When funds for development fall short or there's a need to economize, it's crucial to avoid making hasty decisions. Such choices fail to save money and can also result in wasted time, resources, and frustration. Drawing from our own experiences, we've compiled several examples of how NOT to cut costs.

Remove testing

Removing testing from the development process is a grave mistake. It's arguably the most crucial stage in project development. Even the most flawless code will falter without proper testing.

We have encountered situations when clients asked us to scale back testing to conserve resources. Unfortunately, this approach backfired. With insufficient testing, some bugs slipped through undetected, causing issues for the client and end-users alike. Therefore, we strongly advise against compromising on testing.

Instead, you can simply rethink the approach to testing: automate test case management and test runs, implement auto-tests, etc. 

You can learn more about our testing approach here

Remove the project manager

Thinking that a project can do well without a project manager is a common misconception. 

Project managers are essential for coordinating and guiding the team's efforts. They handle communication with clients, set tasks and deadlines, prioritize work, and manage the team by tracking progress and motivating developers.

Without a project manager, these responsibilities would need to be distributed among other team members, requiring additional resources and potentially leading to inefficiencies.

Alternatively, you can replace the project manager with someone who has relevant IT project experience. More on this topic here

Reduce the cost of the developers themselves

Reducing the cost of developers can involve either hiring less expensive developers or pushing the current team to work faster.

Opting for less expensive developers may seem like a cost-saving move, but caution is essential. While cheaper developers might save money upfront, their quality of work may not meet expectations. Distinguishing between skilled yet affordable developers and mediocre ones can be challenging. In many cases, choosing the cheapest option can lead to unsatisfactory results. Fixing these issues later may end up being more costly than investing in experienced, albeit more expensive, developers from the start.

Pressuring the team to work faster can also have drawbacks. For example, demanding that tasks estimated to take eight hours be completed in just two hours can negatively impact the quality of work. Rushing through tasks can result in a gradual decline in project quality, ultimately leading to unsatisfactory outcomes. It's crucial to strike a balance between cost savings and maintaining quality. 

Additionally, consider the cultural nuances and work ethic of the developers you're working with. While haggling might be acceptable and beneficial in some cultures, it can be perceived differently and harm relationships in others.

To reduce costs without hiring cheaper developers, you can pay attention to task prioritization: focus on developing only the most necessary features to launch the first version of the product. 

To sum up

We've encountered each of the examples described and learned how to deal with them. It is important to keep a balance between cost reduction and quality of work. 

As discussed in our article, optimizing project processes is the most effective approach to reducing development costs, rather than compromising on testing, having a competent project manager, or working with experienced developers.

If you need help with improving your processes – we offer you a free system audit with a detailed report and recommendations to resolve the issues.

Contact us or book a quick call to get started

  • Clients' questions