Project Failure Files: Avoiding Measurable Quality Standards

In Episode 58 of the Project Failure Files weekly webcast, our focus was “Hoping “Good Enough” Is Enough,” in which Sharon and I take on one of the most common causes of misalignment in projects: unclear definitions of “quality.” We break down how vague expectations around what “done” or “high quality” actually means can lead to rework, frustration, and missed goals. The conversation centers around the importance of getting specific—translating fuzzy ideas into testable standards and involving all stakeholders in defining success from the outset.

The discussion explores how mismatched assumptions between teams and stakeholders can derail even technically “on spec” projects. From stakeholder miscommunication to perfectionism paralysis, Sharon and I share relatable examples of what happens when teams over-engineer or under-deliver based on unspoken or shifting criteria. Retrospectives, scope reviews, and active questioning are championed as critical tools for uncovering and clarifying quality expectations early and often.

To fix these pitfalls, we try to offer actionable strategies and best practices—like anchoring metrics to use cases, creating shared “Definitions of Done,” and encouraging real conversations around evolving standards. Whether you’re a stakeholder, a delivery team member, or a project manager, this episode reminds us that quality isn’t a buzzword—it’s a shared understanding, built through deliberate communication and consistent documentation.

Enjoy the episode!

Be sure to tune in next Monday, September 29th at 9am Pacific for a program update on our weekly series. Hope you can join us on our NEW YouTube channel (please subscribe!), or find us on LinkedIn.