Project resources are assigned to solve problems.

Sometimes throwing more resources at problems might help solve them faster. More hands, more eyes, more brains on a task can unlock a bottleneck.

Then again, throwing more at a problem doesn’t always speed things up.

I heard recently an acquaintance is pregnant; it reminded me of a project management quip about adding resources to solve a problem:

It takes nine months to make a baby, typically involving one woman and one man. If you’re in a rush, involving nine men, or nine women, doesn’t mean it will be done in a month.

Consider intelligence in two frames: fluid or crystallised.

Fluid intelligence is ‘idea-generating’, while crystallised intelligence is “making links and using knowledge” rather than creating it.

People with experience (i.e. age) use crystallised intelligence to improve the known. For example, salespeople hone their pitch, or government workers get through red tape.

Our brain is a library accumulating books, which feeds crystallised knowledge.

Fluid intelligence figures out which books to accumulate, and the crystallising is reading, adopting, and adapting that knowledge.

The science shows that our brains change in mid-life. We rely more on crystallised knowledge because we’ve built up our library.

There’s an interesting concept around “Work as Imagined” versus “Work as Done”. Until you’d first heard of it, you maybe didn’t consider the difference between them. But when you are aware of it, it’s a very useful concept to keep in mind, especially if you’re a manager.

The idea that we imagine work differently to how work is actually done is not a big leap.

The ‘imagining’ of work incorporates the assumptions, expectations, and simplifications by someone perhaps not actually doing the work.

The ‘doing’ of the work incorporates working conditions, schedules, and variability that are hard to imagine correctly.

I remember a situation many years ago when I was quality manager for a construction company. Our purchasing officer was organising a second order of cabling for a facilities projects coming up. His plea to me was valid:

"This vendor gave us crap products last time - they were basically wrong. And yet, they are ISO9001 certified, and they’re the lowest price on the bid list. What do I do?"

He was under pressure to award the contract. We were a small order, so had no pull with the vendor. There wasn’t an obvious alternative.

The vendor got the contract.

“The meter was only a metre away from the mitred joint. And then the regulator wanted to check if the regulator was working. But then again, the service line was in need of a service.”

The three sentences above were sentences that actually could have been used in a discussion I was having today. It was while facilitating a risk management workshop for some infrastructure assets in Queensland, that it occurred to me how we were using the same words for very different things.

In conversations, particularly technical ones, there’s a chance someone in the room hasn’t followed along entirely.

In business efficiency programs, we develop flowcharts and process flows and swim lanes and dot-point or numbered lists.

These are all viable and recognisable ways to describe a business process. Follow through the steps in the flowchart, and all will work out fine. There is truth in their ability to clearly depict a procedural sequence; there’s nothing wrong with that.

There’s a space, though, between the numbered items, or between the boxes on a flowchart.

The work required, the waiting, the uncertainty: all things that space represents.

That space between can carry more weight than the boxes connected to it.

The urban dictionary or other entertainment-based resources will explain the background to the quip, ‘show the receipts.’

The phrase is an analogy for being able to demonstrate a confirmation, show proof, or provide documentary evidence that something was done or said.

In our professional lives, collecting receipts – proof of effort - is a smart idea. Then, when we need to demonstrate our abilities, we can show those receipts, to demonstrate previous effort undertaken.

In the world of career tests – like a job interview, or a performance review, or a credential exam, there is every reason to have our receipts ready.

It’s not ant season in Brisbane, but every spring, the battle is on. I figure out where they’re coming into the house, and resolutely stop them.

A while ago, I was standing in a field and realised I was standing on an anthill. I jumped around and in doing so, stepped resolutely into their existence. They scurried into action, racing around to fix their broken home and tend to the mess left behind.

I bring this up because it feels like humanity is an anthill, and it’s been stepped on. We’re now scurrying into action, tending to our changed conditions.

A vexing problem for any person whose job involves handling or using information, is the corralling, filing, structuring, retaining and otherwise accessing and using that knowledge and information, at the right time, when it’s needed.

Whew, there is a lot to that long sentence.

It’s the last phrases that catch me out: the right time, when it’s needed. I think a word for it is “contemporaneous”.

The reality is, we live with just-in-time expectations, for delivery of inventory, or for finding knowledge. We learn in-depth when we need to, but rarely make time for it if it’s not immediately needed.

I can’t let July 1st, being Canada Day, go by without recognising my own deep Canadian-ness. For someone who is firmly and squarely Canadian, it’s hard to admit I’ve lived away from it for over twenty years.

I don’t think I’ll ever call myself Australian, even though I have dual passports. And yet I write Australian on the immigration card when I (used to) arrive in the country after an international trip.

Being more than one thing is accepted these days. We’re also asked to be ‘authentic’. Yet sometimes that’s a bit muddy when we can be two things equally.

There’s an expression, ‘you can’t un-ring a bell’.

It applies to many work and life situations: it’s hard to stop an established process or expectation.

Once the document has been created, it’s likely that someone will expect it in the future.

Once a safety procedure is in place, it’s very difficult to cancel or remove it from the process.

More good advice: don’t remove a barrier or task until you’re certain of its purpose.

But sometimes, when clearing clutter, it’s nearly impossible to get past the “this isn’t needed” thought.

But the bell has been rung, and it’s been heard.

Behaviour changes over age ranges, regardless of what year you were that age, regardless of your generational label.

From 0-25 there are obvious changes: we’re growing, learning, and are, well, selfish.

Between 25-45 it’s about career, growth, opportunities, and perhaps being a parent.

The thing is, if you were 40 in 1970, 1990 or 2010, or will be in 2040, those important things don’t change.

It doesn’t matter if you’re Gen X or Next Gen, at 40 you’re thinking about your career and opportunities.

After 45, well, there’s a hill. But it’s not necessarily downhill. It’s just a different hill.

Those who struggle with decision-making might not even realise they are avoiding it. The difficulty may be associated with the responsibility that comes with deciding an outcome.

All decisions have consequences. Even the answer to ‘what’s for dinner’ has a cascading series of consequences. A roast beef needs more time than a stir-fry. If you don’t have pasta in the pantry, that decision was ‘wrong’. If you burn yourself steaming the vegetables, then your decision has induced pain.

Decisions have consequences. And the decision-maker wears the responsibility for those consequences.

Decision-makers are excellent at accepting responsibility. They have to be.

It’s difficult for knowledge workers to ‘prove’ expertise in a concise and simple manner. We might agree it’s more obvious for a chef, or a cabinet maker, or a tennis player.

A consistent approach to this might help demonstrate ability and competence.

Competency has aspects of knowledge, skills, and experience. If we agree those are a basis for competency then:

• Knowledge is assessed by review of training/education; outputs/documents; and an end result.

• Skills are assessed by repetitive demonstration; interactions with others; and feedback.

• Experience could be assessed through exposure to situations; stories told about those situations; and reviews from others.

There are deep benefits of having routines and sticking to them as much as possible.

Not “set in stone, thou shalt not change” routines. Just something or a few things you try to stick to as much as possible. Or something you do every week. For example, I like(d) to swim lengths at the pool every Sunday. I’m missing that, and that’s because it was a routine.

Ironically, there is freedom in the routine. Just knowing, for example, every Sunday I swim, means one less decision to make. Without that routine, I’m now having to make one more decision each week.

It’s been suggested that universities should add more ‘soft skills’ courses to engineering and technical degrees.

It’s not new, and 100 words here isn’t going to solve it. There’s an ongoing conundrum with whether universities should teach skills, or knowledge.

But it’s relevant to recognise that the job of today’s engineer is more than design or delivering an elegant solution. Engineers today spend time influencing outcomes, navigating emails, and attending meetings.

Employers want deep technical skills when hiring technical and engineering personnel, and rightly so. But on top of that, employers also want the negotiator, leader, writer, and first responder.

Since we are benefitting now with the long-term possibility of remote working arrangements, perhaps another disruption could be coming in the training budget model.

Some employees have a very high expectation that the employer should cover all training costs. Others see professional development as their own cost. It’s the trainee that benefits most. And there’s every possibility that the employment arrangement might change in the future.

Perhaps distributing the training budget directly to employees, with incentives to use it on recommended training, has merit.

When you get trained, you get to keep the knowledge, even if you leave the company.

Collaboration is required almost every day of our working lives. For projects to be successful, we will always need to be able to work with others.

In addition to mainstream teachings on teamwork and leadership, there are some overarching basics that, if managed well, provide reliable platforms for collaboration.

Good teamwork can be made great when conditions, structures, and processes, as well as basic personnel attitudes and behaviour to the project, are aligned with the end goal.

When two-way information flow, work routines and project control systems and structures are set up to meet the project needs, collaboration is easier.

The project management triangle is familiar: scope, schedule and budget. And the meme that goes with it: Pick two, and only two. Cheap, good, fast. But you can’t have all three.

There’s another project triad I use which allows choosing any one of them, and the other two will follow: quality, risk and competence.

• Improve quality, and you are managing risk and raising competence.

• A good risk culture requires high levels of competence, and the quality follows.

• With a highly competent workforce, managing quality and risk fall into place.

Now we’re not stuck with ‘two out of three ain’t bad’.

It’s enjoyable to be in a discussion in which everyone agrees within the topic. There’s furious agreement, and there’s no tension or discomfort.

Contrast that to when there is a dissenter or two amongst the party. The mood is different when someone in the discussion has a unique view, a different interpretation, or a contrasting conclusion. Then it becomes awkward and fraught.

A dissenter isn’t necessarily trying to be difficult, rather, they just have a different view.

The setting matters (social or professional), but the feeling is the same.

Handling difference is a skill for all of us to embrace.