I've spent the best part of 3 decades in IT and I can honestly say I have never taken deliberate decisions that would cause anything less than optimal implementations.
That's not to say I've never supervised a less-than-ideal exercise.
The fun fact about those ones is that the decisions that led to them were made by others. Ones that have less idea of the technical implications and future impacts, but more interest in how to look good today. You, know - management.
I don't know how many times I've had system designs compromised by people who don't have the appropriate understanding
I've always said that the best philosophy for computer systems is "Don't give people what they want, give them what they need.".
However, that is hard, very hard, to actually bring to fruition while navigating the politics of doing so, and sometimes one has to compromise and put oneself in a position where you give them what they say they want, and have the documentation to prove that is what they said they wanted, even if they were advised against it, that you have delivered it, and therefore the blame goes "That way ->". I'll swear that on aggregate, 50% of my professional life in management was proper work, and 50% avoiding other people's blame avoidance schemes or managerial incompetence.