Every team reaches a point where someone says: "We need more process."
Things feel chaotic. Work is slipping through the cracks. People are stepping on each other's toes. Surely, some structure would help.
So you implement a process. Sprint planning. Code reviews. Approval workflows. Standardized templates.
And somehow, things get worse.
The process adds overhead without solving the underlying problems. Now you're slow and disorganized.
Which raises the question: Is no process actually better than the wrong process?
The Cost of Bad Process
Bad process is worse than no process because:
It burns time: Filling out forms, attending ceremonies, following workflows. All time that could go toward actual work.
It creates false confidence: You think you're organized because you're following a process. But if the process doesn't match your needs, you're just organized incorrectly.
It kills morale: Nothing is more demoralizing than busywork. When people see process as obstacles instead of support, engagement craters.
It's hard to remove: Once a process is in place, inertia keeps it there. Even if everyone agrees it's not working, "we've always done it this way."
What Makes a Process "Wrong"?
Process is wrong when:
It solves a problem you don't have: You adopt Scrum because it's popular, not because you need two week planning cycles.
It's designed for a different team size: Enterprise processes built for 50 people don't work for a team of five.
It's cargo cult: You copy what successful companies do without understanding why they do it.
It prioritizes appearance over function: The process makes you look organized to stakeholders, but doesn't actually help you ship.
It's rigid: The process can't adapt when circumstances change.
The Case for No Process
Some teams genuinely function better with minimal process:
Small, colocated teams: When you're five people in the same room, you don't need formal standups. You just talk.
High trust environments: When everyone's aligned and self motivated, you don't need oversight and checkpoints.
Fast moving startups: When priorities shift daily, heavyweight process just slows you down.
In these contexts, "no process" doesn't mean chaos. It means informal, emergent coordination instead of formal structure.
People talk when they need to. Work gets claimed organically. Blockers get resolved in real time.
It's not that there's no process. It's that the process is invisible and adaptive.
When You Actually Need Process
Process helps when:
Coordination is hard: Multiple teams, remote work, asynchronous time zones. Informal coordination breaks down.
Stakes are high: Regulated industries, security sensitive work, financial systems. You need rigor and accountability.
Team is inexperienced: Junior folks benefit from structure and clear expectations.
Scale demands it: At 50 people, informal communication doesn't work anymore. You need some structure to avoid chaos.
In these cases, the right process does add value. The key is: right process, not just more process.
How to Know What's Right
The test is simple: Does this process make it easier to ship good work?
If yes, keep it. If no, change it or drop it.
Don't keep a process because "best practices say so" or "we've always done it" or "other companies do it."
The only valid reason to have a process is because it helps your team.
The Minimum Viable Process
Here's a framework: start with nothing. Add process only when you feel pain.
Feeling pain from unclear priorities? Add a lightweight planning session.
Feeling pain from code quality issues? Add code reviews.
Feeling pain from deployment mistakes? Add a checklist.
But add the minimum process that solves the problem. Don't import an entire methodology because one part of it would help.
Process should be a painkiller, not a vitamin. You add it to solve a specific acute problem, not as a general preventative.
The Permission to Simplify
If you're drowning in process, here's your permission: you can stop.
Try dropping the thing that feels most burdensome and see what breaks. Often, nothing does.
That mandatory status report? Skip it for a week. Does anyone notice?
That weekly planning meeting? Cancel it. Can the team still function?
That approval workflow? Remove a step. Does quality suffer?
If you can drop it without consequences, it wasn't adding value.
The Real Answer
Is no process better than the wrong one? Yes.
Bad process is pure cost. No benefit, all overhead.
No process can work, especially for small, high functioning teams.
But the best answer isn't "no process." It's just enough process, and no more.
Find the minimum structure that keeps you effective. Anything beyond that is waste.
Keep it simple. Keep it lightweight. And when in doubt, drop it and see what happens.