People, Planet, Profits & Projects

Today is celebrated by the Jewish population as Rosh Hashanah, literally, the "head of the year", or New Year.

It is also considered "The Birthday of the World".  This day celebrates the anniversary of the creation of the cosmos and its continuous renewal.  A very "sustainable" thought.

So - happy birthday, Earth!

There's clearly alot to do if we want to keep this "continuous renewal" going.  And although some are "operations" - the way we do things day-to-day, most involve change - and therefore involve PROJECTS.  So they involve us quite directly.   And there are many indications that we have huge problems to overcome when it comes to overconsumption, buildup of greenhouse gases, loss of biodiversity, and so on.

But today is a day to stop and reflect on the positive.  To give ourselves a chance to say, despite all of these things, we have lots to be thankful for and we've come a long way.

And with that we want to wish our Jewish readers a sweet and healthy and happy High Holy Days, a Happy New Year,, and to leave all of our readers of any faith (and any level of faith) with the assignment to consider what is "continuously renewable" in your work and personal lives.

Stay tuned to this blog for more - much more - on what you can do as a project manager. 

Around here, lobsters are sometimes called bugs.  In effect, a lobster is an arthropod, a classification that also includes insects.  But they are really crustaceans, rather than true insects.  Maybe they are called “bugs” because they aren’t pretty, although they may be to some, like their mothers.  Maybe it is because they crawl around the bottom of the ocean, like some mayflies crawl around the bottom of a stream or lake.  Maybe it is those antennae.  Call them bugs or call them lobsters.  Whatever you call them, they may be in trouble.

According to a recent article in our local paper, southern New England lobsters have been experiencing a shell disease that making lobsters look unappealing.  Because of their looks, the lobsters are not saleable in the valuable retail market.  The meat can still be processes and used in the lesser valued lobster meat market.  The “epizootic shell disease”, caused by bacteria, eats away at the lobster’s shell, leaving ugly lesions.  No one likes an ugly bug.  The disease may be spreading northward into the Gulf of Maine, where 123 million pounds were harvested in 2012, and is valued at about $400 million per year.  It is a huge industry in Maine.   The interesting thing is that the disease is primarily a warmer water disease.   Biologist began sampling lobsters in Rhode Island in 1996 and found about 1% of the lobsters affected.  By 1998 that number had jumped to 20% and continues every year after between 18 and 34% peaking in 2011 at 38%.

The disease is less prevalent in the Gulf of Maine’s cooler waters, but there is concern.  It is something to watch, perhaps as another bell weather of the health of our oceans.  Low oxygen levels and rising ocean temperatures are probably contributors to the spread of the disease.  According to the article, discussions with fisherman in Massachusetts indicate that they are seeing more of the diseased lobsters further north.  “Given the sudden increase in shell disease over a short period in southern New England, scientists and regulators have a good reason to be worried”, said Jeffery Shields, a marine science professor at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science.   Professor Shields has been hired to head a project to access some of the diseased lobsters caught off Maine.  Carl Wilson, State of Maine Department of Maine Resource’s lobster biologist says “I think when you have such a high dependence on (a) single fishery, how could you not have concern?  There can be threats to the lobster population that are completely out of the influence of the fisherman, so any change is going to be a concern.”

So it is not only about projects that could arise from identifying issues, like rising ocean temperatures,  but also about being aware, and looking for, the risks that are occurring and connecting the dots.  After all, that, as a project manager, is one of our strong point.  - (Adapted from Disease May Hit Lobster Population, Warmer ocean temperatures cited, by Clarke Canfield, Portsmouth Herald, August 2013.)

The subject of - or rather the question regarding - "what is project success" is fundamental to the evolution of our discipline.

As leaders in the area of sustainability's intersection with PM, we're of course interested in how you - and the rest of your colleagues, as well as your stakeholders, of course, view project success.  It is not as simple as it seems.  It is NOT just about delivering your deliverable, much as you would like it to be.

One simple idea we would like to assert:

Project Success  Project Management Success.

In English: The success of your project is larger (in the largest sense of the word larger) than your success in managing the project.  That is, you could manage a project so that it is within budget, on time, and meets requirements, but also such that the project's product just doesn't cut it.   Alternatively, your project, as assessed by PMBOK(R) Guide criteria, could look like it was produced by the hands of angels, and yet the project's product could fail to deliver benefits to the customers or to the organization, or, yes, we have to add this part, to the planet.  In other words, it would look good on the Gantt chart but not on the (triple) bottom line.

You can actually read about this in the latest edition of PM Network magazine  with an excellent story called "The Value Proposition".

Yet, the many brave authors and thought leaders who have approached this question have come to some important conclusions (like the equation above), but they always seem to come up short in terms of sustainability.  They don't seem to even recognize (until we point it out to them, and then they say "Eureka!") that they are writing about sustainability.

So we thought we'd use a 'green-by-definition' project as an example.

The Tesla Model S is an electric car that has been winning accolades for performance and design.

It's a sleek, sporty, 'muscular' car that makes looking good look good.

But now the Tesla S has just blown away all of its internal-combustion colleagues not in energy efficiency, not in carbon-cutting, nor in looks or acceleration, but in safety.  Safety!  Why?  One reason (there are many): Because unlike a standard gas-fueled engine or even a hybrid, the car does not have a ready source of incendiary liquids to engulf the driver and passengers in flame.

Have a look at these fascinating stories:

Tesla S roof so strong it broke the crush test machine

Upstart Tesla wins top US safety rating

So to our point.

The success of the project "deliver Tesla S" is not limited to the handover to production.  The PROJECT SUCCESS goes on to save lives of Tesla drivers.  Notice how ths type of sustainability is not related to the environment at all.  It's the 'steady-state-ness' of it all that we are aiming at.  This is also sustainability.

Look for some new, improved, expanded, enhanced presentations and materials from EarthPM which will tackle this aspect of sustainability in project management.

An for your own projects: think about the project's deliverable(s) in the steady state.  What lessons can you learn from the Tesla S?

Every once in a while we feel the need to revisit a subject.  It could be because there is new and better information, there is confusing information disseminated that we feel should be clarified, or it is a subject that is very near and dear to our hearts and we want to talk about it.  This post is a little of all of that and it deals with our “rainbow of green” or green spectrum if you will.

We have always asserted that there is a green spectrum that runs the gamut; green by definition -> green by project impact -> green by product impact -> green-general.  From our book, this green spectrum is based on the assertion that “All projects have some element of ‘green’.”  This is one of the more controversial concepts in our book and receives a lot of pushback.   We have expanded our thinking and instead of “green” we now refer to sustainability.  Since we began researching our book in 2007 and publishing it in 2010, the concept of all projects having some element of sustainability has certainly become more important.  More and more organizations are emphasizing sustainability including it in organizational mission/visions.  This can only enforce our original assertion.  How you may ask?

Let’s look at the “rainbow” in some detail.  Sustainability projects by definition are those whose primary function is to directly provide sustainability benefits.  A wind farm is a good example of that type of project.  It involves extensive construction, but its direct benefit is renewable energy.  It is quite easy to see the connection between sustainability and project management.  Whether or not you are managing the project sustainably (I’ll explain that in a minute), you are managing a project whose end product has sustainability benefits.

Projects that impact sustainability of their surroundings are the next category along the rainbow. “It can be argued that every project has an immediate impact on their environment, and that statement would not be wrong.  However, what we are referring to here, are those projects that have an immediate and significant impact on their environment.” Any major road, tunnel, or airport construction, for example, has significant and immediate impact on its surroundings.  Again, there is significant sustainability impact, both positive and negative that needs to be managed with this type of project.

The spectrum message begins to get a little esoteric at the next stage, where the product impacts sustainability.  The main focus is not on sustainability or the project itself, but rather focuses on the “steady-state operation of the end product.”  The example we use in our book is a rather negative one and we always use the caveat that we were not in the room when these decisions were made, so we don’t know what the rationale for the decision was.   However, we can say that as a result of the decision that issues occurred .  Our example is of the single service disposable coffee cup used in some popular brands of coffee makers.  The product (the coffee maker) is excellent, meeting price point, quality and timeline, but the resulting tens of billions of empty single service that are not recyclable or biodegradable and wind up using space in our landfills.

Finally, and this is probably the most obtuse concept, is the end of the rainbow, and really the pot of gold, a project that does not appear to have any sustainability elements, but we assert does.  One example with several elements is a software release.  At the “coding” level, there are ways to make the software more efficient, thereby using less processor power, lending to less overall power usage.  In Harnessing Green IT, Wiley @2012, edited by San Murugesan and G.R. Gangadharan’s the text I use for my Green IT Course, it is stated that “the behaviours of the software has a significant influence on whether the energy-saving features built into a platform (CPU) are effective.  For instance, you could implement a read-ahead buffer methodology and allow optical devices to take breaks rather than continuously spinning the disk.”[i]

One quick note about managing a project sustainably and I will cover this subject in depth in a later post.  There are two elements of a project, the product of the project and the processes used to manage a project.  We all know about time, cost and quality, but there are other ways to make a project sustainably successful, like electronic rather than paper communications.  Again, there is much more to this and I will cover it in a later post, but just wanted to give you an idea of sustainably managing a project as promised above.

Hopefully, I have explained “our” rainbow to you in a little more detail so you can you can then put it in context with other definitions. Let me know what you think.

 Remember, even though it may appear that your project has no element of sustainability, our assertion is it does.  And, whereever you are on the "rainbow," attention to sustainability will lead you to that "pot of gold."

Note: Image above from CapeCod Times article referenced below.

On August 1, 2013, there was an auction to sell rights to 164,000 acres of federal ocean area southwest of Martha’s Vineyard (an Island off the coast of Massachusetts – see map).

The winning bid went to Rhode Island-based developer Deepwater Wind New England LLC, for a total of $3.8 million. This now gives Deepwater Wind the right to develop wind energy projects in the highlighted area.

It’s pretty big news.  From yesterday’s front page story in the Cape Cod Times, there is this quote from US Department of Interior Secretary Sally Jewell:   "When you think about the enormous energy potential that Atlantic wind holds, this is a major milestone for our nation".

Also from that story:

Deepwater Wind plans to build a 200-turbine wind farm on the parcels as well as a transmission system from Long Island to Southeastern New England, company CEO Jeffrey Grybowski said.

The transmission system will allow the company to sell into two regional electrical systems as well as providing those systems with greater reliability and flexibility when moving power around to meet needs, he said.

The 200 turbines the company plans to use — each 6 megawatts — would have a capacity of about 1,200 megawatts and the total cost of the project would be about $5 billion, he said.

The estimated amount of power that would be produced is significantly smaller than the federal government's estimates for the area because Deepwater Wind does not plan to locate any turbines closer than 16 miles from the nearest shoreline, limiting the number of turbines, Grybowski said.

The project could be under construction by 2016 and operational as early as 2017, he said.

We bring this to your attention for several reasons:

1. It’s an example of a “Green By Definition” project (a Program, really, because it is a collection of projects which are better managed together)

·   Our book, Green Project Management, defined projects along a spectrum, from those, like this one, which are geared specifically on renewable energy, saving species, reducing waste, and so on.  We like to illustrate that as projects at various points along the spectrum make news.

2. The project already seems to have incorporated ‘lessons learned’ from its neighboring and pioneering wind project, Cape Wind, about which we have blogged many times before.

·   Cape Wind, a 130-turbine project, has been greatly delayed for several reasons, one of which has been its closer proximity to the shore (though still in Nantucket Sound), and its conflict with a slew of stakeholders who have worked together in unexpected ways to delay the project.

3. From a very early review, and from admittedly limited information, the project team seems to have identified and analyzed stakeholders and seems to ready to deal with the risks (both threat and opportunity) that each brings to the table.

·   From the story: The Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) still has concerns about offshore wind energy projects, said the tribe's historic preservation officer, Bettina Washington.  "Now this is off where we live day to day all the time," she said about the leasing area's location southwest of the Gay Head Cliffs at the heart of the tribe's lands.  In addition to concerns about the view from tribal lands, there are concerns about the impact on whales that use the area and on potential archaeological sites located on and below the sea floor, Washington said.  Deepwater Wind officials have already been in contact with the tribe about a five-turbine project the company is planning off the coast of Block Island and would work with the tribe on any concerns it continues to have, Grybowski said.  "They're a hugely important stakeholder in the process," he said.  Although the tribe would prefer the turbines be located at least 21 miles offshore, Washington said archaeological concerns are being taken more seriously following the debate over Cape Wind and the areas farther offshore are preferable to Nantucket Sound.

As you can see, Grybowski and Deepwater Wind have done at least some of their PM homework.  And that’s important.  1,000,000 homeowners may be soon counting on this program if they’re going to be able to reliably click on their TV sets to watch the Red Sox!

For a press release from Deepwater Wind, click on their logo below.