I’m usually on the other side of this. I regularly request that people spend 3x the time it would take something to prove to me that it’s a good idea, so maybe let me offer you some perspective - the outside view, if you will.

The primary job of an executive is risk management. Let’s say I run an engineering team where people have good ideas 70% of the time, and bad ideas 30% of the time. Famously, it takes 10x the number of resources it originally took to develop and deploy, to remove a bad system from production and replace it.

.7 * 4 + .3 * 3 = 3.7

.3 * 11 + 0.7 = 4.0

An engineering team that doesn’t take 3x the time it takes to do something to verify it ahead of time is actually slightly less efficient overall ( assuming that 3x the time it takes reduces the error rate to 0)

Yea there are lots of simplifying assumptions here, these are all averages, plans don’t all take the same time, etc, etc, etc, and a more sophisticated system would take it all into account. But the results don’t usually change, unless in very special circumstances.