Compromise is a four-letter word

There was a lot of talk in this particular conference call about the series of dates leading up to the release.  I ( not so innocently ) started asking questions about the real point of all of the dates being discussed.  There was a date for code complete, a date for this, a date for that, and I simply wanted to understand why we were setting dates that really had no meaning.  The reasons why they have no meaning are numerous and not important for this forum, but I was trying to make a point about doing things a certain way in the name of consistency.

I don’t put a whole lot of stock in consistency because it usually means you are not paying attention to what is changing around you.  Things move so quickly that the approach you took three or six months ago might not be the right approach for today.  I put a lot of value in asking why we are doing things.  Sometimes I am doing it just to be difficult, but for the most part it is to get people to really think about each decision.  If there is not a good reason for doing something ( and “this is how we do it” is not a good reason unless you can show me that “how you do it” is successful ), then we should not be doing it.  We should be thinking about how to do it better.

After all, that is what our competition is doing every day, isn’t it?

My questions were met with a series of requests to compromise and come up with dates and milestones that would line up with the departmental guidelines.  I am all for compromise in the pursuit of greater good.  I know my ideas are not always the best ones.  But compromise for the sake of making it easier to fit into a Powerpoint presentation?  That is a recipe for failure.

Am I wrong here?  Is there value in fitting in, even when fitting in means doing it in a way that I don’t agree with?