To the second point, there are a lot of situations where the value of making a decision and being able to begin "doing something as opposed to talking about doing something", is greater than the incremental value of the perfect solution left over after the cost of continuing to debate until you reach it -- even if you end up needing to backtrack and start over with what it becomes apparent is a better option than the one you decided on. The confidence to do a quick pivot to an option you now *know* is better is immensely valuable.

And pivoting itself may not have as much value as one thinks. In _Mathematical Carnival_, Martin Gardner has a chapter called "Calculating Prodigies", about the people who engaged in the fad of doing complex arithmetic and other mathematical feats in their heads on demand. One of them is quoted as saying that an absolutely critical part of the process is to decide on the best strategy instantly once the calculation is known, *and then stick to it till the end*, even if a method that would have better in retrospect occurs to one partway through, because the time spent redoing already-done calculations outweighs the amount of time saved. Likewise the not-perfect product or feature that hits the market weeks or months earlier and can begin generating revenue may still outperform the perfect but delayed product over a realistic time horizon.