83,489
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==={{wasteprov|Over- | ==={{wasteprov|Over-engineering}}=== | ||
'''Headline''': ''Don’t design your plane to be waterproof in case it falls into the sea. Design it so it doesn’t crash.'' | '''Headline''': ''Don’t design your plane to be waterproof in case it falls into the sea. Design it so it doesn’t crash.'' | ||
In its original physical manufacturing sense, {{wasteprov|over-processing}} refers to ''unnecessary [[complication]] in design'', whether brought about through carelessness or over-specification. The production cost of features that | In its original physical manufacturing sense, {{wasteprov|over-processing}} refers to ''unnecessary [[complication]] in design'', whether brought about through carelessness or over-specification. The production cost of features that no-one will ever use is as much a form of wastage as any. | ||
The chief production cost in [[contract negotiation]] is ''time'' and ''human resource''. The longer a contract takes to read, and the more it invites challenge<ref>Which will be, in part, a function of its length — there more there is to read, the more there is to challenge.</ref>, the more expensive it is to produce. ''Any'' time taken over the bare minimum needed and ''any'' client challenge to a term that is not really vital the firm’s risk protection strategy is a waste in the contract negotiation process. | The chief production cost in [[contract negotiation]] is ''time'' and ''human resource''. The longer a contract takes to read, and the more it invites challenge<ref>Which will be, in part, a function of its length — there more there is to read, the more there is to challenge.</ref>, the more expensive it is to produce. ''Any'' time taken over the bare minimum needed and ''any'' client challenge to a term that is not really vital the firm’s risk protection strategy is a waste in the contract negotiation process. |