They can do scary things with video software these days.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Friday, October 24, 2008
General Colin Powell and Leadership
General Colin Powell spoke at this year's PMI (Project Management Institute) Global Congress in Denver, CO.
The PMI website summarizes General Powell's remarks below.
“Leadership is leadership is leadership,” says General Powell, who served as a U.S. National Security Advisor for former President Ronald Reagan and held executive positions at several organizations.
“At the end of the day you have to convince a bunch of followers to do what you want them to do—and [convince them] that they want to do it.”
The goal, he says, is to make sure every member of the team knows what is expected of them and to create a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. That means providing support, plus clear, concise missions and inspiration.
“The leader’s passion has to be the example of excellence in the organization and people will want to follow you,” he says.
Sometimes, though, the difference between a good leader and a bad leader is as simple as the ability to recognize when an employee is worth the investment—and when they are not. While it’s important, General Powell says, to capitalize on strengths and build on weakness, leaders can’t “carry dead weight.”
The PMI website summarizes General Powell's remarks below.
“Leadership is leadership is leadership,” says General Powell, who served as a U.S. National Security Advisor for former President Ronald Reagan and held executive positions at several organizations.
“At the end of the day you have to convince a bunch of followers to do what you want them to do—and [convince them] that they want to do it.”
The goal, he says, is to make sure every member of the team knows what is expected of them and to create a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. That means providing support, plus clear, concise missions and inspiration.
“The leader’s passion has to be the example of excellence in the organization and people will want to follow you,” he says.
Sometimes, though, the difference between a good leader and a bad leader is as simple as the ability to recognize when an employee is worth the investment—and when they are not. While it’s important, General Powell says, to capitalize on strengths and build on weakness, leaders can’t “carry dead weight.”
Saturday, October 18, 2008
In Denver,CO and a Mile High!
Waiting for the PMI global conference to start. I attended the ISSIG business meeting today and walked around the city. Denver is a great town.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
See You at the PMI North American Global Congress 2008
I'm traveling to Denver on Saturday to attend the PMI Global Congress. Anybody else going? Want to meet up? E-mail me at sfseay(at)yahoo.com
PMI North American Global Congress 2008 Announcement
PMI is proud to host its Global Congress 2008—North America in Denver, Colorado, USA. The city of Denver is the largest city in Colorado and is also the state’s capital. The nickname of "the Mile-High City" was given to Denver because it is situated at an elevation of one mile above sea level. Denver has the largest park system in the U.S. and experiences more than 300 sunny days in a year, which makes it sunnier than San Diego or Miami Beach. Because of this and its proximity to the mountains, Denver has gained a reputation as being a very active, outdoor-oriented city for skiing, hiking, climbing and camping.
Denver lies at the foot of the Rocky Mountains and experiences a semi-arid type of climate. Autumn (October through December) has a warm climate with sunny days and cool nights. The climate of Denver can be quite unpredictable and does experience frequent weather fluctuations. A popular saying in Denver is that if you don’t like the weather, just wait a minute; it will change.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
John McCain shows he is a Statesman.
Thanks Senator McCain for bring some civility to the conversation.
Monday, October 06, 2008
Principles and the Leader
Principles are mile posts that help to guide our conduct. They come from natural laws that are recognizable by all cultures. Principles have been around since the dawn of time. They are timeless and aren’t dependent on us making them a permanent part of our lives.
I believe a most of our problems in society come from the fact that many of our leaders don’t live principle-centered lives.
What are principles that are easily recognized? These are a few: Patience, Kindness, Tolerance, Integrity, Honesty, Encouragement, Empathy…
Principles should guide our conduct, and when they do, they are easily recognizable by others. When our leaders decide to reject principles in order to gain power, influence or money, the organizations they lead are in deep trouble.
Many times leaders attempt to put aside principles to get short-term gains. They believe by making speeches filled with empty promises they will gain the trust of others. This happens all the time in our organizations and results in the same mistakes repeated over and over. Having said that, we keep electing the same people to office over and over, don’t we? Where has this gotten us?
Albert Einstein said, “The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them”. To solve the tough problems we need to look at our paradigms and habits and be willing to change them. Sometimes this means firing (not re-electing) our current leaders.
Do we really think we can just buy our way out of the current mess on Wall Street without fundamentally changing the way things work (paradigms and habits) and putting principled leaders in place? Can you or your organization really change things for the better without focusing on principles and rethinking your paradigms and habits? Do organizations really believe that layoffs alone change anything when their current broken paradigms and habits are left intact?
I have seen the results of unprincipled leadership, and the behaviors these “leaders” exhibit can have a profound, lasting, and negative influence on others. The sad part is these leaders believe they are part of the solution, however we know better. You can’t lead your way out of a problem that you don’t fully understand, and if you try to do it without principles the results are easily predicted. DISASTER!
Big problems cannot be solved by small people and small mindedness. Remember, principles aren’t values. The Mafia has values, but their practices certainly aren’t related to principles. As Stephen Covey say’s “Principles are the territory. Values are the map”.
I believe a most of our problems in society come from the fact that many of our leaders don’t live principle-centered lives.
What are principles that are easily recognized? These are a few: Patience, Kindness, Tolerance, Integrity, Honesty, Encouragement, Empathy…
Principles should guide our conduct, and when they do, they are easily recognizable by others. When our leaders decide to reject principles in order to gain power, influence or money, the organizations they lead are in deep trouble.
Many times leaders attempt to put aside principles to get short-term gains. They believe by making speeches filled with empty promises they will gain the trust of others. This happens all the time in our organizations and results in the same mistakes repeated over and over. Having said that, we keep electing the same people to office over and over, don’t we? Where has this gotten us?
Albert Einstein said, “The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them”. To solve the tough problems we need to look at our paradigms and habits and be willing to change them. Sometimes this means firing (not re-electing) our current leaders.
Do we really think we can just buy our way out of the current mess on Wall Street without fundamentally changing the way things work (paradigms and habits) and putting principled leaders in place? Can you or your organization really change things for the better without focusing on principles and rethinking your paradigms and habits? Do organizations really believe that layoffs alone change anything when their current broken paradigms and habits are left intact?
I have seen the results of unprincipled leadership, and the behaviors these “leaders” exhibit can have a profound, lasting, and negative influence on others. The sad part is these leaders believe they are part of the solution, however we know better. You can’t lead your way out of a problem that you don’t fully understand, and if you try to do it without principles the results are easily predicted. DISASTER!
Big problems cannot be solved by small people and small mindedness. Remember, principles aren’t values. The Mafia has values, but their practices certainly aren’t related to principles. As Stephen Covey say’s “Principles are the territory. Values are the map”.
Friday, October 03, 2008
The Bailout is a Crime!
We are being ripped off. See the article below from John Dvorak (http://www.dvorak.org/blog)
Give the Public $600 Billion By John C. Dvorak
The administration talks a big game about economic stimulus packages and claims that the public is the winner when taxes are low or they are simply given a handout to spend. So take $600-plus billion and give each man, woman and child $2000 each. That will distribute all this money. A family of 5 would have a nice $10,000 nest egg for a down-payment or to rent a house and pay off their credit cards thus sending the money back into the system.
The trickle-down bail-out is designed to go to the same people who gave themselves huge salaries and ran these firms into the ground? It gets them off the hook. They can then slither out of town when they all should be tarred-and-feathered.
Why not let the public buy up the mortgages at these low-ball prices and move in? Why can’t that be arranged? Use the FHA to do it if the banks cannot. Why do the crooks get to re-buy the bad mortgages at the low price? So they can gouge later?
There has never been economic stimulus from the top down when the money is given to these weasels. These are people who will sell dollars and buy Euros, or horde the money or move to Switzerland to spend the money there. All of the CEO’s of these failed companies have offshore villas. The average Joe spends his money in the USA, not Europe. It stays in circulation. Good things happen.
According to the pro-bail-out “experts” the economy should have melted down on Tuesday hurling us into a depression. Instead the market went up. So how does that work?
Start looking at this bail-out and you start to see that it is an exit strategy for Paulsen and his friends at Goldman, Sachs. There was a need to rush it through before anyone discovered what it was all about.
No oversight, a finance Czar, more free reign than ever.
Exactly why is there such a rush? It’s like the sleazeball salesman telling feeble-minded customers that they MUST buy now. It just makes no sense.
Give the Public $600 Billion By John C. Dvorak
The administration talks a big game about economic stimulus packages and claims that the public is the winner when taxes are low or they are simply given a handout to spend. So take $600-plus billion and give each man, woman and child $2000 each. That will distribute all this money. A family of 5 would have a nice $10,000 nest egg for a down-payment or to rent a house and pay off their credit cards thus sending the money back into the system.
The trickle-down bail-out is designed to go to the same people who gave themselves huge salaries and ran these firms into the ground? It gets them off the hook. They can then slither out of town when they all should be tarred-and-feathered.
Why not let the public buy up the mortgages at these low-ball prices and move in? Why can’t that be arranged? Use the FHA to do it if the banks cannot. Why do the crooks get to re-buy the bad mortgages at the low price? So they can gouge later?
There has never been economic stimulus from the top down when the money is given to these weasels. These are people who will sell dollars and buy Euros, or horde the money or move to Switzerland to spend the money there. All of the CEO’s of these failed companies have offshore villas. The average Joe spends his money in the USA, not Europe. It stays in circulation. Good things happen.
According to the pro-bail-out “experts” the economy should have melted down on Tuesday hurling us into a depression. Instead the market went up. So how does that work?
Start looking at this bail-out and you start to see that it is an exit strategy for Paulsen and his friends at Goldman, Sachs. There was a need to rush it through before anyone discovered what it was all about.
No oversight, a finance Czar, more free reign than ever.
Exactly why is there such a rush? It’s like the sleazeball salesman telling feeble-minded customers that they MUST buy now. It just makes no sense.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Destructive Leadership Behaviors Are Killing Good Organizations
One bad leader can poison an organization. Have you seen the destructive behaviors listed below?
Here are some of the "bad leader" traits that I have witnessed.
Destructive leaders often...
treat people as things or objects
rarely arouse, engage or inspire
aren't good at fixing problems, but excel at assigning blame
are great delegators, but don't like to follow-up
don't trust people that aren't in their close knit group (sometimes their close knit group is them)
believe in a sense of order, as long as they define the order
are greedy (more power, success, money)
believe people are easily expendable (they often have a history of failed personal relationships, marriages, business relationships, etc.)
don't have many (if any) true friends and close business relationships
aren't trustworthy and don't usually trust others
don't possess a common code of decency that others can easily recognize
consistently put their needs above those of their followers
aren't satisfied with what they have (jealousy and envy often drive their behavior)
take advantage of others in a way that can be personally destructive
usually can't create or implement lasting beneficial change due to non-involvement, personal courage, and conviction
are unwilling to have a personal stake in outcomes
often have personalities traits that are out of sync with mainstream thinking (this can also be a positive leadership trait)
often possess an uncanny ability to have both a blind eye and a deaf ear when dealing with others
take personal credit for group accomplishments or the accomplishments of others
are deceptive or intellectually dishonest. They muddy the truth with distorted language or they change the subject to attack your beliefs
rarely give public praise to another
aren't specific or can't be pinned down regarding their position
often leave others asking them to clarify their remarks or explain their position (often a hopeless cause)
love to communicate via e-mail to avoid facing others
often don't understand that the big picture is sometimes just one of the snapshots
use politics to gain power in a way that is unethical, unnecessary, and unwelcome
are self-centered vs. organization centered
often leave their followers "hung out to dry"
say one thing while actively planning to do something different
are poor role models
often make important decisions based upon sketchy information, emotion, or something out of the latest trade journal
believe they are smarter than everybody else
don't like to debate or participate in brainstorming sessions (this is beneath them)
are as transparent as a sheet of glass
Be careful when dealing with these people. Many of them have great power and aren't afraid to use it. Remember, when dealing with them to put personal feelings aside and treat them as you would want to be treated. Bad leaders are inevitable, however we often have to work with them, and we often need their help.
Remember the Golden Rule!
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Ten Words for Thoughtful Planning
It has been said that many new projects never flourish, they just fade away. This is a sign of a broken organization.
To help fix your organization in a small way, think about these ten things (I like the letter "S") to help you regain your planning focus:
______________________________
Strategy - Where are you going? Why do we need this? What is important?
Scrub - Scrub your data, scrub your processes, scrub your silos and across the silos to understand how things are managed and how work is accomplished.
Sort - Think about how work is done and who does it. Sort the work into distinct areas or functions. Plan for rework.
Scrutiny - Carefully review all information. E-mail isn't always your friend.
Sacrifice - Be willing to go to extraordinary lengths to have project success. Take your project's success personally.
Systems - Routines and processes for managing systems of things.
Strength - Focus on relationships. Focus on your strengths for each project.
Standards - Procedures that are followed. Continuous process improvement.
Stand - Be visible. Let the project members know where they are going and why. Lead!
Success - Define success for the project, and define success for your team.
To help fix your organization in a small way, think about these ten things (I like the letter "S") to help you regain your planning focus:
______________________________
Strategy - Where are you going? Why do we need this? What is important?
Scrub - Scrub your data, scrub your processes, scrub your silos and across the silos to understand how things are managed and how work is accomplished.
Sort - Think about how work is done and who does it. Sort the work into distinct areas or functions. Plan for rework.
Scrutiny - Carefully review all information. E-mail isn't always your friend.
Sacrifice - Be willing to go to extraordinary lengths to have project success. Take your project's success personally.
Systems - Routines and processes for managing systems of things.
Strength - Focus on relationships. Focus on your strengths for each project.
Standards - Procedures that are followed. Continuous process improvement.
Stand - Be visible. Let the project members know where they are going and why. Lead!
Success - Define success for the project, and define success for your team.
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
Project management by the numbers
Monday, September 22, 2008
Friday, September 19, 2008
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Monday, September 15, 2008
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.
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.
Saturday, September 06, 2008
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).
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).