Speed holds when the builder may contradict the plan, in writing
When work moves fast, an approved plan is wrong in small factual ways by the time it is built. The fast path that stays correct is a builder who checks each premise against the code, keeps the plan’s intent, and writes down every place the plan was wrong and why.
Plans approved at speed were wrong in small factual ways
On a platform project I deliver, my software factory builds against plans approved the same day. In one, the plan justified a new mutation test by saying the mutation passed every suite; when the builder ran it, suites failed. In another, the plan relied on a safety check that did not exist, because the control it cited guarded something else. The builder wrote that beside the checkbox instead of ticking it.
What the builder does with a plan it can prove wrong
- Plan approved
- Each premise checkedAgainst the code as it is now
- A premise proves falseA control that is not there, a test that fails
- Keep the intentAsk first when the scope would change
- Record it with the reasonA dated decision beside the ticket
- Build continues
Each divergence is a dated decision with its reason
Every place the builder departs from the plan becomes a dated entry beside the ticket: the question, what was decided and why. A divergence that would change the scope is asked as a question with options before any code depends on it. A builder that follows a plan it can prove wrong ships a regression with a green test; one that may contradict the plan in writing ships the right change and leaves a record a reviewer can check.
You get plans whose intent a builder can keep while correcting their facts
I write each plan’s intent out in plain words, separate from its facts, so the builder can keep the first while checking the second against the code as it is when the work starts. Every correction lands in writing, where you and I can read it.
The work starts with a workflow review of how a change moves through your team. My software factory then does the volume, I review what it produces, and you get no constant meetings. Bring your deadline to the workflow review.