, but that is a different story...)
I'm not sure what the point is, but it somehow fits into yours...
Yes, there are some analogs to bridges, but software is much more flexible than concrete.
We can pretend we're building a bridge, but there could be another company, that is more comfortable with changing requirements and may deliver their product later, but more suited to a market.
