OK we are on a roll now with the movie quotes and how to tie them into modern IT services, well I say I roll, more of a rock this one.
There’s a line in the Michael Bay cinematic spectacle Armageddon, delivered by Steve Buscemi’s character, Rockhound, that has always stuck with me as he thinks about the shuttle they are strapped into, perpendicular to earth, ready to launch to chase down a pesky asteroid. This occuring after their slightly more than 10 minutes of training, he deadpans:
“You know we’re sitting on four million pounds of fuel, one nuclear weapon and a thing that has 270,000 moving parts built by the lowest bidder. Makes you feel good, doesn’t it?”
It’s a moment of gallows humour of course, but also a stark whisper of authenticity in a movie that left a family size popcorn box of reality at the cinema door. While the specific numbers and cargo might be Hollywood-inflated, the core sentiment, the chilling realisation that complex, critical systems might be compromised by prioritising cost above all else, is profoundly resonant. It’s a thought that, much like the asteroid in the movie hurtles towards us, the finance team and year end budget reconcilliation perhaps should have the nickname ‘Dottie’ too. I can feel the uncomfortable stretch of that nickname to a decimal currency operation may be a little far, so I will leave it there.
From Hollywood to Houston
These sentiments were echoed in real life by astronaut Alan Shepard reflecting in 1961, “It’s a very sobering feeling to be up in space and realise that one’s safety factor was determined by the lowest bidder on a government contract”, so this only amplifies its power. The anxiety isn’t just a scriptwriter’s invention, it’s a genuine human concern when strapping yourself to a finely tuned, incredibly intricate machine built by a system that, by its nature, seeks the most economical solution.
Consider this beyond the dramatic confines of a last-ditch space mission. How many systems, on which we rely everyday, from the critical infrastructure beneath our feet to the digital networks that connect us, are born from this same imperative? The bridge we drive over, the software that manages our finances, the medical device that monitors a loved one, could components within them trace their lineage back to the “lowest bidder”?
The Hidden False Economy
This isn’t to say that every low bid is inherently problematic. Efficiency and cost-effectiveness are crucial in any large-scale endeavour. The tendering process is designed, in theory, to ensure fair competition and responsible use of resources. However, Rockhound’s line isn’t a critique of tendering itself, but of the potential consequences when the pendulum swings too far towards initial cost savings, perhaps at the expense of rigorous quality control, robust materials, or the kind of skilled craftsmanship that foresees and mitigates potential points of failure.
In the world of software, the “lowest bidder” might not be a superscale manufacturing factory, but rather the development team offering the tightest deadline for the lowest price. This can lead to rushed code, insufficient testing, neglected security vulnerabilities, and technical debt that accrues silently until a critical failure occurs. We’ve all encountered the digital equivalent of a bolt that wasn’t quite tightened, a frustrating bug, a data breach, a system crash, and while the immediate consequence isn’t usually planetary annihilation, the cumulative impact on productivity, trust, and even safety can be significant.
The complexity of modern systems, whether they are spacecraft or sprawling software ecosystems, means that a failure in one seemingly small, low-cost component can have cascading and catastrophic effects. The interface between 270,000 parts, each potentially sourced for maximum economy, becomes a minefield of potential incompatibilities and weaknesses.
Finding The Balance
So, how do we navigate this? Is the answer simply to throw unlimited money at every project? Realistically, no. But perhaps it involves a more nuanced understanding of “value” and the willingness to tolerate a level of governance and risk that aligns with the aspirations of the project. The lowest bid on a part that causes a critical system failure isn’t truly the lowest cost when you factor in the repercussions. It requires a focus not just on the price of individual components or development hours, but on the total cost of ownership, the resilience of the system, and the potential cost of failure, human, financial, or otherwise.
Rockhound does make you think twice about what goes into the everyday things we rely on, and whether we’ve truly accounted for the price of cutting corners.
Back soon with more….
Don’t forget to comment, get involved and get in touch using the boxes below and reach out direct @glennaugustus
comments powered by Disqus