Sorry, I understood what you meant but overly abbreviated my response.

I understand your point about “complete” versus “good” but I have always wondered about the economic impact of the decision to deliver low quality user interfaces (“more complete than good”) to front line operators.

I’ve worked in a number of enterprise domains and I’ve found that the more I empathise with the uses of my software (ie, the front-of-house workers, not the end customer) the more I see benefits to the organisation in terms of staff motivation and efficiency, which translates to a better end-customer experience as well.

I’m just not convinced that something can really be said to be “complete” if it is not also “good”.