Managing for Humpty Dumpty Risk

So this was interesting...

I was in a meeting and someone was discussing the risks involved in a project.

And they mentioned the Humpty Dumpty Effect.

A bunch of people looked at them like what's that. 

Then they explained that it's the risk of breaking something during the project. 

Sort of like the Hippocratic Oath that doctors take to, "first, do no harm."

When we are planning, designing, building or implementing a project--be it information technology or something else--we don't want to break something in the process. 

That's the Humpty Dumpty Risk to beware of and it's an egg-celent point! ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Managing for Humpty Dumpty Risk

What's With All The Finger-pointing

Have you ever seen someone point fingers at the next guy/gal (a classmate, neighbor, co-worker, or even family and friends)?

It's the blame game, the one-upmanship, the I'm golden and your mud way of doing business--can you really push that knife in any further?

And whatever finger your pointing, frankly it might as well be your middle finger in terms of the message you are sending. 

The old saying is that when you point fingers at others, there are three fingers pointing back at you--try it with your hand now and see what I mean.

Getting the job done--means working collaboratively and cohesively--we all contribute from our unique perspectives and skills sets. 

It's synergy where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, rather than I think I'll take all the darn credit--hey, I really do deserve it (in my own mind anyway)! 

Really, it's not who did what to whom, but who helped whom and giving credit amply all around.

Ultimately, when we work together, we are strong, and when we point fingers at each other, it's because we are weak, and we are weakening our relationships and the organization. 

The only time to point a finger, for real, is when you are gesturing to the Heaven, where all blessings come and from whom we are all created in His image. 

Otherwise, keep your fingers to yourself unless your fixing something that's broke. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

What's With All The Finger-pointing

Good IT Gone Bad

So over and over again, good IT goes bad in a flawed decision-making process. 

Even with the best laid plans and governance processes in place, somehow decisions get politicized, go bad, and projects fail. 

Here are some of the popular reasons why this happens:

1) Someone has something to prove - Often their is a person incoming to power who wants to show off what they can do. Instead of focusing on what is best for the organization's mission and people, they put themselves first. IT becomes not a tool for efficiency and effectiveness, but rather as some project rushed through for someone's resume and narcissist career progression. Time to add another notch on your IT belt!

2) Someone used it, saw it, or heard of it someplace else - So why follow a structured decision-making and vetting process for new technology, when Joe Schmoe already has the answer of what we can use and what we should do. Perhaps, Joe Schmoe used the technology in another place and for another reason, but that's what he knows and instantaneously, he's the maven, subject matter expert. Or maybe, Joe Schmoe attended a vendor conference or read a trade mag on the airplane and now he is guess what, the all-knowing on the topic. Get ready to pull out your wallets to pay for the wrong thing for your needs and organization, but it's okay becuase Joe Schmoe assured you it's great!

3) Someone wants to use technology like a Swiss army utility knife - Let's just buy this amazing tool; it can slice, dice, chop, mince, or Julienne; actually there is nothing this IT tool can't do. Buy it and use it for all your technology projects and needs. Why buy specialized tools, when you can have one that does everything--it will be your data warehouse, cloud provider, handle all your transactions, and be your artificial intelligence all in one.  Don't worry about the complexity, integration, training, support or how good it does any specific thing--just trust us!

In general, it shouldn't be so easy for leadership to get sold and fooled by the wrong people with the wrong agendas. Yet, these things seem to take off like a speeding locomotive, and if anyone tries to step in front of it, career splat for some unfortunate well-meaning character!

Some leaders and organizations only seem to learn by making the same IT mistakes again and again--it's costly to their mission and to their stakeholders, but someone is making out like a bandit and it's on their dime. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Good IT Gone Bad

On the Lookout To Managing Risk

So risk management is one of the most important skills for leadership. 

Risk is a function of threats, vulnerabilities, probabilities, and countermeasures. 

If we don't manage risk by mitigating it, avoiding it, accepting it, or transferring it, we "risk" being overcome by the potentially catastrophic losses from it.

My father used to teach me when it comes to managing the risks in this world that "You can't have enough eyes!"

And that, "If you don't open your eyes, you open your wallet."

This is a truly good sound advice when it comes to risk management and I still follow it today. 

Essentially, it is always critical to have a backup or backout plan for contingencies.

Plan A, B, and C keeps us from being left in the proverbial dark when faced with challenge and crisis. 

In enterprise architecture, I often teach of how if you fail to plan, you might as well plan to fail. 

This is truth--so keep your eyes wide open and manage risks and not just hide your head in the sand of endless and foolhardy optimism for dummies. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

On the Lookout To Managing Risk

What Is The Creative Process and Success?

One of my colleagues at work had this hanging on his wall. 

It caught my eye and I thought it was worth sharing.

The creative process (ah, not my style of working, however--I am too much of a planner and worrier): 

1) Work Begins - It starts with, "I have a bright idea" or a "go do" from some other genius. 

2) F*ck Off - Then comes some procrastination and maybe thought process about what you are going to do, but in the meantime, everyone leave me alone to percolate and brew. 

3) Panic - Of sh*t, time is running out, and where the h*ck am I on this project, better get my a*s in gear. 

4) All the work while crying - Hurry, hurry, hurry and get it done. Wa, I feel like such a crybaby and wreck, but I'm going to finish it, I am. 

5) Deadline - Made it by a hair...uh, the whole thing was easy, for me, as pie!

Another thing that I heard this week is that "success is failing to fail."  

Think about that a minute.  ;-)

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Toothpaste for Dinner)

What Is The Creative Process and Success?

Standing Down

So there is a funny term used in government, which is to "Stand down."

Basically, it comes from the military where it has traditionally been used to denote relaxing (or "at ease") after a prior state of alert or readiness.

Since then it has become more broadly adopted to mean abruptly ceasing activity--and usually even all further discussion--on something. 

For example, if someone is working on a project, task, or issue, but you want them to completely halt all activities on this, you may tell them to stand down.

This happens when something, usually significant, has changed or the activity has become OBE (another military term for Overcome By Events).

Basically, something has unexpectedly transpired and the strategy and orders have now changed (maybe a complete 180). 

Often, someone up the chain has put the kabbash on whatever it was.

Either way, you go from a full-on sprint to a complete halt and you might as well stand on your head for all anyone cares, because the run to the finish line, on this matter at least, is over now. 

Standing down is very different from standing up--but you aren't sitting down either. 

Sitting would imply doing nothing at all, while standing down implies you do something else instead--like move on in the meantime to your next order of priority business. 

Still standing down, because of it's abruptness and completeness is a big deal--and when everything and everyone was prior in motion like a moving freight train--and someone now stands in front of it and yells "All stop!"--the rest of the train cars, all the way to caboose, can essentially ram right up into the butt of the engine causing a real mess of things (productivity-wise and from a morale perspective). 

So now everyone untangle yourself and "calm the h*ll down"--there's a new sheriff in town or new way ahead and you better get your standing down under control and stop doing whatever it is you were doing, okay there sonny boy? ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Standing Down

Making The Deadline

It was funny at work recently.

The team was having some "technical difficulties" getting something done. 

It wasn't like it wasn't going to happen, it was just taking a little longer than expected. 

I was riding herd on this, since we had made a commitment to get it done by a certain date and time and it was important to get it right. 

After a number of delays, I started to question whether we were really going to be able to meet the deadline, and one of my colleagues asks about how the boss will react if we don't make it. 

Then all of a sudden, they blurt out, "Is he going to sh*t a brick if we don't make it?"

I was a little taken aback at the saying, but then it was sort of a funny image of the extreme kvetchy face a person would be making in such a situation--trying to pass not a (little) stone, but literally a big brick. 

As it turns out, we made the deadline--although we had to use the buffer time we had carefully built in--and the team did a great job, so no bricks, no stones, and just kudos all around. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Making The Deadline

Enterprise Architecture - Make The Leap

Another good depiction of enterprise architecture.

What we are, the divide, and what we want to be.

We have to make the leap, but only with good planning and decision-making governance. 

Otherwise, it's a long fall down the project failure abyss. 

Faith is always important, but so it doing your credible part. ;-)

(Source Photo: Via Instagram)

Enterprise Architecture - Make The Leap

Measured {Leadership + Management} + Staff = Success!

So I heard from a colleague this week an argument about:

Too much leadership dilutes good management. 

AND [similarly]

Too much management dilutes good leadership.

What is this a tug of war (without the showy skirts please!)?

Or 

Can you ever have too much of a good thing? 

Typically, leaders provide the vision and managers the execution.

I don't see how it is really possible to have one without the other and have anything useful at the end of the day.

A vision without delivered execution is just another big idea.

And

Execution without a meaningful vision is just chasing your tail.

Too much leadership with grandiose vision after vision overwhelms the ability to manage a successful execution.

Too much management of the devils-in-the-details and even the best leadership vision isn't going to see the light of day.

So the conclusion:

Great leaders need to set the goal posts high but doable and then get out of the way so that talented managers can make sure to get the job done and done right.

And don't forget that it's a diverse and skilled staff that actually does the heavy lifting and need to be respected and appreciated.

Tug of war over! ;-)

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Jamie McCaffrey)

Measured {Leadership + Management} + Staff = Success!

Requirements, I Don't Know

This was a funny cartoon. 

Who are we?  

Clients!

What do we want?

We don't know!

When do we want it?

Now!

This is like way to many IT projects...

The customer knows they need to do something, because of changing market conditions, internal (dys)functioning, arising competition, or external mandates and regulations. 

But when the IT project managers and business analysts interview and ask the customer what they want and need to address these...quite often they get blank faces and hands raised in circuitous, endless doubt. 

What do the customers really want?

For IT to define, solve, and make their problems go away--and by the way do it yesterday and without any extra / proportionate resources. 

For some IT "professionals" that may be a little lacking themselves, you end up getting half-assed solutions to half-baked requirements that accomplish nothing or perhaps even break things more.

Hence, the true miracle of technology--to read minds and deliver valuable solutions to problems that no one could fully define to begin with! ;-)

(Source Cartoon: Roz Blumenthal @Facebook)

Requirements, I Don't Know

It's All In The Execution, Baby!

I took this photo on the left yesterday (while the one on the right is from a CD music set).

This lady was wearing this gorgeous shirt.

The words: "Hope, Progress, Change, Action. Yes we can Believe."

Aroud it were the tie-dye colors emanating like the sun,

It is very inspiring!

I was reminded of a similar 1960's slogan of "Peace, Love, and Rock & Roll."

Also good stuff and especially with the cool VW brightly painted minivan--who doesn't want that?

We all want great things from life.

The key is getting us from idea to execution.

Maybe not such a little thing, but that's what life is all about! ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

It's All In The Execution, Baby!

Better Early Than Never

So I learned a new word/concept today...PREcrastination (New York Times)

It's when you do things early!

The better known opposite word is PROcrastintion.

That's when you put things off or delay...often until the very last minute.

We know why people procrastinate--they don't want or like to do something, have more important things to do, may be overwhelmed with too many taskers, or perhaps they are just plain lazy. 

But why do people precrastinate?

Well, it's sort of the inverse of the above--they may like doing it, it may be a priority, or they just may want to get "ahead of the curve" on all the things they have on their to-dos, or they may be a Type A personality and don't rest until they've "got a handle on things."

Getting things done at the last minute (procrastination), can push off stress until later--perhaps a better time to deal with it, but getting it done early (precrastination), can help eliminate stress by just getting it over with. 

Some of us who get things done right away, may be doing extra work, because at times, the necessity of the moment is "overcome by events" (OBE) later on or we may start something before we even have all the directions or information and do it wrong altogether. 

While others who dilly-dally, may find that they waited too long to get the job done or have other things going on later that precludes them from meeting the timeline--as they say, "if you fail to plan, plan to fail!"

Is there a right or wrong in terms of Pre/Procrastination?

I want to tell you now, but I think I'll wait until later. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Better Early Than Never

Slow, Smooth, Fast

A colleague told me a good saying from the Navy Seals. 

"Slow is smooth, and smooth is fast."

The idea is that when we slow down and practice diligently, we give ourselves time and space to heal and to work to perfect our technique, so then when we need to execute, we can do it fast and flawlessly. 

Embedded in this concept is that we do things right the first time, and eliminate risk and having to do them needlessly again...slow down and nail it!

In martial arts and other physical disciplines, this concept is honed by practicing in "motion study" and then "exploding" dynamically in executing upon the enemy. 

Slow, Smooth, Fast--practice makes (near) perfect. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Slow, Smooth, Fast

A Different Definition For IV&V

In IT circles, IV&V generally refers to Independent Verification and Validation, but for CIOs another important definition for leading is Independent Views and Voices.

Please read my new article on this: here at Government Technology -- hope you enjoy it.

Andy

(Source Photo: here with attribution to Joi)

A Different Definition For IV&V

Don't Let Debbie Downer Take You Down

Saturday Night Live has a spoof about Negative Nellie's and they call her Debbie Downer. 

We all know people like this who are the Voice of Doom and the Doctor No's.

Whatever the topic is--they've been there, done it, and have seen it fail--"We tried that before," "That's not the way we do things here," "You just don't understand," "It will never work."

They see danger and bad everywhere and in everything, even in the face of positive and promise. 

These are the people who are obstinate, the naysayers, and are against change at all cost--they fear it or just don't want to deal with it. 

BusinessWeek has an interesting perspective on this--how even these people can be employed to have a beneficial impact on projects--by having them tell you everything that can go wrong, so you can take steps to plan and mitigate against these. 

Some people only want to have positive people around them--"yes men," who only tell them how smart and right they are all the time. 

However, the best leaders don't want kiss ups and brown nosers, but rather value"truth tellers," who will provide them solid advice and guidance on issues, tell them when they think something is wrong or risky, and even take an opposing point of view or play devil's advocate.

I remember when I was asked about whether a certain project was going to meet a very near deadline, and I said point blank, "Do you want me just to say yes or do you want me to tell you the truth?"

I got a big smile to that and the appreciation that I was real and truthful and there to make a difference and not just be another lump on the log. 

The point is not to be a Debbie Downer or a brown noser, but to be an Honest Joe or Jane. ;-)

Don't Let Debbie Downer Take You Down

Many For The Price Of One

We were at the movie theater over the weekend and something funny happened when we went up to the counter to get our tickets.

I ask my wife if she also wants anything to eat like popcorn etc.

She says yes, and I ask the lady behind the counter where the tickets and snacks are sold for some popcorn to ring up.

She points to the next register and says "You need to get the snacks over there" (pointing about one feet over to the left). 

I look at my wife like, okay and we pay for the tickets.

Then, we waddles over to the empty counter a foot over and wait for someone to help with the popcorn. 

Well the lady who just sold us the movie tickets waddles over as well and says, "Can I help you?"

We almost cracked up laughing. 

I said, "Yes, we would like some popcorn, please."

She says, "Sure," and proceeds to get the popcorn and we pay again.

What was hilarious was the lady selling the tickets redirected us to the counter over for the popcorn, where she in turn did the proverbial, changing of the hats, and then after selling us the tickets served us up the popcorn as well. 

It reminded me of a TV episode I saw a kid where some people visit a small town and stop at the Sheriff to ask where the local inn is. The Sheriff points them down the street. Then the people go into the inn and there is the Sheriff again, but this time wearing the innkeeper's visor. After checking in, the people ask where the town pub is and then stroll over across the way. They walk up to the bar, and the bartender turns around, and sure enough it's the Sheriff/innkeeper now with a servers smock on and asks what they would like to drink.

I may not be remembering the episode completely accurately, but you get the point. 

In a small town or an organization where people have to multitask, one person can play many different roles. 

That's why very often management in interested in good employees who can "walk and chew gum at the same time"--employees need to be able to perform under pressure to get many projects and tasks done, simultaneously, and they very often need to assume multiple roles and responsibilities to get that done. 

Pointing the finger at someone else saying not my job or the ball is in their court is no longer an excuse not to get things done. We have to shepherd the project all the way through the many leaps and hurdles that may stand in the way of progress. 

When people have to perform multiple roles and jobs--due to time constraints, cost cutting, or shortage of trained and talented people--then they may have to change hats many times over the course of their day and week. 

The Atlantic (5 July 2013) in an article about performing head transplants--yeah, an Italian surgeon believes this is now possible--retells an Indian folk tale called The Transposed Heads.

Two men behead themselves, and their heads are magically reattached, but to the other person's body. The clincher is that the wife of one of the men doesn't know which man to take as her husband--"the head or the heart."

It's a fascinating dilemma--what makes a person who they are--their thoughts (i.e. brain) or their feelings (i.e. heart).   

Similarly, when a person performs multiple roles at home, work, and in the community--who are they really? Which role is them--at the core?

We tend to like doing one or some things better than others, but does what we like doing mean that is who we are?  Maybe doing the things we don't like that challenge us to grow is what we need to be doing? 

Like the lady in the movie theater--one moment she was the ticket master and the next the concessions attendant--both were her jobs.

We too are made up of multiple and complex roles and identities--we are head and heart--and all the things they drive us to do in between. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Many For The Price Of One

When Requirements Go Awry

You may have seen this before--it is a great comic strip on how requirements can go awry. 

When you look at how product or service requirements look from each person's vantage point, it is easy to see how they can be misunderstand, misinterpreted, or misrepresented. 

Getting clarity of the tire swing before we start can save a lot of wasted time, effort, and money on building contraptions that no one wanted or needs. 

Get the business and technical requirements spelled out in as much detail as possible from all parties; document, document, document; and have the customer approval and sign off on these. 

Build to specification, on time, and within budget and make sure it meets the operational mission needs and strategic vision of the organization. 

(Source Photo: here with attribution to tamingdata.com)

When Requirements Go Awry

Is Bureaucracy Just Another Word For Governance?

Fascinating opinion piece by Fisman and Sullivan in the Wall Street Journal on Friday (15 March 2013) called "The Unsung Beauty of Bureaucracy."

The authors argue that bureaucratic rules and regulations serve important purposes in that while "less good stuff gets done--but it also puts a check on the kinds of initiatives that can lead to catastrophe."

And they give numerous examples of industries that perform sensitive functions that you would want to actually take some extra time to make sure they get it right.

A vary basic example given was the company Graco that makes infant car seat and strollers; they have five design phases and hundreds of tests that add up to two years to product development, but who would rationally argue against such quality controls processes to protect our children.

They make another good point, we always here about bureaucracy slowing the innovation and product development down, but what about the "bad ideas that were quashed as a result of the same rules?"

We all rail against having to jump through hoops to get things done and rightfully so. The mission is important, time is of the essence, and resources are limited--last thing anyone wants is to be told you have x process that must be followed, y gates to get through, z signatures to obtain--and that's just for the routine stuff! :-)

But as much as we hate to be slowed down to cross the t's and dot the i's, often that's just what we really need--to make sure we don't do anything half-a*sed, stupid, or jut plain reckless.

One mistake in an operational environment can bring things to a standstill for thousands, in a system it can have a dominos effect taking down others, and in product development it can bring deadly consequences to consumers, and so on. 

So putting up some "bureaucratic" hurdles that ensure good governance may be well worth its weight in gold. 

Frankly, I don't like the word bureaucracy because to me it means senseless rules and regulations, but good governance is not that.

We need to stop and think about what we are doing--sometimes even long and hard and this is difficult in a fast-paced market--but like a race car taking the turn too fast that ends up in a fiery heap--stopped not by their steady pacing, but by the retaining wall protecting the crowds from their folly.

One other thing the author state that I liked was their pointing out the government which is involved in so many life and death matters needs to maintain some heightened-level of governance (I'll use my word), to get the food supplies safe and the terrorists out.

From clear requirements to careful test plans, we need to ensure we know what we are doing and that it will work. 

At the same time, showing up after the party is over serves no purpose.

Like all things in an adult world, balance is critical to achieving anything real. ;-)

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

Is Bureaucracy Just Another Word For Governance?

SDLC On Target

I found this great white paper by PM Solutions (2003) called "Selecting a Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) Methodology."

The paper describes and nicely diagrams out the various SDLC frameworks:

- Waterfall
- Incremental
- Iterative
- Spiral
- RAD
- Agile

It also provides a chart of the advantages and disadvantages of each framework. 

Finally, there is a simple decision cube (D3) based on time horizon, budget, and functionality for selecting an SDLC framework. 

This is a very useful and practical analysis for implementing SDLC, and it aligns closely with the guidance from the National Institute of Science and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800-64, "Security Considerations in the Systems Development Life Cycle" Appendix E that states:

"The expected size and complexity of the system, the development schedule, and the anticipated length of a system's life may affect the choice of which SDLC model to use."

While NIST focuses on the time horizon and complexity versus the PM Solutions Decision Cube that uses time horizon, budget, and functionality, the notion of tailoring SDLC to the project is both consistent and valuable. 

Just one more resource that I found particularly good is the Department of Labor IT Project Management guidance (2002)--it is a best practice from the Federal CIO website.

I like how it integrates SDLC, IT Project Management, IT Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC), and security and privacy into a cohesive guide. 

It also establishes project "thresholds" to differentiate larger or more significant projects with greater impact from others and calls these out for "more intensive review."

Even though these these resources are around a decade old, to me they are classic (in a good sense) and remain relevant and useful to developing systems that are on target.

(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)

SDLC On Target

Can't Live With Them, Can't Live Without Them

I remember years ago, my father used to joke about my mother (who occasionally got on his nerves :-): "you can't live with them, and you can't live without them."

Following the frequently dismal state of IT project performance generally, I'm beginning to think that way about technology projects.

On one hand, technology represents innovation, automation, and the latest advances in engineering and science--and we cannot live without it--it is our future!

On the other hand, the continuing poor track record of IT project delivery is such that we cannot live with it--they are often highly risky and costly:

• In 2009, the Standish Group reported that 68% of IT projects were failing or seriously challenged--over schedule, behind budget, and not meeting customer requirements.


• Most recently, according to Harvard Business Review (September 2011), IT projects are again highlighted as "riskier than you think." Despite efforts to rein in IT projects, "New research shows surprisingly high numbers of out-of-control tech projects--ones that can sink entire companies and careers."


• Numerous high profile companies with such deeply problematic IT projects are mentioned, including: Levi Strauss, Hershey's, Kmart, Airbus, and more.


• The study found that "Fully one in six of the projects we studied [1,471 were examined] was a black swan, with a cost overrun of 200% on average, and a schedule overrun of almost 70%."


• In other words there is a "fat tail" to IT project failure. "It's not that they're particularly prone to high cost overruns on average...[rather] an unusually large proportion of them incur massive overages--that is, there are a disproportionate number of black swans."


• Unfortunately, as the authors state: "these numbers seems comfortably improbable, but...they apply with uncomfortable frequency."

In recent years, the discipline of project management and the technique of earned value management have been in vogue to better manage and control runaway IT projects.
At the federal government level, implementation of such tools as the Federal IT Dashboard for transparency and TechStats for ensuring accountability have course-corrected or terminated more than $3 billion in underperforming IT projects.
Technology projects, as R&D endeavors, come with inherent risk. Yet even if the technical aspect is successful, the human factors are likely to get in the way. In fact, they may be the ultimate IT "project killers"--organizational politics, technology adoption, change management, knowledge management, etc.

Going forward, I see the solution as two-pronged:

• On the one hand we must focus on enhancing pure project management, performance measurement, architecture and governance, and so on.


• At the same time, we also need to add more emphasis on people (our human capital)--ensuring that everyone is fully trained, motivated, empowered and has ownership. This is challenging considering that our people are very much at a breaking point with all the work-related stress they are facing.

These days organizations face numerous challenges that can be daunting. These range from the rapid pace of change, the cutthroat global competition at our doorsteps, a failing education system, spiraling high unemployment, and mounting deficits. All can be helped through technology, but for this to happen we must have the project management infrastructure and the human factors in place to make it work.

If our technology is to bring us the next great breakthrough, we must help our people to deliver it collaboratively.

The pressure is on--we can't live with it and we cannot live without it. IT project failures are a people problem as much as a technology problem. However, once we confront it as such, I believe that we can expect the metrics on failed IT projects to change significantly to success.

(Source Photo: here)

Can't Live With Them, Can't Live Without Them