"Hurry up and wait" is a recipe for inefficiency. Some product development projects start and stop and start again, with team members being added and removed throughout the process. The cost of this lurching does not appear to be well quantified. Moving technical talent from one project to another may assume 100% engineering efficiency, which is not the case. Hidden effects of engineers being moved include having to "spin up" on the new project and learn where the last team members left off (which may not be well documented), repeating initial work, and lowered efficiency and morale on the part of the engineers if the reason behind the moves was not well communicated or understood.

A lack of clear strategic intent leads to people or money being shifted between projects frequently and inefficiently. In the case of a project being completely shut down due to the shift, the short term effects are fairly obvious: the old project is stopped and will not complete until it is started up again. The long term effects could include opportunity costs of missed sales and additional costs to pull the project out of mothballs. When a project is not completely shut down, the effects are more difficult to quantify. Were the resources moved subject matter experts? Is the increase in schedule a one for one match or something more substantial?

Publication Date


Document Type

Master's Project

Student Type


Degree Name

Product Development (MS)


Clyde Eirikur Hull

Advisor/Committee Member

Lori Thompson


RIT – Main Campus