We’ve all been there. A workflow breaks right before quarter end, or a field update stops syncing and everyone’s in panic mode. You throw in a quick fix, maybe a new validation rule, a small tweak to a flow, or an automation bandaid, and suddenly everything’s working again. Crisis averted.
But fast forward six months and things look…messier. Admins can’t remember why certain automations exist. Someone accidentally creates a duplicate rule. The quick fix you once loved becomes a mysterious landmine buried deep in your org. Sound familiar? We get it and we’ve been there too.
But let’s talk about why quick fixes can be both a lifesaver and a long-term headache, and how to use them wisely when your team is in growth mode.
The good side of a quick fix (yes, there is one)
Quick fixes get a bad reputation, but the truth is, they have their place. Sometimes a small, well-placed patch keeps momentum going when there’s no time or budget for a full rearchitecture. When you’re under pressure to deliver outcomes quickly, these small wins can be the difference between hitting a target and missing it entirely.
A quick fix can keep teams productive when an outage or bug threatens to slow deals, or prove a concept before investing in a larger rollout. A short-term tweak that works can help earn buy-in from leadership, showing what’s possible without the upfront commitment. And just as importantly, quick fixes can build trust in the system when users see fast results from small improvements.
In fast-growth environments, those moments matter. When everyone’s sprinting, “perfect” can’t always be the priority. Progress can be enough (and that’s okay). The trick is knowing where progress ends and where risk begins.
But here’s the catch, every patch adds weight
The danger isn’t in one quick fix, it’s in the accumulation. Each small tweak adds another layer of dependency, and before long, you’ve got what we call invisible architecture. A new flow depends on an old process, that process relies on a workaround from two years ago, and suddenly one change triggers a cascade of errors.
A few examples we’ve seen in the wild: multiple automation tools triggering off the same object causing record-locking errors, business logic split across Process Builder, Flow, and Apex where no one’s sure which rule wins, or data “hacks” that make reporting impossible six months later. Individually, these look harmless. Collectively, they slow innovation and make scaling painful.
If you’ve ever spent hours chasing down why an automation fired twice, or why a report suddenly dropped key records, you’ve felt the cost of accumulated quick fixes. It’s like adding duct tape to a leaky pipe. It might hold for now, but eventually, the pressure (also known as growth) finds the weak spots.
The long game, strategic fixes that stick
Here’s where things get interesting. Quick fixes and strategic thinking aren’t opposites, they can actually work together if you treat them as part of the same system. The goal isn’t to completely eliminate the behaviours around short-term fixes, it’s to make sure they’re made intentionally.
When we’re working with clients in this position, we often talk about the Three Rs approach:
- Risk: What’s the actual risk of leaving this as is? If it’s blocking sales or data accuracy, act fast. But if it’s a small UX annoyance, it might wait.
- Reach: How far does this fix ripple through the organization? A tweak touching one process is one thing. A change affecting multiple teams or automations is another.
- Review: Every quick fix deserves a follow-up. Document the why, schedule a revisit, and assess if it’s still the right solution later.
This structure helps teams find their balance because it’s not about slowing down, it’s about understanding when to move fast and when to pause. By making review part of your process, you turn quick fixes from risky shortcuts into low-cost experiments that inform future design.
Budget realities (and how to work within them)
We get it. Taking a step back to reassess the whole engine sounds expensive, and sometimes it is. But not every strategic step means a huge overhaul. The truth is, you can make smart, sustainable improvements without needing to completely rebuild from scratch.
Proofs of concept, documentation sprints, or sandbox audits are ways to start without derailing momentum. Think of them as controlled experiments that buy you both time and trust. They demonstrate initiative, uncover weak spots, and help your team make the case for deeper investment later.
Growth mode doesn’t mean ignoring the cracks, it means addressing them with clarity and intention. The more visibility you have into your system’s foundation, the easier it becomes to make fast decisions that actually stick.
Finding your balance
The real question isn’t whether you should use quick fixes or not, it’s when and how to use them and building good habits within the team. The more effective teams know that quick fixes aren’t shortcuts, they’re checkpoints. Each one is a signal, a clue about where systems are strained or processes need attention.
If you listen to those signals early, you save yourself the future cleanup. The teams that scale the smoothest are the ones that track their fixes, question their patterns, and build reflection into their process. Quick fixes are fine, as long as they’re part of a bigger plan.
If your Salesforce org feels like it’s been patched together one fix at a time, it might be time to step back and look at the bigger picture. Not to overhaul everything, but to reconnect the dots and make sure the fast moves you’re making today don’t slow you down tomorrow.
Curious what that could look like for your team? Let’s chat.