3 ms·

The article and discussion here all seem to assume that everyone is acting rationally in service to the stated goal(s) of the project, and that problems with th

The article and discussion here all seem to assume that everyone is acting rationally in service to the stated goal(s) of the project, and that problems with the timeline are just honest mistakes. Unfortunately, in my 25 years, I've witnessed a nauseating amount of political infighting that sought to undermine projects in attempts to build and/or preserve internal power for respective managers. This behavior employs the 2 things readily at-hand for ruining estimating: bad-faith technical decisions, and good, old-fashioned feet dragging. I've spent most of my career in Fortune 250's, but I've seen this happen in a couple of very small companies too. As someone with a personality that is honest to a fault, this has caused me a significant amount of distress in my career. More than once, I've been the lone voice in the wilderness crying about the forthcoming train wrecks, only to be ignored, and then ultimately blamed for the crash, because I was the only one that people could point to for having said anything about it at all.

derbOac 5y ago
This essay and your last point really resonate with me. I've been surprised at the extent to which raising reasonable concerns, as a preventative or cautionary exercise, becomes equated with sabotage by some. I can think of projects initiated by colleagues that I would not have started because of obvious issues, but that I was nevertheless supportive of because I felt they were worth trying ("I wouldn't do this because of X but if A wants to try I'm on board and will help because if it works it would be good"), that failed, and then I ended up salvaging and cleaning up, but then was accused of sabotaging it from the start. In my those situations, it was accompanied by many other operational and management problems. Specifically, failures of communication and certain persons' perspectives being allowed to drown out all others the further you went up the administrative hierarchy.
AlbertCory 5y ago
You're absolutely right; they're not "honest mistakes" but they're not dishonest either. Even anonymity will not work unless the population is so large that they won't know the lone voice is you. What they really are is: peer pressure. If all your peers have signed up for May 1 and you "know" it'll really be September, you'll incur their displeasure (or worse) if you say that. As you found out.

derbOac 5y ago

This essay and your last point really resonate with me. I've been surprised at the extent to which raising reasonable concerns, as a preventative or cautionary exercise, becomes equated with sabotage by some. I can think of projects initiated by colleagues that I would not have started because of obvious issues, but that I was nevertheless supportive of because I felt they were worth trying ("I wouldn't do this because of X but if A wants to try I'm on board and will help because if it works it would be good"), that failed, and then I ended up salvaging and cleaning up, but then was accused of sabotaging it from the start. In my those situations, it was accompanied by many other operational and management problems. Specifically, failures of communication and certain persons' perspectives being allowed to drown out all others the further you went up the administrative hierarchy.

AlbertCory 5y ago

You're absolutely right; they're not "honest mistakes" but they're not dishonest either. Even anonymity will not work unless the population is so large that they won't know the lone voice is you. What they really are is: peer pressure. If all your peers have signed up for May 1 and you "know" it'll really be September, you'll incur their displeasure (or worse) if you say that. As you found out.