I can only speak from a developer’s perspective, and I’ve faced this dilemma a few times.

During the software development lifecycle, there are moments when you’re under intense pressure to fix a critical, release-blocking bug as quickly as possible. Typically, there are two ways to approach this.

The first is a quick fix—something that can be implemented fast but is often hacky and fragile. The second is the more deliberate approach: engaging all relevant stakeholders, fully understanding the root cause, and designing a solution that is correct and sustainable.

Technically, both approaches can be justified depending on the situation. In most companies I’ve worked at, the quick fix is usually favored due to time and delivery pressures. However, at Nokia, we consistently chose the latter approach because of a strong “quality first” mindset.

Over time, this fundamentally changed my idea of doing the right thing. I learned that doing the right thing isn’t always about speed; it’s about accountability, transparency, and long-term impact.

Practicing this philosophy often led to uncomfortable situations such as pushing back on timelines, having difficult conversations, and being upfront about trade-offs. But choosing honesty and quality over convenience played a vital role in my professional growth and shaped how I approach engineering decisions today.
P.S.: In a few cases, this quality and honesty-first approach prevented recurring production issues that would have cost far more time and trust later.

01 February, 2026 12:21