There should be zero shame in reversing field when the evidence demands it.
However it’s common to encounter resistance to changing your mind during the course of a project. This is especially true when your project is structured using the flawed “waterfall” model, where a firm does discovery, has everyone sign off on requirements, and then delivers something based on that agreement that doesn’t quite work the way it needs to. Predictably, everybody loses.
It’s true, changing your mind might alter budget and timelines. It may vex project managers whose job it is to keep everything as predictable and on-track as possible, or executives who are understandably focused on cost.
But the truth is that understanding evolves. It evolves as you solve related problems, as you work through the specifics of implementations and migrations, and as people start testing and using the damn thing you’re building.
What’s the alternative? Recognizing a flaw or spotting an improvement and keeping your mouth shut? Why are we building this boat in the first place if we’re going to ignore the leaks that are springing up?
Changing your mind based on the latest landscape is not a sign of negligence. It’s a sign of careful attention and thoughtfulness.
It’s ok to change your mind.