Project Management

Perry Mason’s Initials Are “PM”

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  


My oldest son graduated Magna Cum Laude from a fairly prestigious law school, and works as a prosecutor. On those occasions when he visits home and gets into conversations with me, I sometimes like to tweak him by deliberately mis-using legal terms when I want to take exception to an assertion he’s made. A recent example went like this:

“Objection, your honor! Facts not entered as evidence!”

“You realize” he replied, “that what you just said is almost literally gibberish.”

“Not according to the television law shows I’ve seen.”

“Then you need to watch a higher caliber of law show.”

Later, when talking about that exchange with my wife, I admitted that I should stop doing that, lest I increase the odds of my son skipping trips back home in order to avoid such face-palm moments. But I hastened to add that, if there were television shows about Project Management (similar to “Law & Order,” would ours be “Cost & Schedule?”), and some of the terms we use on a regular basis were to seep into the common lexicon, I would be more tolerant of their modified, hipster connotations than our legal professional counterparts.

And then, almost as those words were leaving my mouth, I realized that they were utterly false.

In fact, it drives my face directly into my palm when I hear project managers misuse terms with which they should be completely familiar. It’s particularly cringe-worthy when the speaker has some sort of PM certification. A quick list includes the following. NOTE: all of these are actual quotes that I have heard in my time in PM.

“This task is too important to not be on the critical path.”  While not almost literally gibberish, it is extremely goofy, as any entry-level scheduler can tell you. Whether or not a task in a schedule network appears on the critical path has nothing whatsoever to do with its profile, or perceived “importance.” Its presence on the critical path is solely determined by its duration and schedule logic (e.g., which tasks have to be completed before others can begin). Now, I will concede that, once a CPM-capable software package has performed the forward and backward passes on the schedule network, and has identified the critical path, your typical PM will place more importance on the performance of the activities that are on it. But to assume that high-profile or perceived-to-be important tasks must therefore be on the critical path is a sure sign that the person who is asserting so has no idea what they’re talking about.

“There’s an 80% confidence interval that this project will not exceed (N) dollars.” Yeah, and there’s a 100% confidence interval that the person or persons who have performed the “analysis” that supports such an absurd position have absolutely no way of knowing that for certain. How do risk managers and analysts come up with the 80% confidence interval figure? Typically, it’s based on the following data points:

  • Original estimate, in both cost and duration (at the level of the Work Breakdown Structure where the analysis occurs),
  • Estimates of the odds of the task experiencing unplanned events,
  • Estimates of the impact that such events may have,
  • A calculation of the odds of occurrence, multiplied by the estimated impact, and then subtracted from the original budget in order to isolate the cost or schedule contingency amount.
  • If a Monte Carlo analysis in used, the risk analysts will also pre-select a type of leaning-bell curve with which the artificially-generated “events” should conform. (Did I mention that the result, represented graphically, of the artificially- [or “randomly- “] generated events, is pre-selected?)

Okay, so what’s wrong with all this? Consider the steps, in order:

  • Subjective data.
  • Highly subjective data.
  • Obscenely subjective data (can we even really call it “data”?)
  • Statistical analysis of obscenely subjective data.
  • Further analysis of obscenely subjective data, where the results are already established.

Need I say more?

“We’ve spent more than we budgeted for the month, so we have a negative cost variance.”

I can’t even.

So, if you hear these phrases spoken aloud, and it’s not a case of a father exercising his right to irk his children, you will know that the speaker is not an authentic project manager.

Or else he just needs to watch a higher caliber of PM shows.

 


Posted on: July 31, 2017 10:24 PM | Permalink

Comments (7)

Please login or join to subscribe to this item
avatar
Sante Delle-Vergini, PhD Senior Project Manager| Infosys Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
I agree with most of the article, however step 1, while usually subjective at the "original estimate" stage, is not always so at the final estimate stage. Also, I'm not sure if you are suggesting to abolish probability ratings for projects (so why not abolish them for risks too since they are subjective in qualitative risk analysis), or if you are suggesting that someone stating "80% confidence level" should perhaps say it in another way. Perhaps start with "Subjectively speaking..."? I too have heard some crazy statements from certified PM's, so I understand where you are coming from. However, they are still "authentic project managers", just not 100% infallible ones. I'm yet to meet one of those.

avatar
Stéphane Parent Self Employed / Semi-retired| Leader Maker Prince Edward Island, Canada
The one that gets me is "project plan". I know most of the time they are referring to a project schedule. A plan is so much more than just a schedule.

avatar
Sante Delle-Vergini, PhD Senior Project Manager| Infosys Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
So true, actually my first dealings with projects a couple of decades ago, I was guilty of the same thing

avatar
Vincent Guerard Coach - Trainer - Speaker - Advisor| Freelance Mont-Royal, Quebec, Canada
I can remember many poor use of expression.
I have to disagree with your P80 comments, that is highly subjective affirmation by putting all in the same bag. Some industry have data that give you sound data. Some company have historical data that can be use and relying on a group of experience/expert people can make the evaluation valuable. It is like the evaluation of Flood Zone, not perfect. Many place in Canada where flooded this year in Zones consider safe like 50 years. Like any statistical analysis it is relatively good over time.


avatar
Eduin Fernando Valdes Alvarado Project Manager| F y F Fabricamos Futuro Villavicencio, Meta, Colombia
Very interesting to know about these topics, and the contribution of all, thanks Michael.

avatar
Eduin Fernando Valdes Alvarado Project Manager| F y F Fabricamos Futuro Villavicencio, Meta, Colombia
Very interesting to know about these topics, and the contribution of all, thanks Michael.

avatar
RAJESH K L Project Manager, PMP| Bharat Electronics, Bengaluru, India Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
Interesting to see such happenings with perceptions

Please Login/Register to leave a comment.

ADVERTISEMENTS

"Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh."

- George Bernard Shaw

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsors