Project Management

PM Philanthropy and The Jetsons

From the Game Theory in Management Blog
by
Modelling Business Decisions and their Consequences

About this Blog

RSS

Recent Posts

George Jetson, Bring Me A Rock!

How To Obstruct A PMO

Rage, Rage Against The Dying Of The Project

Think You Have A Culture Problem? Think Again.

Finally! A GAAP Concept PMs Can Get Behind!

Categories

Game Theory, PMO, Politics, Risk Management, Strategic Management

Date

linkedin twitter facebook Request to reuse this  


An unfortunate tendency I have encountered in many project controls analyst is that of insisting on a high level of rigor in the setup of their cost and schedule performance systems, as if such information streams must be difficult in the extreme to generate and operate, lest they be found wanting. This approach goes well beyond my previous distinctions drawn, between Processors and Effectives (quick recap: Processors are happy if every policy statement concerning project management is followed to the letter, and care less about actual project success or failure; Effectives seek project success, and don’t care much for formal policy guidance). To highlight the problems with the if-it’s-not-hard-it’s-wrong approach, I want to take a look at the animated situation comedy The Jetsons.

The Jetsons aired in the 1960s, and featured a futuristic family headed by George Jetson. George worked (will work?) at Spacely Space Sprockets where, if each episode’s opening is to be believed, his job is to press a single button, and then recline in his office chair. The red button turns on and off the Referential Universal Digital Indexer (R.U.D.I.)[1] , a job that, for unexplained reasons, George is able to do in a far superior manner than any other person. For this “work,” George apparently receives sufficient income for he and his wife and two children to live extremely well (by 21st Century standards, anyway).

Meanwhile, back here in the last weeks of 2015, earning a good income from extreme minimal effort is quite a trick (please, no comments on politicians), particularly in the PM world. Although it would certainly be nice to be so smart, educated, experienced and wise as to have droves of project team members lining up to hear pearls of wisdom about Work Breakdowns Structures, Critical Path Methodology, and Configuration Management tumble from our lips, the reality is something quite different. Many (if not most) projects are awarded after a bid process, and proposing the lowest bid is often the determining factor. Lowest bids rarely have the padding or reserves available for consulting with self-identified experts who like to pretend that they are the only ones who can casually push the critical buttons. 

Before my readers jump to the conclusion that this does not happen within their project teams, consider: each and every time two PM “experts” get into a discussion, or argument, about what they believe to be the proper way of doing PM, it is not free. This discussion is taking place among two or more professionals who are billing the project for their time. Litmus Test: the next time such a discussion takes place, inform the arguers that they can’t bill for the amount of time it takes to resolve the difficulty. My bet is that the issue evaporates.

Indeed, if an Effective is in charge, the very notion that one’s expertise or education should carry the argument whenever a disagreement arises is probably going to be depressed; instead, whomever can generate the deliverable on-time and on-budget will tend to get the work, billable time and all. If, on the other hand, a Processor happens to be in charge, the Insipid Debate Society can – and will – dominate the project’s landscape, wasting time, effort, and budget.

Which brings us back to philanthropy. If philanthropy can be defined as the act of making life a little easier for those whom we perceive to be going through a tough stretch, then wouldn’t the PM version be to make our crucial information streams as easy as possible to effectively implement? And, if that’s the case, wouldn’t that make those who insist on an absurdly high level of rigor in the installation of such systems – the chronic debaters among us – the very opposite of charitable?

In short, if George Jetson and his coworkers are convinced that he is uniquely qualified to turn on and off the RUDI, just as the PM experts are convinced that all of their standards must be met prior to performance measurement system startup, they might all want to avoid putting those assumptions to the test.


  (1)The Jetsons. (2015, December 12). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 02:47, December 13, 2015, from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Jetsons&oldid=694864376


Posted on: December 14, 2015 10:50 PM | Permalink

Comments (2)

Please login or join to subscribe to this item
avatar
C Joseph Nower Senior Business Analyst| Hennings and Nower LLC Decatur, In, United States
I see the Project Management process an iterative one. I continue to refine my tools and techniques with each project as I gain more experience. True, I have a set of forms and guidelines that have remained core to my projects over the last 20 years but as each project is producing a new, unique output I continue to find new ways to meet the deliverable.

avatar
Khalid A. Elzairy GM| ECO Consultant Office Elwasta, Bani Sweef, Egypt
thanks for sharing

Please Login/Register to leave a comment.

ADVERTISEMENTS

If you haven't got anything nice to say about anybody, come sit next to me.

- Alice Roosevelt Longworth

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsors