> The latter is qualitatively insufficient, but it gets you there with very little effort plus some manual fixes.

I remember years ago, when I worked at a large PC OEM, I had a conversation with one of our quality managers -- if an updated business process consumes half the resources, but fails twice as often, have you improved your efficiency, or just broken even?

"Qualitatively insufficient, but gets you there" sounds like a contradiction in terms, assuming "there" is a well-defined end state you're trying to achieve within equally well-defined control limits.