Quartz By Tim Fernholz 6/2/2022
The difference between bespoke quantum leaps and platform power.One of my favorite academics is a frustrated Oxford professor named Bent Flyvbjerg, whose career is pointing out that big projects almost always fail in predictable ways.
Mega-dams, high-speed rail, Olympics infrastructure, and national IT projects costing more than $1 billion almost inevitably wind up delayed and over-budget, to the point of becoming money-losers. If that reminds you of some projects undertaken by NASA, you see where this is going: Flyvberg and a colleague, Atif Ansar, have written a new case study focused on NASA and SpaceX.
They examine the difference between one-off projects focused on “quantum leaps”—the Space Shuttle or the Space Launch System, say—versus repeatable platforms—containerized shipping, auto manufacturing, and SpaceX’s vehicles. Notably, they insist this isn’t a public-private distinction. Rather, the researchers are focused on organizational principles that lend themselves to successfully delivering transformative projects at scale.
Planners behind projects that attempt to achieve a massive gain in a single leap, they posit, enmesh themselves in psychological patterns that lead to failure. They delude themselves in thinking the actual costs of the project will be much less than expected, because if the real costs were known, the projects would never be attempted.
Platforms, on the other hand, grow incrementally. These aren’t just digital constructions but real world activities that share several characteristics: Repeatability, extendability, the ability to absorb new knowledge and adapt to new situations.
More:
https://qz.com/emails/space-business/2172377/an-oxford-case-study-explains-why-spacex-is-more-efficient-than-nasa/
