New York Times Says Research and Development Is Hard…but maybe not

At least that is what a reader is led to believe by reading this article that appeared over the weekend.  For those of you who didn’t catch it, Alphabet, which formerly had an R&D shop under the old Google moniker known as Google X, does pure R&D.  According to the reporter, one Conor Doughtery, the problem, you see, is that R&D doesn’t always translate into a direct short-term profit.  He then makes this absurd statement:  “Building a research division is an old and often unsuccessful concept.”  He knows this because some professor at Arizona State University–that world-leading hotbed of innovation and high tech–told him so.  (Yes, there is sarcasm in that sentence).

Had Mr. Doughtery understood new technology, he would know that all technology companies are, at core, research organizations that sometimes make money in the form of net profits, just as someone once accurately described to me that Tesla is a battery company that also makes cars (and lately its showing).  But let’s return the howler of a statement about research divisions being unsuccessful, apply some, you know, facts and empiricist thought, and go from there.

The most obvious example of a research division is Bell Labs.  From the article one would think that Bell Labs is a dinosaur of the past, but no, it still exists as Nokia Bell Labs.  Bell Labs was created in 1925, but has its antecedents in both Western Electric and AT&T, but its true roots go back to 1880 when Alexander Graham Bell, after being awarded the Volta prize for the invention of the telephone, opened Volta Labs in Washington, D.C.  But it was in the 1920s that Bell Labs, “the Idea Factory” really hit its stride.  Its researchers improved telephone switching, sound transmission, and invented radio astronomy, the transistor, the laser, information theory (of which I’ve written about extensively and which directly impacts on computing and software), Unix, the languages C, C++.  Bell established the precedent that researchers kept and were compensated for use of their inventions and IP.  This goes well beyond the assertion in the article that Bell Labs largely made “contributions to basic, university-style research.”  I guess New York Times reporters, fact checkers, and editors don’t have access to the Google search engine or Wikipedia.

Between 1937 and 2014 seventeen of their researchers have been awarded the Nobel Prize or Turing Award.  Even those who never garnered an award like Claude Shannon, of the aforementioned information theory, is among a Who’s Who of researchers into high tech.  What they didn’t invent directly they augmented and facilitated to practical use, with a good deal of their input going into public R&D through consulting and other contracts with the Department of Defense and federal government.

The reason why Bell Labs didn’t continue as a research division of AT&T wasn’t due to some dictate of the market or investor dissatisfaction.  On the contrary, AT&T (Ma Bell) dominated its market, and Bell Labs ensured that it stayed far ahead of any possible entry.  This is why in 1984 the U.S. Justice Department reached a divestiture agreement for AT&T under antitrust laws to split off Bell Labs from its local carriers in order to promote competition.  Whether the divestiture agreement was a good deal for the American people and had positive economic effects is still a cause for debate, but it is likely that the plethora of choices in cell phone and other technologies that have emerged since that time would not have gone to market without that antitrust action.

Since 1984, Bell Labs continued its significant contributions to the high tech industry through AT&T Technologies which was spun off in 1996 as Lucent Technologies, which is probably why Mr. Doughtery didn’t recognize it.  A merger with Alcaltel and then acquisition by Nokia has provided it with its current moniker.  Bell Labs over that period continued to innovate and has contributed significantly to pushing the boundaries of broadband speed and the use of imaging technology in the medical field.

So what this shows is that, while not every bit of R&D leads directly to profit, especially in the short term, a mix of types of R&D do yield practical results.  Anyone who has worked in project management understands that R&D, by definition, represents the handling of risk.  Furthermore, the lessons learned and spin offs are hard to estimate in advance, though they may result in practical technologies in the short and medium term.

When one reads past the lede and the “research division is an old and often unsuccessful concept” gaffe, among others, what you find is that Google specifically wants this portion of the research division to come up with a series of what it calls a “moon shots”.  In techie lingo this is often called a unicorn, and from personal experience I am part of a company that recently was characterized as delivering a unicorn.  This is simply a shorthand term for producing a solution that is practical, groundbreaking, and shifts the dialogue of what is possible.  (Note that I’m avoiding the tech hipster term “disruption”).

Another significant fact that we find out about Google X is the following:

X employees avoid talking about money, but it is not a subject they can ignore. They face financial barriers that can shut down a project if it does not pan out as quickly as planned. And they have to meet various milestones before they can hire more people for their teams.

This sounds a lot like project and risk management.  But Google X goes a bit further.

Failure bonuses are also an example of how X, which was set up independent of Google from the outset, is a leading indicator of sorts for how the autonomous Alphabet could work. In Alphabet, employees who do not work for Mother Google are supposed to have their financial futures tied to their own company instead of Google’s search ads. At X, that means killing things before they become too expensive.

Note that the incentive here, given in terms of a real financial incentive to the team members, is to manage risk.  No doubt, there are no #NoEstimates cultists at Google.  Psychologically, providing an incentive to find failure no doubt defeats Groupthink and optimism selection bias.  Much of this sounds, particularly in the expectation of non-existential failure, amazingly along the lines of an article recently published on AITS.org by yours truly.

The delayed profitability of software and technology companies is commonplace.  The reason for this is that, at least to my thinking, any technology type worth their salt will continue to push the technology once they have their first version marked to market.  If you’re resting on your laurels then you’re no longer in the software technology business, you’re in the retail business and might as well be selling candy bars or any other consumer product.  What you’re not doing is being engaged in providing a solution that is essential to the target domain.  Practically what this means is that, in garnering value, net profitability is not necessary the measure of success, especially in the first years.

For example, such market leaders such as Box, Workday, and Salesforce have gone years without a net profit, though revenues and market share are significant.  Facebook did not turn a profit for five yearsAmazon took six years, and even those figures were questionable.  The competing need for any executive running a company is between value (the intrinsic value of IP, existing customer base, and potential customer base), and profit.  The job of the CEO is not just to stockholders, yet the article in its lede clearly is biased in that way.  The fiduciary and legal responsibility of the CEO is to the customers, the employees, the entity, and the stockholders–and not necessarily in that order.  This is thus a natural conflict in balancing these competing interests.

Overall, if one ignores the contributions of the reporter, the case of Google X is a fascinating one for its expectations and handling or risk in R&D-focused project management.  It takes value where it can and cuts its losses through incentives to find risk that can’t be handled.  An investor that lives in the real world should find this reassuring.  Perhaps these lessons on incentives can be applied elsewhere.

 

Over at AITS.org — Failure is not Optional

My latest is at this link at AITS.org with the provocative title: “Failure is not Optional: Why Project Failure is OK.”  The theme and specifics of the post, however, are not that simple and I continue with a sidebar on Grant’s conduct of the Overland Campaign entitled “How Grant Leveraged Failure in the Civil War.”  A little elaboration is in place once you read the entire post.

I think what we deal with in project management are shades of failure.  It is important to understand this because we rely too often on projections of performance that oftentimes turn out to be unrealistic within the framing assumptions of project management.  In this context our definition of what defines success turns out to be fluid.

To provide a simplistic example of other games of failure, let’s take the game of American baseball.  A batter who hits safely more than 30% of the time is deemed to be skilled in the art of hitting a baseball.  A success.  Yet, when looked at it from a total perspective what this says is that 70% failure is acceptable.  A pitcher who gives up between 2 and 4 earned runs a game is considered to be skilled in the art of pitching.  Yet, this provides a range of acceptable failure under the goal of giving up zero runs.  Furthermore, if your team wins 9-4 you’re considered to be a winning pitcher.  If you lose 1-0 you are a losing pitcher, and there are numerous examples of talented pitchers who were considered skilled in their craft who had losing records because of lack of run production by his team.  Should the perception of success and failure be adjusted based on whether one pitched for the 1927 or 1936 or 1998 Yankees, or the 1963 Dodgers, or 1969 Mets?  The latter two examples were teams built on just enough offense to provide the winning advantage, with the majority of pressure placed on the pitching staff.  Would Tom Seaver be classified as less extraordinary in his skill if he averaged giving up half a run more?  Probably.

Thus, when we look at the universe of project management and see that the overwhelming majority of IT projects fail, or that the average R&D contract realizes a 20% overrun in cost and a significant slip in schedule, what are we measuring?  We are measuring risk in the context of games of failure.  We handle risk to absorb just enough failure and noise in our systems to both push the envelope on development without sacrificing the entire project effort.  To know the difference between transient and existential failure, between learning and wasted effort, and between intermediate progress and strategic position requires a skillset that is essential to ultimate achievement of the goal, whether it be deployment of a new state-of-the-art aircraft, or a game-changing software platform.  The noise must pass what I have called the “so-what?” test.

I have listed a set of skills necessary to the understanding these differences in the article that you may find useful.  I have also provided some ammunition for puncturing the cult of “being green.”

Sunday Music Interlude — Adia Victoria, SHEL, and onDeadWaves

I haven’t written about music in a while, so it’s time to catch up on some of the more interesting new acts and new projects that I’ve come across.

Originally out of South Carolina, Adia Victoria now calls Nashville home.  Her interesting bio can be found at Allmusic.com here.  Her original music is a combination of country and electric blues, punk, garage rock, and a modern type of dark Americana roots music borne of the narrative tradition and neo-folk.  Her voice consists of a girlish rasp wrapped in an alto silkiness.  You can learn more about her at her website at www.adiavictoria.com.

She was named WXPN’s Artist to Watch for July 2016, and just performed on NPR’s Tiny Desk Concert.  The performance from this last appears below.

 

SHEL is a group of four sisters out of Fort Collins, Colorado.  I wrote about them back in September 2014 as they were just out of the egg, featuring their neo-folk music after an EP and first album.  They have since matured and have come out with a critically hailed album entitled Just Crazy Enough.  They just played live on Echoes.org with John Diliberto.   Here they are performing a couple of selections that reveal both their developing maturity and natural talent informed by that maturity.  The first is “Let Me Do.”  The song begins as a deceptively simplistic song that then changes both tempo and melody, carried by the ethereal combined voice of their harmony vocals in the call and response from narrative to chorus.

Speaking of ethereal, here is SHEL performing “I’m Just a Shadow.”  This is first class neo-noir folk and roots music.  The following Lyric Video highlights the emotional power of the lyrics.

It is probably time for a shout-out to John Diliberto at Echoes.org.  I actually came across John’s taste in music through the program Star’s End, which is still on-going.  There I was introduced to ambient and space music in the 1970s when I split time between visits to my home state of New Jersey and during trips from my job in Washington, D.C.  FM radio waves being as they were, especially in the early morning over weekends, I would occasionally be able to tune into the program, which memory serves was out of Philly, while driving down some deserted highway with the star-streaked night sky above, and wish that the feeling of my movement through time and space, the fresh air from the open windows, the firmament of the night sky, and the music–which seemed to transport me to some other dimension–would never end.  Then, after years traveling and at sea, I was reintroduced to John as music critic through his contributions to the long-missed CD Review magazine.  His thoughtful, eloquent, and informative reviews opened my world to new music and new musical genre’s that I would probably not otherwise have explored.  There are a few critics that fall into this category which, for me, includes Ralph Gleason, Leonard Feather, Ira Gitler, John McDonough, Robert Christgau, Gary Giddins, Orrin Keepnews, Greil Marcus, Dave Marsh, Michael Cuscuna, and David Dye, among a few–all good company.

This serves as introduction to another project to which I was introduced through Echoes.org and Mr. Diliberto.  It is the group onDeadWaves.  The group consists of British singers Polly Scattergood and James Chapman.  Their maiden album is this month’s Echoes CD of the Month.  According to the review by John Diliberto, onDeadWaves’s sound is like “a meeting of Lanterna, driving across the desert in a 57 ‘Chevy, with Leonard Cohen and Lucinda Williams in the backseat.”  Their music, also called “shoegaze west”, seems more varied, especially when confronted by the 60’s Byrd’s-like guitar and unrestrained punk of the song “California.”  Overall, though, I can hear the influence of the moodier neo-noir song-styling of Lana Del Rey through most of the songs.  Perhaps Ms. Del Rey was onto something after all.

Here they are the song “Blue Inside”.  Other videos are also available at the Echoes site linked above.

 

My Little Town — Orlando, Florida

Pulse Orlando memorial

Photo courtesy of Donna Pisano

Conference, workshop, and vacation season had slowed blogging of late.  When it was over I had a number of things to post regarding interesting discussions and trends in the field of project management.  Then on my return to my adopted home town of Orlando, the singer Christina Grimmie was shot and killed after performing a concert at the local music venue The Plaza Live–a beautiful young woman senselessly struck down by a cypher of a man.  Then, early on Sunday my wife and I woke to the news of the mass shooting at Pulse nightclub.  Both venues are less than two miles from our home.

Writing about the more mundane issues of contract, technology, and earned value management just does not seem appropriate when the families of the 49 dead and 42 wounded are either mourning or anxiously hopeful so close by.

The impact on this community has been significant.  Orlando, as most cities, is a place of contradictions.  In the minds of tourists and those who come here for the amusement parks, it is all about Disney, Sea World, Universal, and all of the others.  This, however, is not Orlando.  Back when the parks were being planned and built they took advantage of the cheap land that was situated in the surrounding countryside of pine forest and played out orange groves.  Orlando happened to be the closest town of any significant size, and the local boosters were all too happy to accommodate, so Orlando became synonymous with the parks, which actually mostly lie near what used to be the hamlet of Kissimmee.

But Orlando and its people is more than that, but this is not a treacly homage.

My earliest encounter with Orlando came when I was a student at Stetson University, which is situated in DeLand, Florida, back in 1972.  Back then Orlando had the reputation of being a mostly white, Anglo-Protestant community that was largely racially and ethnically intolerant.  The “N” word was used freely.  African-American communities were walled off from the community at large by the construction of highways.  When a section of town became desirable, they were effectively disenfranchised from their land and homes through the coordination of real estate developers, local politicians, lawyers, and judges.  The orange groves and vegetable fields used migrant labor.  At first these were also African American, but Hispanic laborers also entered the picture back in the 1960s and 1970s.  The Edward R. Murrow documentary Harvest of Shame from 1960 chronicled the lives of migrant workers during this early period, a system that still lived on into the ’70s and early ’80s.  When the United Farm Workers union began to organize, the large orange and agricultural companies hired Pinkertons and Wackenhut men to break them up, often recruiting the more athletic students from the surrounding colleges like Stetson to do some of their dirty work.

For a New Jersey boy looking to make Florida home (this was before I decided to make the United States Navy my home) the old saw back then was there were two types of Yankees:  Yankees and Damned Yankees.  It was said that the difference was that the latter category wouldn’t go back home.  This was a traditional stance in Florida, which in its advertising from the days of Henry Flagler and his Florida East Coast Railway, and Henry Plant and his Plant System of railroads, steamboats, and steamships, beginning in the 1880s, sought to remake Florida from a hostile land of uninhabitable swamps, a hotbeds of the Confederacy and rampant racism, to a vacation playland, constructed to draw the new disposable income of a growing middle class from the urban and suburban communities from the north.  Thus was established the tradition of high profits for the rich developer and low pay for the workers.

But things have changed.

The introduction of air conditioning and the Civil Rights movement began transforming parts of the American south in the 1950s toward more emigration and diversity, at first confined to the coastal communities of Miami, Ft. Lauderdale, West Palm Beach, and Tampa, but the pace and geographical reach of the change has accelerated.  Orlando has been part of that transformation.  I saw it through my parents, who resettled from New Jersey and called Orlando home for over 20 years.

Our community today is a bastion of tolerance and diversity in a state that still, all too often, is a sea of intolerance, bigotry, and privilege.  For those who come to the town of Orlando they are impressed with our modern urban downtown district, our world class healthcare facilities (which transformed themselves from places of mediocrity and exclusion), and our beautiful red-bricked road, oak tree lined historic neighborhoods of hanging Spanish moss containing pretty cottages and early vernacular homes.  For foodies, we have world-class chefs opening new restaurants.  We also have vibrant neighborhoods of new ethnic immigrants.  We have a Vietnamese neighborhood and Hispanic neighborhoods from multiple cultures: Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, and others.  We have beautiful parks and pedestrian-friendly neighborhoods.  We have world class musical venues, night clubs, and professional sports franchises.  We have havens for people who otherwise are shunned by the intolerant.

Most importantly, the overwhelming majority of my fellow Orlandoans are friendly and respectful.  It is a community that I have found doesn’t care a whit about one’s geographical, racial, or ethnic origins, their sexual orientation, or their religious beliefs.  It is not, however, utopia.  There are great chasms of class differences that reflect the larger society–the tradition of low pay and union busting continuing to this day.  There are frictions along the edges as the community as it accepts and incorporates new emigrants and cultural traditions.  We also still have overhanging racial problems borne of exploitation, neglect, and prejudice.

But on the whole, Orlando in the year 2016 is a good place to live and work, it addresses its shortcomings and embraces change while largely working to preserve what is good–and I have lived in communities across the country and traveled around the world against which to compare it.

What has impressed me most about the reaction of my adopted home is the outpouring of love and support to the victims and their families, and to the First Responders made up of local, state, and national law enforcement, but especially, of our medical professionals.  The community is shocked, but rather than anger and intolerance, they have responded by giving blood, donating food and other supplies, being a little kinder in their encounters with their neighbors, more courteous on the morning commute or in encounters on the sidewalk, and are coming to grips with actions that are both inexplicable and horrific.  More importantly, they are seeing the act at Pulse for what it is–a hate crime against our vibrant LGBTQ community and what it means to our town.

For just down the road, barely half an hour drive away, politicians in Florida communities have used the old scare tactics of pedophilia and rape against transgender bathroom usage and, as such, have cultivated an environment of intolerance and hostility to that community.  The Florida Attorney General fought tooth and nail against gay marriage, and is now having a hard time living up to her words and actions.  Now, thanks to that intolerance and bigotry, the partners of the victims–who are not recognized as such–cannot obtain information about their loved ones.  Gay men giving blood face discrimination based on the illogical fear of AIDS.

People are also recognizing that the widespread availability of powerful firearms meant for war and conflict will only guarantee that we’ll be mourning for other victims again.  It must stop.  It all must stop.

I am overwhelmed with a feeling of sadness for what has happened.  Sadness, love, and support is leading to thought.  Thought and reflection will lead to determined action.

The hate-filled speech coming from some quarters is not having much of an effect here.  Attributing the actions of a first generation American to his ethnic heritage is bigotry and we’ve had enough of that.  One need only substitute the heritage of that individual for the heritage of any other person who commits a crime to see the stupidity of the logic behind it.  There was a day when my own swarthy ancestors of Italian and Jewish origins were similarly tarred.  No group has a corner on integrity or wickedness.

Life does go on and in the near future I will write about the technical aspects of my discipline and my ideas to improve it.  But, for now, here is a document about my little town and life in it in the face of monstrous acts.

The (Contract) is parent to the (Project)

It’s been a late spring filled with travel and tragedy.  Blogging had taken a hiatus, except for AITS.org, which I highly encourage you check out.  My next item will be posted there the first week of July.  The news from Orlando is that we are united and strong as a community, facing down both crackpots and opportunists, and so it is back to work.

At a recent conference one of the more interesting conversations surrounded the difference between contract and project management.  To many people this is one of the same–and a simple Google search reinforces this perception–but, I think, this is a misconception.

The context of the discussion was interesting in that it occurred during an earned value management-focused event.  EVM pitches itself as the glue that binds together the parts of project management that further constitutes integrated project management, but I respectfully disagree.  If we ignore the self-promotion of this position and like good engineers stick to our empiricist approach, we will find that EVM is a method of deriving the financial value of effort within a project.  It is also a pretty good indicator of cost risk manifestation.  This last shouldn’t be taken too far.

A recent DoD study, which is not yet published, demonstrated that early warning cannot be had by EVM even when diving into the details.  Instead, ensuring integration and traceability to the work package level tied to schedule activities could be traced to the slips in schedule (and the associated impact of the bow wave) against the integrated master schedule (IMS), which then served as the window to early warning.  So within the limited context of project performance, EVM itself is just one of many points of entry to eventually get to the answer.  This answer, of course, needs to be both timely and material.

Material in this case refers to the ability to understand the relevance and impact of the indicator.  The latest buzz-phrase to this condition is “actionable” but that’s just a marketing ploy to make a largely esoteric and mundane evolution sound more exciting.  No indicator by itself is ever actionable.  In some cases the best action is no action.  Furthermore, a seemingly insignificant effort may have asymmetrical impacts that threaten the project itself.  This is where risk enters the picture.

When speaking of risk, all too often the discussion comes down to simulated Monte Carlo analysis.  For the project professional situated within the earned value domain, this is a convenient way to pigeonhole the concept and keep it bounded within familiar pathways, but it does little to add new information.  When applied within this context the power of Monte Carlo is limited to a range of probable outcomes within the predictive capabilities of EVM and the IMS.  This is not to minimize the importance of applying the method to these artifacts but, instead, a realization that it is a limited application.

For risk also includes factors that are external to these measurements.  Oftentimes this is called qualitative risk, but that is an all too familiar categorization that makes it seem fuzzy.  These external factors are usually the driving environment factors that limit the ability of the project to adapt.  These factors also incorporate the framing assumptions underlying the justification for the project effort.  Thus, we are led to financing and the conditions needed to achieve the next milestone for financing.  In government project management, this is known as the budget hearing cycle, and it can be both contentious and risky.

Thus, as with the title of this post, the project is really the child of the contract.  Yet when speaking of contract management the terms or often intertwined, or are relegated to the prosaic legalese of contract clauses and, in government, to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR).  But that does not constitute contract management.

This is where our discussions became interesting.  Because need invoke only one element not incorporated into consideration to prove the point.  Let’s take Contract Budget Base (CBB).  This number is made up of the negotiated contract cost (NCC) plus authorized unpriced work (AUW).  In order to take these elements into account, since existing systems act as if they are external to consideration, ephemeral tools or spreadsheets are used to augment the tracking and incorporation of AUW and its impact on the CBB, though the risk of incorrectly tracking and incorporating this work is immeasurably more risky than any single work package or control account in the more closely monitored program management baseline (PMB).  The same goes with management reserve (MR), and even within the PMB itself, undistributed budget (UB), work authorizations (WADs), and change order tracking and impact analysis are often afterthoughts.

But back to the contract itself, the highest elements of the contract are the total allocated budget (TAB) and profit/fee.  But this is simply shorthand for the other elements that affect the TAB.  For example, some contracts have contract clauses that provide incentives and/or penalties that are tied to technical achievement or milestones, yet our project systems act as if these conditions are unanticipated events that fall from the sky.  Only by augmenting project management indicators are these important contract management anticipated and their impacts assessed.

In my own experience, in looking at the total contract, I have seen projects fail for want of the right “color” of money being provided within the window for decisive impact on risk manifestation.  Thus, cashflow–and the manner in which cashflow is released to fund a project–enters the picture.  But more to the point, I have seen the decision regarding cashflow made based on inadequate or partial data that was collected at a level of the structure that was largely irrelevant.  When looking at the life-cycle management of a system–another level up in our hierarchy–our need for awareness–and the information systems that can augment that awareness–becomes that much more acute.

The point here is that, while we are increasingly concerned about the number of angels dancing on the head of the EVM pin, we are ignoring other essential elements of project success.  When speaking of integrated project management, we are speaking of slightly expanding our attention span in understanding the project ecosystem–and yet even those moderate efforts meet resistance.  Given new technology, it is time to begin incorporating those elements that go well beyond the integration of cost, schedule, and bounded schedule risk.

 

Wednesday Music Interlude — Homage to Guy Clark

Guy Clark, famous luthier, songwriter, and singer died last week while I was on travel, and so this tribute is somewhat late.  I had heard Clark’s songs through other artists but came late to his music, being a sailor and preoccupied with other concerns.  But finding myself on dry land one day I picked up and listened to a copy of Dublin Blues.   The title song froze me in my tracks and I was hooked.

Here was a man with the ability to take the internal voice that animates and provides narrative to our everyday lives and put it to song with all of its emotional rawness and nuance intact.  That ability in itself marks a true artist.  To sing that way in front of others requires emotional honesty and courage that few possess.  Using that same courage he could also be topical, and his songs “El Coyote” and “Heroes”, both from 2013, are as topical as anything done by Guthrie, Seeger, or Dylan.

To me Clark was a folksinger–one of the most important this country has ever produced.  He led the Nashville progressive country music scene and was one of the leaders of the Outlaw country movement along with Waylon Jennings, Willie Nelson, Kris Kristofferson, Johnny Cash, and Merle Haggard, among others.  His musical approach was deeply influenced by Townes Van Zandt, and you can hear his influence in the songs of both Steve Earl and Lyle Lovett.  A few years ago I had the pleasure of hearing him, along with Lyle Lovett, Joe Ely, and John Hiatt in concert, unplugged as they say.  Just four old boys playing heartfelt music, like sitting around the campfire.  Waiting for Woody and Pete to show up; and maybe Doc and Hank Sr. too.

His voice will be missed.  Here he is singing the song that introduced me to his music.

Over at AITS.org — Open a Window: Using Data and Self-Awareness to Remove Organizational Blind Spots

As I’ve written in the past, as I get over my recent writer’s block, all of the interesting articles on project management are found at AITS.org. My latest post deals with the use of data in approaching the organizational Johari Window. Please check it out.