Need testing support? Check our Quality Assurance services.

See also

Let’s discuss your project

“A developer is not the best person to test their own code because they tend to test what they intended, not what they actually built.”

— Gerald M. Weinberg, The Psychology of Computer Programming | Source

Have questions or need support? Contact us – our experts are happy to help.

Imagine two archers. The first one shoots ten arrows. The arrows land in different places on the target, some close to the center, some further away, but the average position of all the arrows falls almost perfectly in the center of the target. The second archer also fires ten shots. They all hit a single, compact point, forming a tight group about the diameter of a coin, but… two meters to the left of the target. Which one of them is better?

This simple thought experiment, drawn from science and metrology, illustrates one of the most important, yet most underestimated, differences in strategic thinking: the difference between accuracy (accuracy) and precision (precision). The first archer was inaccurate, but his process was reasonably precise (though not accurate). The second archer was extremely precise, but catastrophically inaccurate.

In the world of business and technology in 2025, this distinction is no longer a semantic curiosity. It has become one of the most powerful mental models for leaders to diagnose fundamental problems in their organizations. And the truth is that most companies, especially large and mature ones, suffer from the second archer’s disease. They have created extremely precise, optimized and repeatable processes for… perfectly doing the wrong things.

In this comprehensive guide, prepared by ARDURA Consulting strategists, we will translate this scientific concept into the language of everyday challenges in product, technology and data management. We’ll show why chasing precision without ensuring accuracy is the most effective path to failure, and how to build a culture and processes that first find the right target and then learn to hit it with absolute perfection.

What is the fundamental difference between precision and accuracy, and why is it so dangerous to confuse these concepts?

In order to consciously manage these two dimensions, we must first fully understand their definitions, preferably with the help of the aforementioned shooting target.

Accuracy answers the question: how close are you to the real, right target? It’s a measure of how consistent your results are with reality or strategic intent. If your target is the center of the target, the arrows landing around it, even if scattered, have high accuracy. In business, accuracy is the ability to correctly identify customer needs and accurately address market problems.

Precision answers the question: how repeatable and consistent are your results, regardless of whether they are correct? It is a measure of the dispersion of your attempts. If all your shots land in one tight spot, your process is extremely precise. That precision, however, says nothing about whether that point is in the right place. In business, precision is the ability to repeatably and predictably execute processes and deliver consistent results.

The danger arises from the fact that precision is much easier to measure and often gives a false sense of control and success. An organization can proudly look at its perfectly functioning processes (high precision) without noticing that all the effort is directed in the wrong direction (low precision). High precision combined with low accuracy is more dangerous than low precision and low accuracy, because in the latter case at least we know we have a problem.

How does this difference manifest itself in product strategy, and why do startups often beat corporations in this?

The world of digital product development is an ideal testing ground for observing the battle between precision and accuracy.

Many large, mature corporations are masters of precision. They have powerful, optimized and extremely repeatable development processes. They are able to execute a detailed two-year product development plan with clockwork precision, to the nearest day and dollar. The problem is that this plan was created based on assumptions from two years ago, and at the time of completion, the market is already in a completely different place. The company has perfectly and precisely built a product that no one needs anymore. This is the classic “high precision, low accuracy” syndrome.

On the other hand, we have an agile, chaotic startup. Its initial processes are often disorganized, and the first version of the product (MVP) is imperfect and full of errors (low precision). However, with an obsessive focus on constant customer contact, feedback collection and iterative improvement (Agile philosophy), the startup continually corrects its aim. Its shots are scattered at first, but with each iteration they get closer to the true center of the target - the real market need. It’s an approach that optimizes for accuracy.

Of course, the ideal state that mature, innovative organizations strive for is a combination of both: the ability to accurately identify a target that startups have, with the engineering discipline and quality of execution that corporations have.

Precision vs Accuracy in the World of Data Science and AI: How not to build a brilliant model that solves a bad problem?

In the world of artificial intelligence, failure to understand the difference between precision and accuracy can lead to catastrophic errors.

The machine learning model, from a technical point of view, can be extremely precise. It can, for example, classify images with 99.9% repeatability, achieving near-perfect results on a test set. However, this precision is worthless if the model is fundamentally inaccurate.

Imagine an AI model to predict machine failures in a factory. It has been trained on a huge amount of data, but only from the summer period. The model can become a brilliant expert at predicting failures due to overheating, achieving remarkable accuracy in this regard. However, when winter arrives and completely new causes of failure arise, related to low temperature and humidity, our precise model will become completely inaccurate and useless. It will give wrong answers with perfect precision because the target (the real causes of failure) has fundamentally changed.

For a leader investing in AI, the conclusion is one: **the accuracy of the model, i.e. its compatibility with the real, dynamically changing world, is infinitely more important than its technical precision **. And that accuracy depends almost entirely on the quality, completeness and representativeness of the data on which it is trained.

What processes and tools in modern development, such as testing and DevOps, build precision?

Engineering excellence is largely about building precision, that is, the ability to reproducibly and reliably deliver high-quality software. Modern development has a whole arsenal of tools and processes for this purpose.

Automated tests (unit, integration, E2E) are, at their core, a mechanism for verifying and enforcing precision. They guarantee that a given piece of code, in response to a given input, will always and reproducibly return the expected result.

CI/CD (Continuous Integration/Continuous Deployment) pipelines are an automated production line that ensures that the process of building, testing and deploying software is identical every time, eliminating the risk of human error. It is the definition of operational precision.

Design Systems are tools that provide precision and consistency in the visual layer, ensuring that every button, form and interface element across a huge application looks and works in exactly the same, defined way.

However, it should be remembered that all these powerful tools are “blind” to accuracy. They only guarantee that the executed plan will be executed with absolute precision. However, they will not answer the question of whether the plan itself was right.

What strategies, such as Discovery Phase and Agile, are key to ensuring accuracy?

If precision is the domain of engineering, then accuracy is the domain of product strategy and process. There are specific methodologies whose overarching goal is precisely to “calibrate the sight” and ensure that the organization is directing its efforts in the right direction.

The Discovery Phase, which precedes any development, is at its core a process of seeking accuracy. It’s a phase in which, with the help of market research, customer interviews, data analysis and prototyping, we try to find the answer to the fundamental question, “What is the real problem we need to solve to deliver real value?” The goal is to find the center of the target before we even fire the first shot.

The Agile methodology, on the other hand, is an operating system for continuously maintaining and correcting accuracy throughout the project. The iterative nature of sprints and regular ceremonies such as Sprint Review are built-in feedback loop mechanisms. These are moments when the team and stakeholders pause, compare the results to date with the strategic goal, and course-correct if necessary. Agile accepts that our knowledge of the goal is imperfect at the outset, and builds a process to intelligently “tip the target” as we move forward.

How can leaders diagnose whether their organization suffers from “precision obsession”?

Many organizations, without realizing it, have fallen into the trap of optimizing precision at the expense of accuracy. There are several warning signs that every leader should be alert to.

The first signal is the reward and evaluation system. Are your teams rewarded primarily for “delivering the project on time and on budget” (precision metric) or for “real impact on key business metrics” (accuracy metric)?

The second signal is the nature of meetings and discussions. Is most of the time spent discussing implementation details, schedules and resource allocation, or is it spent on deep discussions about customer needs, market data analysis and product strategy?

A third, and very powerful, signal is the attitude toward failure. Does your organization have a culture in which a failed experiment is viewed as a disaster or as a valuable lesson that allowed you to correct course and improve accuracy?

How do you build an organizational culture that values accuracy as much as precision?

Changing these dynamics requires a conscious effort and a cultural shift that must start from the very top of the organization.

First, celebrate and reward learning, not just success. Create an environment of psychological safety where teams are not afraid to experiment and admit mistakes. A failed prototype that proved the original hypothesis wrong is a huge success because it saved the company from a multimillion-dollar investment in a bad product.

Second, strengthen the role and autonomy of Product Owners. Give them real power and access to data so they can make bold, strategic decisions about the direction of the product, even if it means changing the original plan.

Third, shorten feedback loops. Implement processes and tools that allow you to interact with real users and their feedback as often and as early as possible. The voice of the customer is the most powerful tool for calibrating accuracy.

What are the practical steps to balance precision and accuracy in the project life cycle?

The ideal development process is one that intelligently balances both, adjusting priorities according to the stage of the project.

At an early stage (idea, research, prototyping), the priority is 99% accuracy. The goal is only to find the right problem and verify the value proposition. Implementation precision is almost irrelevant at this stage. The tools here are interviews, mock-ups and quick, “dirty” prototypes.

At the middle stage (building the MVP, first versions), the search for balance begins. We need to accurately implement the key functionalities we identified at an earlier stage, but we need to do it with enough precision to make the product usable, stable and trustworthy. This is the ideal field for Agile methodology.

At the mature stage (scaling, optimization), the role of precision becomes increasingly important. When a product supports thousands or millions of users, reliability, performance and consistency become absolutely critical. It is at this stage that the most is invested in advanced test automation, DevOps optimization and building a robust architecture. But even then, an organization must not lose the mechanisms (such as A/B testing) that allow it to constantly verify accuracy and adapt to the market.

How do we at ARDURA Consulting help our clients hit the mark by combining strategic accuracy with engineering precision?

At ARDURA Consulting, we believe that delivering world-class digital products requires a mastery of both dimensions. Our entire process is designed to ensure perfect synergy between the two.

We always start our journey with the customer with an intensive Discovery Phase, which is entirely dedicated to the search for accuracy. We act as a strategic partner that, through research, workshops and prototyping, helps the client accurately “target the goal” before the first line of production code is even written. Our agile approach to development, in turn, ensures that this target is continually reviewed and adjusted throughout the project.

At the same time, our organizational culture is based on an obsession with engineering excellence to ensure accuracy. We implement best practices in test automation, CI/CD and code reviews to make sure that what we build is reliable, consistent and of the highest quality. Our unique value proposition lies precisely in this combination: we are neither just strategists nor just engineers. We are an integrated partner that ensures that our customers build the right product (accuracy) the right way (precision).

What is the most important question every leader should ask themselves before approving a new project?

In the hustle and bustle of daily meetings and the pressure of deadlines, it’s easy to focus on the measurable and concrete - schedules, budgets and feature lists. These are all about precision. But the most important question a leader can ask is about something else entirely.

That question is not, “Do we have a solid plan to get this project done on time and on budget?” That question is, “How can we be sure - what evidence do we have - that this is the right target we should be aiming for at all?”

An honest and data-driven answer to the latter question is the essence of modern strategic leadership.

Aim before you shoot

In business, as in archery, chasing precision without ensuring accuracy is the most efficient and repeatable path to spectacular failure. It is the art of wasting resources perfectly. The most successful and innovative organizations in the world are those that have understood this simple truth and have built a culture and processes that first obsessively seek the right target, and only then engage all their engineering might to hit it with flawless precision.

It’s a shift in thinking from “are we building it right?” to “are we building the right thing?”.