When time is running out and the product must launch now, you need a partner who can run without stumbling.
You find yourself in one of these situations:
- You have a digital project already started but stuck for months
- You need to launch an app or website in a few weeks because an investor wants to see concrete results
- Your current supplier abandoned the project halfway, leaving you with incomplete code and looming deadlines
You're not alone. It happens more often than you think.
The problem is that most software houses will tell you:
"We need to start from scratch, it will take at least 6-9 months." But you don't have those months. You need results now, not next year.
The Reality of Fast-Track Projects (and Why Many Fail)
Let's start with a fact:
accelerating software development without compromising quality is damn difficult.
It requires experience, method, and above all the ability to make quick but smart decisions.
Many companies that try to run end up stumbling. The code becomes a mess, bugs multiply, features don't work as they should. After a few months you find yourself with an unstable product that costs more to maintain than to redo from scratch.
Others get stuck: they analyze, plan, discuss every detail.
Result? After three months you still don't have a single line of working code and the market window has closed.
The truth is you need both: execution speed and technical discipline. Without the first, you never reach launch. Without the second, you launch something that collapses at the first real user load.
How Huulke Accelerates Without Causing Damage
We at Huulke often find ourselves taking over projects already started or stalled. Not because we actively seek it, but because many companies come to us exactly in these situations: blocked project, previous team disappeared, investors demanding results, market that won't wait.
We've developed an approach that allows us to move quickly without compromising product solidity. It's not magic, it's method.
Step 1: Quick but Precise Assessment
Before touching a single line of code, we dedicate at least 3-5 days to understanding what's really on the table.
We're not talking about in-depth audits that require weeks. We're talking about a targeted assessment that answers the essential questions:
- What actually works? Not what should work according to the documents, but what works if you test it now
- What's recoverable? Which parts of the existing code can be saved and which need to be rewritten
- Where are the landmines? Critical technical debt, problematic architectural choices, obsolete dependencies
- How much is really missing? Not what's missing according to the original plans, but what's needed to have a minimally functional product on the market
Concrete example: we evaluated an e-commerce at mid-development. The documents said "70% complete." The reality? The checkout didn't work, the payment system wasn't integrated, the database had performance issues. Real completion: 40%. But that information allowed us to make an honest and realistic estimate.
Step 2: Defining Immediate Priorities
You can't do everything at once when time is tight. You must be ruthless in cutting the superfluous and focusing on what really matters for launch.
We use a simple but
effective framework:
Must have for launch:
- Core functionalities that without them launching makes no sense
- Basic security (authentication, sensitive data protection)
- Acceptable performance (no one will wait 10 seconds for a page to load)
Should have for version 1.1:
- UX optimizations
- Secondary features appreciated but not blocking
- Integrations with non-critical external services
Nice to have for the future:
70% of projects in difficulty are blocked precisely because no one had the courage to say "this can wait." We say it, and we enforce it.
Step 3: Short Sprints with Continuous Delivery
When you accelerate, the biggest risk is losing control. You wake up after a month and discover that the team has built something different from what was needed.
That's why we work with sprints of 1-2 weeks maximum, never longer. Each sprint ends with:
- Working demo of what was done
- Deploy in test environment
- Immediate feedback from the client
- Course adjustments if necessary
This means that every 7-14 days you see concrete, tangible progress. Not promises or theoretical completion percentages, but features you can touch with your hands.
One of our clients told us:
"With the
previous team we had weekly meetings where they told us everything was fine. After six months we still had nothing to show. With you, after two weeks we already had the first working version of the login and dashboard."
Step 4: Learning by Doing (but with Safety Nets)
When you run, you don't have time to write perfect documentation or plan every possible scenario. You learn by doing. But this doesn't mean improvising.
Our "safety nets":
- Mandatory code review: no code goes into production without at least one other developer reviewing it
- Automated tests on critical functionalities: you can't test everything manually when you're going fast, but you can automate tests on the parts that must never break
- Quick rollback: if a release creates problems, we must be able to go back in minutes, not hours
- Active monitoring: as soon as the product is live, monitoring systems that immediately alert us if something goes wrong
This allows us to move quickly without turning the product into a time bomb.
When This Approach Works (and When It Doesn't)
Let's be honest: acceleration only works in certain situations.
It works when:
- You have clear and limited objectives for launch
- You're willing to accept compromises on non-essential features
- There's a concrete business case that justifies the speed (investors, seasonality, competition)
- You have the budget to do things right, even if quickly
It doesn't work when:
- You don't know what you want ("I want an app that does everything")
- You demand immediate perfection
- The budget is insufficient even for the bare minimum
- You don't have an internal team or technical contact who can validate rapid decisions
Speed isn't free. It requires quick decisions, extreme focus, conscious sacrifices. If you're not ready for this, better take more time and plan calmly.
Running vs Planning: What We Really Prefer
Let's be honest:
we would always prefer to have time to plan, design, test calmly.
When you have 6-12 months ahead, you can do things the best way: solid architecture, clean code, complete documentation, thorough testing.
But real life doesn't always give you this luxury. Sometimes the market moves faster, sometimes things go wrong and you need to recover, sometimes opportunities have narrow time windows.
In those cases, do you prefer a partner who tells you "it can't be done" or one who says "it can be done, but here's what it involves and how we do it without causing damage"?
We're the second type. Not because we like working under pressure (that would be a lie), but because we know how to do it well even when time is tight.
And this makes the difference between a project that reaches launch and one that remains a PowerPoint file full of good intentions.
The Next Step to Take
If you have a digital project stuck, delayed, or that needs to take off quickly, don't wait for the situation to get worse.
Write to us for a quick and honest assessment.
We'll tell you immediately if we can help you, in how much time realistically, and what it takes to do it. No beating around the bush, no impossible promises.
Because when time is running out, the last thing you need is someone telling you fairy tales.
