The PMP

     The Project Management Institute (PMI) is the main association for the project management profession.   What makes the PMI so important to the business world is that it provides a benchmark for employers to gauge whether or not the person they hire is qualified to run projects.   Conversely, the institute gives project mangers seeking working a way to prove themselves to employers.   The PMI accomplishes this through the Project Management Professional (PMP) certification program.  The PMP means that the certified person has:

1.  Demonstrated the appropriate education

2.  Has the appropriate professional experience.

3.  Passed the PMP exam

4.  Agreed to the professional code of the PMI

     Does this mean that everyone that has taken this exam is well qualified to lead a project?   No,  a PMP certified individual may become the worst employee ever, as the guest speaker on Thursday alluded.   However, certifications do prove one thing.  That the person knows something about the material and that they have passed a qualitative test on knowledge in that area.   To an employer, a prospective employee is just a piece of paper.  It takes time to get to know someone and taking the time to get to know everyone who has applied for a job just isn’t practical.   That is why certificates and education are so important on a resume, especially for those who don’t have experience in the field.   These certificates may not help, but they never hurt.  

     Preparing for a large exam takes time.  Cramming is an inefficient way to study.   The brain can only retain so much information in a day.   So a large exam like the PMP should take weeks of study.   Studying does not mean reading.    Studying should consist of taking practice exams and working through problems, this is how I plan to prepare for the PMP.  Why am I taking this test?  To be a little more qualified than the next guy.

Human Resource Annoyances

    

    The presentation seen in class made a point to talk about how much body language and tone contributed to the meaning of the speaker and how little the words meant.  This is true for relationship and many human endeavors, but for business, you are better off listening to the words.   The worst bosses with which I have worked have all been body language people.  The problem with this is that humans are generally horrible at listening and just as bad with observation.   Don’t believe me? Check out the following link, http://bigthink.com/ideas/20583.  If this is your first time experiencing this experiment, chances are you missed the 200 pound gorilla in the room.  Doesn’t that make you feel so much better about the observational skills of people in general?  Just wait till the judge the intent of your words through your body language.  It is horrible.   

    A comedian once made a joke about liars always making the best first impressions.  Dr. Paul Ekman explored a similar concept with his experiments with micro-facial expressions.  He found that people are horrible at spotting deception.  Of 20,000 people tested, only 50 could reliable detect is someone was lying or not.  He found that the true facial expressions of people reveal themselves for only a fraction of a second and that reading these “micro-facial expressions” was the key to determining the true feelings of the tested person.  The point is not many people have this ability to read micro-facial expressions.  So they rely on what they know or more accurately what they think they know.  This means that as the comedian stated they fall for liars. 

 

     This isn’t to say that gut reaction are all misleading.  Most gut reactions are not instinct, but quick decision based on years of experience.   That is the key years of experience.  Most people who are really into body language are new at the technique and the methods of reading aren’t really taught in any detail as to make the person an expert.  In the meantime, try relying on the words and stop trying to second guess people based on body language.   Words contain many important things such as who, what, when where and why.  Body language can convey a lot, but sometimes words say just as much.  That is probably why humans started using words.   Diagrams are good as well.   Also, the thing about written words is that they are pretty permanent, so I can always go back and  read them… word for word.

The Frustrated Farmer Performs Risk Management

    

    A farmer must move a chicken, fox and wheat across a river.   Why this farmer has a fox is unimportant, but the fox belongs to the farmer so he must move it across the river.  The farmer has a raft that can take him across the river, but there is only room for him and one object.   The chicken will eat the wheat, if unsupervised.  The fox will eat the chicken, if unsupervised.  The raft has no propulsion device other than the farmer and the farmer has no rope. What is the farmer to do?   This riddle explains risk management well.  If you aren’t thinking about the risks involved in your project, then you are likely to lose your chicken because you left it with the fox.    The riddle also shows that the risk management plan, isn’t something separate from the project plan, but an integral part.  The risk management plan is defined a plan that documents the procedures for managing risk throughout a project.   Risk is defined as an uncertainty that can have a negative or positive effect on meeting project documents.  Let’s go back to the farmer.  Without analyzing the risk, the farmer goes ahead and crosses the river with the fox only to come back and find the wheat was eaten by the chicken.  At least, the farmer had a short project with which to deal, albeit the project was a failure.  

    Let’s say instead the farmer took a project management class and when through the six steps of risk management.  Hopefully before leaving for the river, he would have planned, identified risks, performed qualitative risk analysis, performed quantitative risk analysis, planned risk responses, and monitored and controlled.  This allowed him to identify the risks of the fox eating the chicken, the chicken eating the wheat, and the problems of crossing the river.  It is clear the project objectives can not be completed without planning for these risks.  These risks should be an integral part of the plan.  The farmer performs qualitative and quantitative risk analysis.  In the qualitative sense, losing any of the three items is horrible for the farmer.   No cost can be associated with the fox, so the value of the fox is purely qualitative.  The farmer just likes the fox that much.  In the quantitative sense, the wheat and the chicken cost $50 and $20 respectively.  The loss of these items hit the farmer in the wallet.  The farmer can respond to these risks in four ways, avoidance, acceptance, transference, and mitigation.   Clearly, he can not accept the risk since  the consequences are too great.   He transfer the risk by hiring a moving company, but this is too expensive.  He could mitigate the risk by never leaving the fox alone with the chicken or the chicken alone with the wheat.  This seems to be a good idea.  However if the farmer was smart, he included risk management in his initial planning versus considering it separately.  He then avoided the risk by not taking the river route or bringing his friend Bob to help him move the items.  Either way, the risk is controlled before reaching the river.

    While risks can not always be avoided, all risks are easier to control when they are identified early in the planning process.   Too many people see risk management as a Cover Your Avenues (CYA) asset that is done after planning.  This is the wrong way to approach risk, risk should be the plan.