[jimjimjim]

This will be difficult to do in text (imagine a triangle):

                Quality

        Time                Cost

Right, which one is more important? and more importantly who gets to decide which one is more important?

[andrewprock]

Honestly, I would love it if anyone could make the decision at all. Usually it's "I want all three".

[voltagex_]

Yep, managers seem to think the triangle can be overcome with enough money/prowess/brute force.

[myrion]

Well, if they're willing to invest money, then they've chosen, no? Cost is not important, but timeliness and quality are.

[dimino]

Cost is always important, everyone has the price at which they're no longer comfortable.

[nine_k]

Money in many cases can buy you (some) time.

[kazinator]

It can't be quality because "[e]rrors are the primary source of an antifragile system", quoting from the paper directly.

[dstroot]

The triangle is "cheap", "fast", and "highly available".

Pick any two...

[Joeri]

You can have all three. Prioritizing quality from the start, by doing design reviews, pair programming, tdd and so on, will actually reduce time needed to deliver fully functional software, and therefore lower overall cost.

[icebraining]

reduce time needed to deliver fully functional software

Except you can deliver a cheaper product faster if it's not fully functional, hence the triangle.

[dimino]

In theory.

In practice? Pick a spot inside the triangle.