Working Up

by Dwayne Phillips

Some people don’t know what they want until they see it. This can be agonizing for those of us who decide what we want and then do it. There is a way for the two of us to work together.

The conversation usually proceeds like this:

• Me: You tell me what you want, and I will write it.
• Other: Great! Write this.
• Me: I write this, I bring it back to the other person.
• Other: Hmmmm, write something else.
• Repeat a few dozen times.

I find at least two possibilities here (we’ll only cover two today).

(1) This is the “bring me a rock” game.

Bring me a rock proceeds something like this:

• Other: Bring me a rock.
• Me: Run outside, pick up a rock, bring it back.
• Other: Not that one.
• Repeat a few hundred times.

Bring me a rock is a complete waste of time. If this is the case, quit. Go somewhere else and do something of value.

(2) Maybe the other person doesn’t yet know what he wants.

The other person is trying to discover what he wants. He is proceeding sincerely and with all good intentions. The concept, however, has yet to form in his mind.

When viewed quickly from the outside, these two situations look the same. That is the frustrating part. It all looks like a silly game, and if you are the person writing pieces that seem like fetching rocks, you just want to quit.

A piece of advice: ask.

Ask if this is situation (1) or situation (2). Most of the time, it is situation (2) and the other person has never heard of situation (1) let alone imagined that they were playing bring me a rock.

There are less time-consuming activities that can help a person see what they want. Sketches on white boards, outlines, and conversations are a few. Regardless of the technique employed, once the other person realizes that situation (1) and (2) exist and  you realize that the other person is proceeding sincerely and with all good intentions, things tend to work well.

by Dwayne Phillips

The Technology Imperative states that if a new technology exists, we need it. Logic and business school lessons don’t matter.

It happened again this week. I was visiting someone at their office in another building. The man I was visiting was slouched over in his chair with a face that asked, “Why did I come to work this morning?”

He was talking to a co-worker whose smile read, “Please Uncle Charlie, can we get some ice cream?”

The co-worker wanted my friend, who has purchasing power in their office, to buy a few iPads for the office. They take attendance at frequent, large, group meetings (don’t ask why they take attendance, it is actually important in their case). They currently pass a clipboard, attendees place a check next to their name, and someone in the office later enters the checks into a database. Maybe they could use iPads instead of clipboards and…well, you get the picture.

About 20 years ago I worked in a signal processing lab. We had all the latest computers and computer-related gadgets. We, however, never seemed to have enough computers and computer-related gadgets. We always needed to buy more. I knew because I was involved in the purchasing, installation, and maintenance of all these new things. I was also involved in the disposal of all the one-year-old things that were absolutely necessary only 12 months before. This is the technological imperative at work in both of these two examples.

A piece of technology exists; we need it.

Notice that I didn’t write that we want it, we would like it, or we might be able to use it. I wrote that we N-E-E-D it. That is why it is called the Technology Imperative. Some definitions of “imperative” include: Not to be avoided or evaded; obligatory; binding; compulsory; as, an imperative duty or order.

Pleading, “Tell me what you are going to do with this? What is the requirement? What is it we cannot do without this? If it is so important, how have we survived without it? What is the cost-benefit analysis?” does you no good. The technology imperative overrules all logic and business sense.

There is only one thing that stops the technology imperative: a lack of money.

When business is bad, businesses cut to the bone and logic holds the day.

At all other times, the technology imperative triumphs.

Try to relax. There are worse things a business can do with its money. After all, the imperative technology that you are buying provides jobs for engineers in other places.

by Dwayne Phillips

Project managers have various goals. Here is one to consider: the people who work on your project are willing to work on another one.

Working on a project can be tough. The requirements change, if there are any requirements. The schedule shrinks, if there is a schedule. Weekends – what are weekends? – are spent in the office to meet the deadline.

Who wants to work on a project? What’s more, who wants to work on a project after having survived one?

This is one measure of a project manager – the people who worked on a project you managed are willing to work another project. You didn’t ruin them.

This basic measure extends to many endeavors.

• Writers – the reader of your book is willing to read another book after reading yours.
• Programmers – the user of your program is willing to use another program after using yours.
• Furniture maker – the person who sat in a chair you made is willing to sit in another chair after sitting in yours.
• Parent – the children you raised became fine people.

I could go on with examples. Simple to do? Perhaps not. I have seen examples of the opposite: people swear never to work on another project again, swear never to read a book again, swear never to use software again, swear never to speak to their parents again.

Doing something doesn’t have to inspire people to great heights. A simpler goal is to have people willing to try something again. A simpler goal is to not ruin someone in some way. Allow people to see that managing  a project, writing a book, and raising kids is not as easy as it might appear. Allow them to see that you tried.

What is most important, allow them to see that what you cared about most is them.

by Dwayne Phillips

My printed book from FastPencil is in hand. It took about three weeks for FastPencil to transform a PDF file to a paperback book. It is 6″x9″ and 155 pages.

My Little Book in Hand

Lessons Learned:

• 10-point font is too small for my eyes
• I chose a creme paper instead of white, I wish I had chosen white

I am happy with the result. These paperbacks (I bought ten copies) are like large business cards.The are easy to carry with me and hand to people I meet.

This is a short book, but that is one of the main points. I wanted to write a short book on Systems Engineering. Most books on Systems Engineering are graduate-level textbooks. They are good, but they are longer than 500 pages, and practicing engineers and scientists don’t have time to read those.

I have a few other short books that I may put into paperback form with FastPencil. Time will tell. I also have a long book that is a collection of 50+ fiction short stories that I wrote a couple of years ago. Time will tell.

by Dwayne Phillips

I hate doing something twice. That leads to disliking short tasks. Short tasks are easy to do all over a second time, especially when someone else decides that they want you to do it again.

This may not sound right, but I would much rather have a long, time-consuming task that one that is short and  can be completed in a couple of hours. This stems from something I’ve noticed about myself in the past couple of years:

I hate doing something twice.

Perhaps it is a sense that doing something twice is wasting time; perhaps it is a desire to move to something new and learn something new. I am not sure, but I do know that I hate doing something twice.

Hence comes the distaste of short tasks. Most of my tasks these days are reading and writing things for people at work. The nice people at work ask me to research a topic. I spend an afternoon or two doing so. That is a short task. Then the nice people at work come to me and say, “Oh, did I tell you to study this-and-such? Sorry, I’ve changed my mind. I meant to tell you to study that-and-such. Well, I’m glad you didn’t spend a lot of time on the wrong thing. It should be easy to catch up.”

Groan. Do the task again.

I have similar experiences with writing at work. The nice people at work ask me to write about a topic. I write a couple of pages as requested (an hour or two spent writing). The nice people at work read what I have written, think a moment, and tell me, “This-and-such is interesting. It has caused me to think of a few things. I guess I really want you to write about that-and-such. Well, this is a short piece, so I guess you can just start over and write about that-and-such.”

Groan. Do the task again.

I have to ask, why did my first writing spur thinking? Why didn’t they think first, and well, you know, only have  me do it once?

Anyways, if the task was long, let’s say five or six days of writing, maybe it wouldn’t be so easy to start over and write something new. Maybe I could do some edits and move on to something else. Short tasks are just so easy to do over again.

Anyways, short tasks are rotten as they can be done over. It is sort of like my equal disdain for short meetings. There seems to a trend here.

Anyways, this is the third paragraph in a row I’m starting with “anyways”, but I digress. Anyways, if the nice people at work knew what they wanted me to do and I only had to do it once, life would be less interesting. I live in interesting times and people pay me to do interesting things. I have to smile.

by Dwayne Phillips

There is a difference between gifts and contracts. Givers often confuse the two.

I just read several blog posts and comments about giving money to “poor” people only to see them half an hour later buying lottery tickets with the money. They givers were incensed as the poor had promised to buy food and necessities with the money.

Hence, we address a gift (one definition):

Property, money or asset that one person transfers to another while receiving nothing in return.

The “while receiving nothing in return” part is oft forgotten and takes many forms. In the example above, the giver expected honesty in return and was incensed when honesty wasn’t returned. I have seen many similar examples where the giver was incensed that the receiver used the money not for lottery tickets, but for things the giver deemed unworthy. I have even seen givers incensed when the receiver in turn gave some of the money to other less-fortunate people instead of spending it on themselves.

Now we move from a gift to a contract (same source):

An agreement between two or more parties for the doing or not doing of something specified.

Here we clearly have the “doing or not doing of something specified.”

Continuing the first example, “I am giving you this money to buy food for your kids.” That is not a gift, it is a contract. The money is transferred for the expressed purpose of buying food for kids.

Continuing the second example, “I am giving you this money to spend on yourself.” Again, that is not a gift, it is a contract as the money is transferred for the expressed purpose of the receiver spending it only on the receiver.

Once a person gives something to another (gives, not contracts), the receiver has total control over it. If the giver expects to have any control or expects to receive anything in return, even love or adoration, we do not have a gift. Instead, we have a contract.

There is nothing wrong with contracts. They work quite well in many instances. There is nothing wrong with me giving, er I mean me contracting with, my son for he and his wife to take a vacation with money I transfer to him. That will work just fine. He doesn’t have to accept the transfer and take the vacation I specify. He can negotiate with me about the amount of funds and the vacation destination. Either of us can decline the contract at any time. And so it goes with contracts.

Understanding the difference between gifts and contracts is quite liberating. It can also be insulting to some people, so take care.

by Dwayne Phillips

People make mistakes. Some mistakes lead to a complete collapse of groups of people. When large, well connected groups fail, others suffer. This happens in national and international economies. It also happens on projects involving only a few persons. There are things that project managers can do to contain the damage from local failure. Nations may not be able to do such, but nations can provide lessons for project managers.

I like George Will’s editorial from last week on the power of the weak. He was discussing how GM and Greece, just two recent examples as there are many more, were “weak” economically. They were both at the point of collapse and financial default. In the weakness, however, they had great power. GM and Greece at least convinced others that they great power.

If GM were to go bankrupt, its employees would be out of jobs, stop paying taxes, and be a drain on government programs. Likewise, its assets would clog the market and reduce the value of similar property held by others. If the Federal government were to allow GM to fail, the government would suffer grave consequences. Current elected officials believed this story and gave GM tens of billions of dollars. In a similar manner, if the government of Greece were to default on its obligations, the Euro currency would drop and all nations using the Euro – almost all of Europe – would suffer. The current elected officials in the rest of Europe believed this story and gave Greece tens of billions of Euros.

I include the phrases “the current elected officials…believed this story and” because these are stories – not facts. They are estimates, and we often forget that estimates are merely our attempt to predict the future – an endeavor that routinely fails. What is more, these are economics stories, and economics is a “science” where all experiments have a sample size of one. No other science is allowed to practice with such a meager sampling.

Nevertheless, these weak organizations held power over the strong ones. There cry was simple,

If you let me fail, I will pull you down,

and

Oh by the way, you have more to lose through my failure than I.

In our current world, those who have give to those who are failing. At times, this seems to be a fanatical desire to keep another person from suffering the consequences of their mistakes. These suffering people are adults, but we don’t want to treat them like adults because, well because we find pleasure in treating them like children instead of adults.

Writing about this situation is difficult for me. I am a Christian, and one of the tenets of Christianity is to help those who are suffering. I give to those who have less than myself.  I do so privately and I do so at large rates via government redistribution. I wish government was more efficient at this redistribution, but waste and fraud seem to be an inherent part of the soul of government. Nevertheless, I give money and time and talent and so on privately.

Still, there are times that I have to ask myself,

Is giving a way to help someone or a way to prolong and encourage their suffering?

Mistakes leading to failure hurt. Mistakes can teach lessons that stay with a person for the remainder of his life. And, as we see today with GM, Greece, and many others, mistakes by one person can lead to pain in other persons nearby who through prudence have avoided the mistakes.

As a side note, I find humor in the efforts of some elected officials in America who craft laws that will make mistakes illegal.

This all leads back to the topic of project management. If one team on a large project makes plenty of mistakes, falls behind schedule, and runs over their budget, the failure of that team can damage the rest of the project. The other teams on the project are on track for success, but the weak team has the power to ruin everyone else. The cries from the failing team are:

If you let me fail, I will pull you down,

and

Oh by the way, you have more to lose through my failure than I.

If only the project leadership had mandated that mistakes were not allowed; if only the project leadership had written enough procedure, mistakes would not occur.

I believe that good procedures (documented, taught, and used) reduce the probability of project-ruining mistakes. I don’t believe that such procedures are sufficient. What is more powerful is personal oversight, mentoring, advice, reserves, and other things that come from a relationship of trust.

People make mistakes. Accept that. Try to create a situation in projects where the mistakes of some cannot negate the diligence of others. That is possible to do on projects.

Politics, national economies, and international economies are different situations. I don’t know if we can apply the same before-the-mistakes-are-made strategies. I do know that we can learn from the power of the weak.

by Dwayne Phillips

I perform better when I feel better. I can decide to feel better thereby improve my performance.

Have you ever had the opportunity to (safely) crash someone else’s car? To spin the tires? To do a 180-degree spin? I had the good fortune to do that about 30 years ago. It was great fun (the story of the circumstances is too long for now).

I was in a class at the time of my car-crashing escapade. The car crashing occurred in the morning, and in the afternoon I was doing some skills tests. I did better on those tests than I ever did at all other times in my life. What’s more, everything I did the remainder of the day was easier than it was before.

Everything was easier than it was before. Wait a minute; how did that work? Was it possible to capture that moment and release it again when I wanted something to be easier? Had I discovered the secret formula to superior performance?

No, I didn’t. As much as I tried, I couldn’t recreate the feeling I had that day.

But, then again, yes, I did. I can feel “better” if I decide to do so. If I feel better, I work better, play  better, and do everything better. I can capture the feeling of crashing cars and use that do to just about anything.

Sometimes, however, I forget what I have learned. I forget to feel better and do things better. Alas, such is the human condition.

by Dwayne Phillips

Frenzied paralysis – so many things in my mind that I cannot do any of them. I make a list to clear my mind and move from paralysis to action.

I can’t think. Well, that’s not true. I guess the problem is that I am thinking too much. Well, that is not true, either. I guess the problem is that I am thinking about too many different things. Each second I think about ten different things. Round and round and round and…When will this stop? When will I be able to focus on few enough things so that I can write or read or just get up off the couch and do one constructive thing?

Panting, staring, motionless.

A solution for me:

Make a list.

Make a list? That doesn’t do anything. True, it doesn’t do anything physical, but, for me at least, it does a great thing both mentally and emotionally.

Making a list clears my mind.

All those ten-things-per-second that are jumping in and out of my mind are now on a piece of paper. They are out of my mind. My mind is left with only a few items that I can manage without falling into panting, staring, motionless and other such frenzied paralysis.

All those ten-things-per-second that were jumping in and out of my mind were important. Otherwise they wouldn’t be in my mind. I have not erased them; I have not discarded them. I still have them, but now they are on a piece of paper. I can now work on them one at a time or I can leave them on the paper and later decide that they were not that important.

Every few weeks in my journal I find a list of items. I also read words of relief after the list. Every few days I make a list on a sticky note on my desk. My trash can has many of these crumpled lists with lines scratched through each item.

This technique of clearing my mind by making a list works wonders for me. I can’t say if it will do any good for any other person. I suggest you try it. If it works, please use it. If not, try something else until you find what works for you.

by Dwayne Phillips

We do things that we know won’t work. I don’t understand why.

We do things that we know won’t work. Some examples:

The Polygraph: This machine (the lie-detector machine) doesn’t work. People have beat it for decades. That is why polygraph results are not admissible in court. Still, lots of government and business organizations use the polygraph.

Internet Filters: These are meant to keep people, like those on airplanes, from viewing objectionable material. They don’t work. People take pride in breaking through the filters during the first hour they are used. Yet, lots of people still use Internet filters in libraries, airplanes, restaurants, and such.

Computer Voting Machines: I have voted in several elections where the machines were running Microsoft Windows. Uh, er, I think people have punched security holes in that operating system for years. Still, some people “guarantee” that everything is secure and no one can tamper with the votes.

Secure Online Databases: These aren’t secure. People are involved and people make mistakes. I have lots track of how many times a person has lost a copy of a secure database. Millions of credit card numbers are lost; millions of bank account numbers are lost; millions of health care records are lost.

I could continue with the examples. I don’t know the answer here. Why do we continue to use things that we know don’t work. I could be cynical and claim that someone is out to make money, so they lie about something to make a sale. Maybe people are ignorant, i.e., they don’t know that something has been proven to not work. Maybe there is something happening that hasn’t occurred. to me. Still, it continues.

Perhaps it is an integral part of the human condition.