Search This Blog

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

The Measure of a Project Manager

I like what the article below is saying, however a project manager would need time for the usual processes of Initiation, Planning, Executing, Monitoring/Controlling, Closing.

Project management by the numbers

Monday, September 15, 2008

Free Book- "Your Business Brickyard" (pdf)

Good review by Tom Peters!

Click here to download

Project Sponsor Responsibilities

In my experience most projects don't have a real project sponsor. A project sponsor is the senior manager or executive that champions the project in the organization. The sponsor provides support for obtaining resources, provides strategic direction, and acts as the decision point for questions outside of the project manager’s authority.

Every project that crosses functional lines of authority needs a project sponsor to remove barriers, assist in resolving conflict, and mediate negotiations. The sponsor can also act as a mentor and coach to the project manager and team members.

The project sponsor is usually chosen by senior management, but sometimes the sponsor volunteers because the project directly impacts their resources or budget the most.

Typically Project Sponsors are responsible for:

Providing project direction

Monitoring project progress

Assisting the Project Manager to define the Project Management process for the project

Approving final scope, project objectives, schedule, resource assignments, roles and responsibilities

Providing accurate, relevant and timely communications in writing when appropriate
Approve scope changes

Obtain or resolve issues surrounding resources (people, money, equipment)
Setting project priorities and removing barriers to project success

Personally responsible for project success or failure.

Friday, September 05, 2008

Assumptions versus Facts

I have a couple of Dr. Ireland's books and admire his project management intellect. He published the following article about the differences between assumptions and facts. Great article!

Poker anyone?

Project Planning: Assumptions versus Facts
© 2003 by Dr. Lewis Ireland, Clarksville, TN

Introduction - The difference between an assumption and a fact is often subtle and confusing. Some organizations, and individuals, view assumptions and facts in the same light. This approach causes confusion in managing both the assumptions and facts as well as communicating accurately the situation during planning and execution of projects.

The American Heritage Dictionary defines both words in the context of planning as:• Assumption – a statement accepted or supposed as true without proof or demonstration.• Fact – something presented as objectively real or something that has been objectively verified.

Planning a project using the wrong term can convey a different meaning to fact or assumption with catastrophic results. Facts do not change whereas assumptions are typically about a future state that may or may not come true. Listing both facts and assumptions as assumptions can also cause confusion because the project manager does not know which assumptions to track to ensure they are converted to facts.

Facts and assumptions in a poker game - Herbert O. Yardley, a noted mathematician and code breaker from the late 1920s and author of The Education of a Poker Player, gives some insight as to facts and assumptions. His explanation of poker is instructive and is used here to give examples of facts and assumptions. Yardley used mathematics to explain poker and the human element associated with playing a very competitive game.

Some of Yardley’s advice included rules that guided a person to play poker in realistic terms. Some rules are:

• Don’t play any games that you don’t understand. Luck does not favor the person with the least knowledge of the rules or who doesn’t understand the game.

• Use facts to determine your best odds of winning and discipline yourself to stick with the facts.• Don’t assume that something good will happen if you ignore the facts.

• Don’t drink alcoholic beverages or engage in any practice that reduces your mental ability.

• Don’t talk to try to sway the opposition, but play your cards.

Editor's note: the same rules apply to projects!

If we take facts as “absolutes” and assumptions as “maybes” in managing projects, we have a distinct difference in information. Facts are what we know and assumptions are what we hope will happen. Remember, assumptions are always stated in a positive framework. Both facts and assumptions have a positive or negative impact on the project.

Following Yardley’s instruction in his book, let’s use poker as an example of facts and assumptions as work. First, we need to review the rules of the game of seven card stud – a card game where a player may draw as many as seven cards for a hand, four face up and three face down.

Typically, there are from three to five players in the game. The sequence for the game play is that all players ante (place a nominal amount in the pot just for the privilege of seeing the first three cards). Three cards are dealt to each player – two down and then one face up. The highest face up card starts the betting. Players may “call” (match the bet), “fold” (remove self from the game), or “raise” (call the bet and make another bet). This sequence continues until only one player remains and is the winner of the pot or the last card is dealt face down. This leaves the hands with seven cards, three down and four up. The final betting takes the same sequence as prior bets, but the high hand wins when all betting is concluded.

How does this help us understand facts and assumptions? Let’s take a look at the game in progress.

1. Five players ante a dollar each and are dealt three cards, the first two face down and the last face up. With fifteen cards in front of players, we know, or the facts are, that we can see seven cards (fact) and there are eight hidden, for which we must make an assumption. Based on our three cards and the other four hands we can bet, call, or fold. An opponent may give us some indication of his/her cards by the betting – high bet, medium bet, no bet, call, fold, raise.

2. Say that a medium bet of one dollar is made and all players call. The pot is now at $10 with each player contributing a dollar for the ante and a dollar for the first bet. Therefore, we have five players who have neither shown a strong nor weak hand. We make the assumption that our chance to win is still viable based on seeing seven cards and the betting. We can make the assumption that no player has a totally worthless hand or he/she would have folded.

3. The fourth card is dealt face up to give each hand two up and two down. We can now see 12 cards -- all face up cards and our two “hole” cards. Yardley tells us that if another play has a higher card hand showing in his/her two cards, we should fold. The fact is that we would be beat by the cards showing. To make an assumption that we can out draw this other hand is against the odds. Actually, we have the highest hand showing, but the other players are not folding when we make a modest bet. The facts are that we have the highest showing hand, but must make the assumption that at least one other player has a higher hand in his/her four cards.

4. The betting is over and the fifth card is dealt. The facts are that we can see 17 cards. Our hand is still high and starts the betting. Two players fold and two opponents call the bet. With 17 cards known and three players remaining, we make the assumption that the two opponents have a better hand than our three cards showing. Therefore, we need to have a better hand with our two hole cards than just the values of the three face up cards.

5. The sixth card is dealt face up to the three active players. We now have two pair with one pair showing and a face up card matching a hole card. The other two players each have a pair showing. The facts are that either of the opponents could have a third card matching the pair for three-of-a kind, which always beats two pairs. Further, all players may draw the seventh card down, which could improve any of the hands.

6. The seventh card is dealt face down. The only change to the facts is that we now know the full extent of our hand. It has changed in that we have three pair and can only use the highest two pair. The opponents have given no indication that they have better hands. It is a fact that we cannot bluff by making a high bet. This group has always covered bets just to see what the other person’s hand is. So, the betting starts with one dollar and the two opponents call. As the first bettor, we show all of our cards and declare two pair – aces and nines. The second player shows two pair – kings and tens. The third player shows three fours as the winning hand.

The game of seven card stud shows that we have continually building facts and changing assumptions. Each player sees the same number of card values at each play as facts. Each player does not see the same number of card values at each play and must make some assumptions about the probable worth of each hand. Weighing the facts and assumptions at each play gives us a relative worth of our hand compared to the cards that we can see around the table and the probable hole cards.

Projects are similar in that we need to assess our progress to successful completion of the work and that each day changes the relative worth of the end product. We deal with the facts and analyze the assumptions to arrive at the best solution.

Our example of a card game gives us several lessons about facts and assumptions.

• Facts are what we can see and what we know about the future, e.g., we have a number of cards available.

• Facts only change with the situation, e.g., each new card dealt to the players changed the actual situation and the parameters of the game.

• Facts are what is visible and real, but do not give a complete picture.

• Assumptions are used to assess the unknown and to make judgments for future actions.

• Assumptions bridge knowledge gaps, but are not necessarily true situations.

• Assumptions are necessary to make decisions about the future.

Conclusions - It is concluded that a more rigorous approach to developing facts and assumptions in project planning can enhance the quality of the plan and the probable success rate for projects. There are some rules that help in developing and working with facts and assumptions. Facts are real and have more weight in our decision process that assumptions.

Developing guidelines for the use of facts and assumptions will give a better solution that random application during critical times. Facts are real and assumptions are what we think will happen. Assumptions should never be made because we want them to happen – this is an emotional approach rather than a logical approach.

Know the rules for developing facts and assumptions and use them rigorously. Be consistent in the use of the objective evidence (facts) and the subjective evidence (assumptions).

Monday, August 25, 2008

Learning to Lead - Part 2

By MajGen Perry M. Smith, USAF (Ret.)

The following article was originally published in the Marine Corps Gazette in January 1997.

Part 2 of 2

16. Thank the Invisible People
There are lots of fine people doing great work who seldom get thanks because they are "invisible." They work so quietly and so competently that they often are not noticed by the leader.

17. Don't Send Out "I Don't Trust You" Messages
People who say "I never want to be surprised" or "Check with me before you start anything," or "I'm off on a trip; I will call in every morning for an update" are sending out very strong "I don't trust you" messages to their subordinates. People who know they are not trusted will never contribute at their full potential.

18. Serve, Don't Humor the Boss
Too many leaders see their big tasks as keeping their bosses happy, getting to the bottom of the in-box, or staying out of trouble. That is not what leadership is all about. Leadership is serving the mission and serving your people.

19. Criticize Up, Praise Down
Leaders must deflect at least some of the bad guidance they get from above. Is it being loyal to your boss and to the institution you serve to tell the bosses when they are wearing no clothes?

20. Be Physically Fit
Everyone has a "health age." If you exercise regularly and watch your diet, you can make yourself four or five years younger than your chronological age.

21. Develop Solid Leadership Skills
The best leaders in business, the nonprofit sector, and government are superb at time management and are competent in speed reading, personal computers, dictation skills, and the use of manual and electronic brainstorming techniques.

22. Help Your People Understand You
When you take over a new organization, get your key people together and tell them what your top priorities and your pet peeves are. It is especially important for them to learn very early what really bugs you. They will appreciate your candor.

23. Smoke Out Those of Low Integrity
Leaders must sniff the air constantly to ensure high standards of ethics are maintained. In almost all large organizations, someone is walking out the back door with something. Expense accounts, personnel records, training reports, and contracts need regular scrutiny.

24. Concentrate on Performance, Not Just Results
How you get results is important. Leaders who don't concern themselves about the process and the performance that leads to the results are making a big mistake. Always ask yourself what it took to gain those great results.

25. Maintain a Sense of Outrage
There are many super-cool managers who worry too much about keeping their bosses happy. As a result, they never allow themselves to be outraged when the system is doing serious damage to those who work for them. The best leaders get mad occasionally and, using controlled outrage, can often make right wrongs that are levied upon their people.

26. Beware of Intimidation
Be very careful here. Some bosses allow themselves to be intimidated by outsiders, by their bosses, and even by their subordinates. An intimidated boss can never be a great leader. You have to have an independent mind to make the right choices.

27. Avoid the Activity Trap
Don't confuse being busy with being productive. Without discipline, managers can become slaves to their meetings, travel schedules, in-boxes, and telephones. They get so wrapped up in the minutiae that they can become "in-box managers" rather than visionary leaders.

28. Build a Robust Braintrust
One of the great secrets of success is to have a braintrust of experts on various issues. I have learned that a braintrust of around 300 real smart and quick thinking friends can be very helpful whenever I need help. I have their office and home phone numbers and their e-mail addresses so I can get hold of them quickly. The braintrust is reciprocal in that we help each other.

29. Beware of the Paul Principle
Too many leaders allow themselves to slowly slide downhill in competence. When they lose touch with the issues, the new technologies, and the people, they have fallen victim to what I call the Paul Principle.

The future is coming fast. Leaders need to think about the future and prepare their people for it. To keep a close eye on the future, join the World Future Society and read two magazines regularly - Business Week and The Futurist.

30. Get Ready for the Future
Soon leaders will have exciting new technologies to help them be more efficient and effective leaders. The automatic dictating machine will allow leaders to quickly answer their daily mail or write their memos or weekly column. Teleconferencing will reduce the need for travel and speed up consensus-building and decision-making. Electronic brainstorming will accelerate the velocity of innovation. Electronic mail will reduce time wasted with "telephone tag."

All leaders must work hard to build the future, for that is where they and their people will spend the rest of their lives.

A retired major general, Perry M. Smith served for 30 years in the U. S. Air Force. During his career he had a number of leadership experiences, including command of the F-15 wing at Bitburg, Germany where he provided leadership to 4000 personnel. Later, he served as the top Air Force planner and as the Commandant of the National War College, where he taught courses on leadership of large organizations and on strategic planning. He is the author of the book Rules and Tools for Leaders and is currently the President of Visionary Leadership in Augusta, Georgia.

Thursday, August 21, 2008

Where is My Brain?


To followup yesterday's post, click the link below to view a short PowerPoint presentation by Merlin Mann entitled "Who Moved My Brain - Revaluing Time and Attention". Good stuff.

Time Management Presentation by Merlin Mann

Wednesday, August 20, 2008

Getting Things Done

David Allen has a great website for people wanting to "Get Things Done". The graphic listed below is on David's website as well as lots of other useful information to help you better manage your time.




Wednesday, August 13, 2008

Where are the Assets?

How well is your company managing their assets? I continue to work on an Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) deployment project, and we are just now getting a handle on some of the costs to procure, deploy, operate, maintain, and dispose of many of our assets. 

When an organization has assets valued in the tens or hundreds of millions of dollars they better have a plan to manage them efficiently.

Check out this link for a good Asset Management article.


Hofstadter's Law

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hofstadter's Law is a self-referencing time-related adage, coined by Douglas Hofstadter and named by himself. The law states:

"It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take Hofstadter's Law into account".

—Douglas Hofstadter: Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, 20th anniversary ed., 1999, p. 152. ISBN 0-465-02656-7

Hofstadter's Law was a part of Douglas Hofstadter's 1979 magnum opus Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid. It is often cited among programmers, especially in discussions of techniques to improve productivity, such as The Mythical Man-Month or Extreme Programming.

Hofstadter's Law is a statement of the difficulty of accurately estimating the amount of time it will take to complete tasks of any substantial complexity.

Hofstadter's Law is infinitely recursive in nature (i.e., it calls itself by reference), as it has no terminal condition or case. That is, even after one has taken Hofstadter's Law into account, by Hofstadter's Law one must still apply Hofstadter's Law, and so on.

Projectsteps Note: This makes sense to me especially when estimating software development projects. Comments?

Monday, August 11, 2008

Learning to Lead - Part 1

By MajGen Perry M. Smith, USAF (Ret.)

The following article was originally published in the Marine Corps Gazette in January 1997.

Part 1 of 2

Successful leaders don't need rows of sharp teeth to swim with the sharks. Here are 30 common sense, often-forgotten tips for good leadership.

In speaking to large audiences on leadership, I am often asked to do the impossible. In less than an hour's time, I am expected to motivate them to improve their skills, inspire them to be better leaders, and to acquaint them with the new technologies and concepts.

To cover all these points in the time allotted, I have come up with "30 Blazing Flashes Of The Obvious" about leadership. Here they are:

1. Know Yourself
All leaders should realize they are, in fact, five or more people. They are who they are, and who they think they are, (and these are never the same); they are who their bosses think they are; and who their subordinates think they are.

Leaders who work hard to get feedback from many sources are more likely to understand and control their various selves, and hence be better leaders.

2. Develop Mental Toughness
Leaders must be brutally honest with themselves or they will slip into the terrible habit of self-deception. Even the best leaders make mistakes. By smoking out these mistakes and correcting them quickly, a good leader can become a superb one.

3. Be Magnanimous
Leaders who share their power and their time can accomplish extraordinary things. The best leaders understand that leadership is the liberation of talent; hence they gain power not only by constantly giving it away, but also by not grabbing it back.

4. Squint With Your Ears
The most important skill for leaders is listening. Introverts have a great edge, since they tend to listen quietly and usually don't suffer from being an "interruptaholic." Leaders should "squint with their ears." Too many bosses are thinking about what they will say next, rather than hearing what is being said now.

5. Trust Your Instinct and Your Impulse
If something smells bad, sounds funny, or causes you to lose sleep at night, take another look. Your instincts combined with your experience can prevent you and your organization from walking off the cliff.

6. Learn By Failure
In my professional career, I have learned much more from my failures than from my successes. As a result, I have become tolerant of the honest failure of others. When a major setback comes along, try to treat it as a marvelous learning experience, for most certainly it will be just that.

7. Protect Innovators
For three years I had a Medal of Honor recipient from Vietnam, Army Col. Jack Jacobs, working for me. He is by far the most innovative person I have ever known. Well over 50 percent of his ideas were awful, but buried among these bad ideas was an occasional pearl of great wisdom. I learned that I had to protect Jack and my organization from his bad ideas while encouraging him to present all his ideas, so we could use his great ones.

8. Beware of Certainty
Leaders should be a bit skeptical of anyone who is totally certain about his or her position. All leaders should have a decent doubt especially when dealing with "true believers" who are always sure they are right.

9. Be Decisive
Top leaders usually must make prudent decisions when they only have about 60 percent of the information they need. Leaders who demand nearly all the information are usually months or years late making decisions.

10. Don't Become Indispensable
Organizations need indispensable institutions not indispensable people. Leaders should not allow themselves to become indispensable, nor should they let any of their subordinates do so.

11. Avoid the Cowardice of Silence
During meetings, so-called leaders often sit on their hands when it is time to raise a hand and speak up. Leadership requires courage - courage to make waves, courage to take on our bosses when they are wrong, and the courage of conviction. Every Robert E. Lee needs a James Longstreet to tell him exactly the way it is.

12. Fight Against Paranoia
Welcome criticism, help people understand that it is OK to have "love quarrels" with the organization. Loyalty and criticism are mutually supporting while slavish loyalty is deadly. Avoid the defensive crouch. Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

13. Be Goal Oriented
Leaders, even at a lower level, must try to set some long-term goals for their people and for their organization. People want to know where they are going and in what order of priority.

14. Follow the Platinum Rule
The golden rule is marvelous. But in leadership situations, the platinum rule may be even better: "Treat others the way they would like to be treated."

15. Don't Waste People's Time
The best question a leader can ask a subordinate during a counseling session is, "How am I wasting your time?" Not everyone will tell you, but cherish the ones that do, for they will help you grow and prosper as a leader.

Saturday, July 26, 2008

Project Management Needed In Health Care

Health Information - Author Unknown

This is scary stuff, and I'm sure it has gotten worse since this was written.

The worlds most influential Medical Journal, 'The New England Journal of Medicine' has admitted that 50% of drug therapy reviews were written by researchers for undisclosed financial support from the drug pharmaceutical companies. This only represents those who admitted this breach of ethics. This is for the period 1997 to 1999. In 2002 some admitted to falsifying research results so as to be more favorable to drug company claims. This raises the question of medical integrity of lesser publications and the Medical Industry as a whole. Most lesser Medical Journals do not consider allowing the fox in the chicken coop as being an ethical problem. Some believe this is only the tip of the iceberg on how far pharmaceutical companies have gone in the control of academic research and publishing. (Feb 2000)

Eighty-seven percent of doctors who set guidelines on disease treatment have financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry. The 2002 study suggest the percentage is likely in the 90% range. It is the pharmaceutical companies who finance most of the nation's drug research.

MAJOR MEDICAL MYTH: Physicians have an ethical obligation to tell patients about significant medical errors when such disclosure would benefit the health of the patient, would show respect for the patient’s autonomy, or would be called for by principles of justice.

INFORMATION: Major faulty medical advice that has been widely communicated when proven in error only receives very minor public coverage. Statistics on systemic medical delivery problems are not recorded and communicated to the general public for correction. Hospital errors in the United States for example are estimated to be as high as 3,000,000 per year at a cost of 200 billion dollars.

Medical errors are the leading causes of death and injury in America according to the medical authorities in both Canada and the U.S.A. Health-care professionals cause 225,000 deaths per year in the United States. 12,000 from unnecessary surgery, 7,000 from medication errors, 20,000 from hospital error, 80,000 from infections acquired in hospital, 106,000 from non-error, adverse effects of drugs. Another 199,000 deaths are attributed to adverse effects in outpatient care. 2000 Journal of American Medical Association.

Only 50% of medical mistakes are even disclosed to the attending physician.

Only 25% of medical mistakes are ever disclosed to the customer, we the patient.

In 1998 in the United States 160,000 patients died because of adverse medical events.

Canada is estimated at 20,000 deaths per year because of medical errors. The Canadian Medical community admit that there are likely 4,000 to 10,000 die due to medical errors, more than are killed in automobile accidents.

Studies conducted record 100,000,000 people believe they were adversely affected by medical mistakes.

  • 42% were directly affected themselves, a family member or a friend

  • 40% site misdiagnosis and wrong treatment

  • 28% for medication errors

  • 22% for mistakes during a medical procedure

The largest 50% sited carelessness, improper training and poor communication.

My dad was the victim of several medical mistakes when he was in the hospital last year. He died at the hospice within hours of leaving the hospital.

Friday, July 25, 2008

Free Audio Book - The World is Flat


The World is Flat Audiobook Giveaway

With the No. 1 bestseller The World Is Flat, Thomas L. Friedman helped millions of readers see and understand globalization in a new way. Now you can have it for free.

From now until August 4th, you can download the audiobook version of The World Is Flat and receive an exclusive audio preview excerpt of Hot, Flat, and Crowded.

Sign up here for details

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Technobabble Defined

Since I used the word "technobabble" in today's post I thought I would include the definition of the word as taken from Wikipedia. I see this behavior exhibited occasionally and it always strikes me as funny.

Technobabble (a portmanteau of technology and babble) is a form of prose using jargon, buzzwords and highly esoteric language to give an impression of plausibility through mystification, misdirection, and obfuscation. This is not to be confused with jargon itself, but rather technobabble is a conscious attempt to deliver jargon to outsiders, without insight or comprehensive explanation, to make unsound or unprovable arguments appear to have merit.

Various fields of practice and industry have their own specialised vocabularies (jargon) that are intended to convey specific features in a concise manner to those educated within that industry, which would otherwise appear confusing or nonsensical to an outside listener. Additionally, the sound use of jargon will concisely convey information (even if that information is not fully understood by the listener). Conversely, the primary function of technobabble is to obscure the truth of a situation by overdressing the words and concepts.

Read the rest at Wikipedia

VUGs and Projects - REPOST

I created and posted this here almost two years ago. Can anybody relate?

I like the quote by Malcolm Forbes that goes, "You can easily judge the character of others by how they treat those who can do nothing for them". I have been fortunate over the years to have worked for people that had good character and lived by high ethical standards. At the same time, I have worked with and for people that only care about their own vague agendas, that speak mostly gibberish (technobabble), and refuse to acknowledge the accomplishments of others. I call these people, "VUGs". VUG is an acronym for Vague, Unclear, and Gibberish- speaking.

I'm sure you know a few VUGs. They come to meetings, (they love e-mail) and try to prove how smart they are by using "industry" jargon, corporate gibberish-speak, and what has been referred to as "technobabble". They are generally laid back, often personable, will complement you to your face, and put you down behind your back. They are insecure, generally soft-spoken, power hungry, yet calm in the face of crisis. They blame others, never apologize, and love recognition. When they do try to recognize others, it is usually out of guilt or a sense of corporate duty.

VUGs like unclear (immeasurable) strategies and objectives. They ensure that they can't personally be held accountable because they speak in vague terms and future perfect scenarios. Timeframes usually aren't important to VUGs. In fact, they will never state a definitive deadline for anything that can come back to bite them. They love to delegate, are unwilling to debate, and are usually unable to deal effectively with others because of a lack of self-confidence or guilt from the way they have treated others.

VUGs speak in VUGlish, a language all their own. When VUGs speak what they say rarely has a connection to organizational strategy, is peppered with gibberish, or is a long-winded rambling of disconnected thoughts and ideas linked to immeasurable goals.

So what does all this mean? For the project manager, having a VUG for a project sponsor, as your manager, or as one of your stakeholders is inevitable. How we handle them will help determine how successful we are when managing our project.

As project managers we have to de-VUG our projects. We de-VUG our projects by ensuring that language in our scope documents, project plans, and other project documentation is:

Specific and Clear

Linked to Organizational or Departmental Strategy

Is Written in Plain Language

Is Measurable

Has Definitive Dates (deadlines) for all Milestones and Deliverables

If you are ignorant of the VUGs that can influence your project, your projects could get VUGly!

What do you think? Do you agree, or disagree? Do you know a VUG?

Leave me a comment or e-mail me.

Saturday, July 19, 2008

Untouchables? Maybe a new project manager is required?

The Untouchables - HUMAN EVENTS — Pat Buchanan wrote the essay below asking if the Obamas are getting kid-glove treatment by the press. Interesting read.

Why did progressives recoil [over the New Yorker cartoon]? Because the more savvy among them sense that, like much humor, this cartoon was an exaggeration that contained no small kernel of recognizable truth.

After all, Barack did dump the flag pin. Michelle did say she had never been proud of her country before now. Barack did don that Ali Baba outfit in Somalia. His father and stepfather were Muslims. He does have a benefactor, Bill Ayers, who said after 9-11 he regrets not planting more bombs in the 1960s. He did have a pastor who lionizes Black Muslim Minister Louis Farrakhan. Put glasses on him, and Barack could play Malcolm X in the movies.
And assume the point of the cartoon had been to satirize the Obamas. Why would that have been so outrageous? Journalists, after all, still celebrate Herblock, the cartoonist who portrayed Richard Nixon with the body of a rat climbing out of a sewer.  Hillary Clinton has been compared to the sex-starved Glenn Close character in “Fatal Attraction.” George Bush’s verbal gaffes are endlessly panned by late-night comics and Comedy Central. But Barack gets the special-ed treatment. Our first affirmative action candidate.

The New Yorker made a “damn-fool decision,” said George Lockwood, a lecturer on journalistic ethics.  David West of Brookings wailed to USA Today of the cartoon: “It’s the mass media at its worst. It perpetuates false information, and it’s highly inflammatory. … It gives credibility to what’s been circulating for months, and that’s what makes it dangerous.”
But dangerous to whom? Again, it is only a cartoon.

For it suggests that Obama is an untouchable to be protected. As an African-American, he is not to be treated the same as other politicians. Remnick and Hertzberg obviously felt intense moral pressure to remove any suspicion that they had satirized the Obamas. No problem, however, if they were mocking the American right.