I Think I’ll Write A PM Novel

 

Let me state right up front that I believe that the use of fictionalizing an idea from the sciences – especially and particularly the Management Sciences – is disingenuous. My first encounter with this approach to selling a supposedly scientific hypothesis or theory was when I read Walden Two (Hackett Publishing Company, 1948), by B. F. Skinner. Skinner, of course, was one of the seminal and most persuasive drivers behind the psychological theory of Behaviorism. How big was Behaviorism? According to VeryWellMind.com, “From about 1920 through the mid-1950s, behaviorism became the dominant school of thought in psychology.”[i] In Walden Two, a rural community has been established, with its internal governance based in Behaviorism. And, of course, this community thrives.

Eliyahu Goldratt took a similar approach to introducing the notion of “Critical Chain” Project Management with the publishing of his novel The Critical Chain (North River Press, 1997). Based on the Theory of Constraints, Goldratt’s characters engage in dialogue to lay out the various ideas that make up Critical Chain PM, mostly in a university setting. And wouldn’t you just know it? Those ideas effect successful outcomes in the real world (“real world” here being the difference between the fictionalized university and the fictionalized company where these ideas are implemented).

Compare and contrast this approach to what Waterman and Peters did in In Search of Excellence (Harper Business Essentials, 1982). They went to (then) successful companies, and noted what these companies did differently. No made-up characters, places, or events. This is the way Management Science is advanced. Not through untested suppositions looking for some organization with a claim to success that appears to be working its structure, and certainly not by a prefabricated hypothesis being set in a fictionalized place and time.

I can already hear GTIM Nation challenge “Michael! If you’re so against fictionalizing management science concepts, how do you explain Stanly T. Raspberry?” For the newer members of GTIM Nation, Stanly T. Raspberry is a fictional private detective that receives requests to investigate “cases” of egregious Project Management malfeasance. I introduced him back when I was writing my PMNetwork column, The Variance Threshold, and he has made several appearances in GTIM. The difference here, though, is that I’m clearly not expecting anybody to take ol’ Stanly seriously. The entire franchise started with a column entitled “Really Bad Management Writing,” and I’ve been using it as a device to mock both the fictionalization of management science ideas as well as some of the practices that I found to be, well, egregious.

However, there’s no denying the effectiveness of introducing a management hypothesis in a fictionalized setting, having that introduction and implementation proceed smoothly in the fictional organization, and the realization of the solution to long-existing problems leading to clear success. There’s even a Goldratt Institute, with points of contact in the United States, Malaysia, and Japan.[ii] This being the case, I can’t help but to wonder what would happen if I were to admit the efficacy of the PM-science-in-a-novel approach, dial down my loathing of that particular device, and write a novel about some aspect of PM that I believe is underappreciated (like Earned Value Management Systems’ ability to accurately forecast cost and duration Estimates at Completion) coming to the rescue of a fictionalized company or organization beset with rival information streams that are basically flim-flammery. The main problem with writing such a novel is … finding a truly underappreciated PM theory? No, that part is easy. The “theory” being pushed doesn’t even need to be valid, since, in fiction, the outcome is always in the novelist’s head. What is needed is an original situation for the underappreciated PM theory to work on as some sort of talisman, since the long-standing and familiar issues with macro-PM theory, like the optimal role of the PMO in setting guidance, or the level of robustness called for in a given organization, will never have a clearly articulatable theory that’s widely applicable. The central conflict/plot driving device here must be fresh somehow, like what PMs in charge of human-like androids face in their work that’s somehow applicable to what, say, capital projects and construction PMs encounter.

So, before anybody beats me to it, I think I’ll write a novel about a young, brilliant PM named “Michael,” who has been put in charge of a line of human-like androids, and has brought with him an appropriate recognition of an EVMS’ ability to accurately forecast at-completion costs and durations. He is opposed by risk managers (no initial caps) and accountants who stand to lose their corporate standing if Michael successfully brings in his scope on-time, on-budget, completely without their “help.” Then, I’ll reveal at the climax that the risk managers and accountants are actually androids themselves, from an earlier line that was discontinued due to their overly robotic, template-driven approach to PM. If real-life risk managers and accountants object, I’ll reply “It’s only fiction! Didn’t you see the whole “any resemblance to actual persons…” bit in the Introduction?
Also, I’m going to want exclusive rights to the action figure version of Michael.

[i] Retrieved from https://www.verywellmind.com/behavioral-psychology-4157183 on May 17, 2023, 20:10 MDT.

[ii] Retrieved from https://www.goldratt.com/contact , on May 20, 2023, 13:52 MDT.