SPOKE - Mental models for Project Managers

Mental models are our simplified internal representations of how the world works. These are sometimes referred to as “general rules of them” or heuristics. They are created based on personal experiences, beliefs, values and also cultural norms. Mental models are used to make sense of new information, solve problems, and make decisions. They can be conscious or unconscious. Most of the time, you don't even notice them. They can be negatively biased by prejudice and other factors, and that's why it's very important to know them before they mislead you.

These are the most important ones that an expert Project Manager should be aware of.

Project Mental Models

Schedule

(PMI-SP)

Scope

(Scope)

Quality

(QA)

Cost

(Cost)

Integration

(Int)

Human Resources

(HR)

Risk

(PMI-RMP)

Procurement

(Proc)

Time

(Time)

Communication

(Comms)

Project Communications Management

Effective Communication Techniques

A list of mental models and biases that are relevant to the PMI knowledge area of Project Communications Management

The Pyramid Principle

Description:

This communication framework (created by Barbara Minto in her book The Pyramid Principle: Logic in Writing and Thinking.) emphasizes starting with a main point or conclusion and then providing supporting information. This approach grabs attention and can help ensure that important information is conveyed clearly and effectively, by providing the supporting evidence in a clear and logical manner. Show how the different points are connected and show how conclusions were drawn from the findings.

Utilization:

Use the Pyramid Principle to structure project communications, focusing on key messages and supporting information that is relevant and necessary for stakeholders to understand.

The 5 C's of Communication

Description:

Keep in mind that clear, concise, complete, correct, and courteous communication is essential for effective project management. Ineffective communication can lead to misunderstandings, project delays, and conflict.

Mitigation:

Establish clear communication channels and guidelines for communication, including expectations for tone and professionalism between the team and the stakeholders. Note that too much information in one statement can lead to stakeholders not understanding your message. User short sentences with concise language.  Always remain courteous. It is important to maintain good relationships in order to build trust and allow for collaboration. 

Personal Incredulity

Description:

If a person does not understand or believe something, or if the information contradicts their existing beliefs or assumptions, then this new information is likely to be rejected by them due to  a bias called cognitive dissonance. This can lead to misunderstandings or a lack of trust between stakeholders.

Mitigation:

Help the stakeholder understand that complex topics may require significant upfront work to understand. If needs be, point out that this is a complex topic but that should not lead to them immediately dismissing it. Acknowledge differing opinions and work to understand and address any underlying concerns or objections. Help your stakeholders understand how the evidence enables everyone to reach the project goals. But be mindful of their doubts and objections; listen carefully and consider your answers.

Metcalfe’s Law

Description:

While the value of a team increases as the number of participants increases.  (the value is proportional to the square of the number of participants), so too does its complexity. Each additional team members or stakeholders will have a preference on how they receive updates. Some prefer email, some Slack, while some prefer face to face communication. Adding additional stakeholders or groups impacts the way information spreads and is shared to stakeholders.

Mitigation:

Create a communication plan, which should include a Stakeholder Matrix. Identify who should be consulted and who should be informed. Note how best to inform them. Use a variety of communication channels to ensure information is reaching all stakeholders and that there is a two-way flow of communication between the Project Manager and their stakeholders. Push information to a central channel (such as Slack / MS Teams or Sharepoint/Confluence. Let the team pull from that information to keep everyone on track.

Framing Effect

Description:

The way a message or problem is presented influences how it is perceived.  It can be presented either positively (a problem to be solved) or negatively. Be aware that this can impact the way stakeholders perceive the project and its objectives.

Example

Negative: 10% of this produce is pure fat.

Positive: 90% fat free.

Negative: Saying "this will not work".

Positive: Saying "what other approach could bring us closer to success?"

Mitigation:

Use clear, concise and neutral language to present information and avoid using loaded language or emotional appeals. Use visual cues such as images or diagrams to reinforce the message, break down language barriers and help to prevent misunderstandings.

Bandwagon Effect

Description:

The Bandwagon effect, also known as the "herd mentality", is a cognitive bias whereby individuals tend to adopt certain beliefs or behaviors simply because many others are doing so. This phenomenon often occurs when people are uncertain about what course of action to take, so they look to others for guidance.

For Project Manager, the Bandwagon effect can manifest itself when team members blindly follow popular opinions or trends without thoroughly evaluating their potential impact. Our desire for conformity sways our decision-making, as its usually an easier option. We can then double-down on these beliefs, even if we didn't hold them strongly initially. This can lead to groupthink or a lack of diversity in ideas or perspectives within projects.

Mitigation:

Initially, ensure that your team is diverse as possible, so that you can gain many different insights. One way to mitigate these effects is by promoting critical thinking and encouraging team members to question assumptions and seek different perspectives. By creating an environment that values diverse viewpoints and encourages open discussions, Project Manager can help prevent the Bandwagon effect from taking hold.

In addition, providing thorough and transparent information about the project's goals, objectives, and strategies can help team members make informed decisions rather than simply following the crowd. Clear communication and regular updates on project progress can keep everyone well-informed and reduce the likelihood of succumbing to the herd mentality.

Fostering a culture of independent thinking and individual responsibility can help counteract the Bandwagon effect. By empowering team members to take ownership of their decisions and encouraging them to voice dissenting opinions if they have valid concerns, you can foster a more balanced decision-making process. Specifically ask for the opposing viewpoint and why a certain decision may turn out to be incorrect. It is important to talk through the initial and secondary consequences of the belief of behavior.

Project Cost Management

Dealing with Money & Budgets

A list of mental models and biases that are relevant to the PMI knowledge area of Project Cost Management

The Pareto Principle

Description:

Time and time again its seen that 20 percent of activities produce 80 percent of the desired results. This principle was named after its discoverer Vilfredo Pareto, an Italian economist. 

Utilization:

Use this Principle to identify and prioritize cost drivers, focusing on the 20% of cost drivers that are responsible for 80% of project costs. If a project is faced with unavoidable additional costs, its recommended to focus efforts on what matters most (the 20% in terms of benefits) and identify ways to mitigate the costs associated with lesser priority activities (the 80%). 

Sunk Cost Fallacy

Description:

We have a tendency to continue investing in a project or decision based on the resources & effort already invested, rather than considering the potential future costs or benefits. This can lead to over-investment in a project that is no longer feasible or profitable.

Mitigation:

Regularly evaluate project feasibility and profitability with stakeholder, considering both sunk costs and potential future costs and benefits. Earned Value Management is a great input into this conversation.

Marginal Thinking

Description:

We have a tendency to make decisions based on the incremental incremental changes or improvements rather than the bigger picture. This marginal thinking can lead to inefficient cost-cutting measures that do not address underlying cost drivers.

Mitigation:

Use a holistic approach to cost management, identifying and addressing underlying cost drivers rather than just focusing on incremental cost reductions. 

Loss Aversion

Description:

We are nearly 2.5 times likely to try to avoid a loss than to acquire an equivalent gains. The pain of losing something is more powerful than the pleasure of winning it. People tend to be much more vigilant in avoiding losses than optimizing gains. Loss aversion can lead to risk-averse decision-making, leading to missed opportunities or cost overruns due to excessive risk management.

Mitigation:

Prevention is better than the cure. Investing time upfront in the Planning Phase to help mitigate any potential issues or losses later in the project.  Balance risk management with opportunity management, identifying and evaluating opportunities as well as risks. Make a Pros & Cons list to assist.

Anchoring Bias

Description:

We rely on the first piece of information encountered when making decisions. Once the information/number is stated (anchored), then it is a human tenancy to latch onto that number despite any changing circumstances in subsequent discussions. The anchoring bias can impact budgeting and cost estimating, leading to over-reliance on initial estimates or data.

Mitigation:

Use a range of data and sources to inform cost estimates and avoid over-reliance on a single data point. Three point estimation or PERT can help with project estimation. If someone does try to anchor, it is suggested that shaking your head may release the link that that anchor. Explain to stakeholders that it is normal for figures to be adjusted according to new information. 

Introduce standardized metrics into each stage of the planning process, such as resource utilization ratios or return on investment analysis. This will help keep track of costs in a consistent manner. It can also alert stakeholders when an increase exceeds acceptable thresholds. These standardized ratios allow for a balance to be introduced and ignore any anchoring taking hold.

Project Human Resource Management

Dealing with People

A list of mental models and biases that are relevant to the PMI knowledge area of Project Human Resource Management

Self Justification Theory

Description:

If questioned, we will try to justify our actions and decisions, even when they were not the right ones. Your team members will also defend their poor decisions and actions, leading to poor project outcomes.

Mitigation:

Encourage team members to challenge assumptions and decisions and promote a culture of continuous improvement. Focus on the process, not the person. Use the Lessons Learned sessions or Retrospectives for the team to identify issues and put plans in place to change them together.

Fundamental Attribution Error

Description:

We attribute the behavior of others to their personality and character rather than to external factors, while attributing external factors to your mistakes rather than your personality and character. Within your project, this could lead to team members being unfairly blamed for issues and problems, leading to demotivation and poor team dynamics.

Mitigation:

Encourage open and transparent communication and foster a blame-free culture. Embed, practice and promote team psychological safety to ensure the team feel free to take risks and thrive within your project.

Dunning-Kruger Effect

Description:

We overestimate our own abilities and knowledge while underestimating the same in others. In a project environment, this can lead to team members overestimating their skills and knowledge, leading to poor performance and project outcomes.

Mitigation:

Set goals for team members and provide regular feedback and opportunities for team members to learn and develop their skills.

Project Integration Management

Dealing with tasks

A list of mental models that are relevant to the PMI knowledge area of Project Integration Management

Second Order Thinking

Description:

This mental model involves considering the potential second and third-order effects of decisions and actions, rather than just their immediate impact. Use this model to help anticipate and plan for the unintended consequences of decisions and actions. Be careful not to let this approach lead to analysis paralysis. Instead, carefully balance the benefits of Second Order Thinking with the need for timely decision-making.

Mitigation:

Clear decision-making criteria, timelines, and seeking input from stakeholders should ensure a comprehensive understanding of the potential consequences of decisions. These steps should avoid analysis paralysis.

First Principles Thinking

Description:

This approach involves breaking down complex problems into their fundamental components and then building up solutions from scratch based on those components. Project Managers can use this to identify the key drivers of a project's success and focus on addressing those drivers first. Be careful not to oversimplify complex problems. The benefits of First Principles Thinking need to be balanced with the need for a more nuanced understanding of the project. And who better to understand this other than the Project Manager?

Mitigation:

Mitigate the risks associated with oversimplification by engaging in cross-functional collaboration with the team, stakeholders and subject matter experts to validate assumptions and explore potential solutions.

Project Procurement Management

Dealing with buying assets

A list of mental models and biases that are relevant to the PMI knowledge area of Project Procurement Management

 Opportunity Cost

Description:

The decision to do one thing is the decision not to do another. There is a cost of time, experience or cost of forgoing an alternative option while making a decision. Its possible for a project manager may focus solely on the cost of the selected vendor and ignore the opportunity cost of not selecting an alternative vendor. As time passes this grows stronger as the Sunk Cost Fallacy kicks in.

Mitigation:

Consider the long-term impact of the procurement decision, including the opportunity cost of not selecting alternative vendors.

Network Effects

Description:

Smaller vendors that may provide better value for the project may be overlooked due to the Network Effects of vendors with larger market share or a more extensive network.

Mitigation:

Define objective criteria by which to judge all vendors during the procurement process.

Zero-Sum Thinking

Description:

This is the belief that benefits & gains for one person or group come at the expense of another; Gains made by one party must be offset by a loss to another party. This is not necessarily true. This can impact the decision-making process by the assumption that a vendor is only interested in their own profit and will not negotiate in good faith. This can result in a breakdown of the negotiation process, leading to an unfavorable outcome.

Mitigation:

Adopt a win-win negotiation approach that is beneficial for both parties. Always focus on building long-term relationships with vendors instead of short-term gains.

Project Quality Management

Dealing with quality quickly

A list of mental models and biases that are relevant to the PMI knowledge area of Project Quality Management

The Law of Large Numbers

Description:

Larger sample sets tend to produce more reliable and accurate results than smaller ones. In project quality management, this could mean that relying on a small sample size of data could lead to incorrect conclusions or poor quality outcomes. During the Project Estimation phase, if your sample sets are really large then you can use this to your advantage in rounding up or down during the PERT analysis, so that a task is not said to take 2.4 days. Rounding large sample sets up or down will cancel one or the other out over the longer term.

Mitigation:

Ensure that data collection and analysis processes are thorough and robust, using a large enough sample size to provide reliable results. As you increase the sample size the more accurate the results will be. Additionally, statistical methods should be used to analyze the data and to make informed decisions based on the results.

Consistency Bias

Description:

Consistency bias can impact a project manager in quality management by causing them to overlook or dismiss new information that conflicts with already established beliefs, methods or practices. This can lead to a lack of innovation or improvement in quality management.

Mitigation:

Actively seek out and consider alternative perspectives and new information, encouraging a culture of continuous improvement both on each test phase and more-so on each subsequent project.

Project Risk Management

Dealing with Risk

A list of mental models and biases that are relevant to the PMI knowledge area of Project Risk Management

Outcome Bias

Description:

This bias occurs when people judge the quality of a decision based on the outcome, rather than the decision-making process itself. This can lead to a false sense of security or complacency if a project is successful despite poor risk management. When project managers assess the success or failure of a project based solely on the end result, they may overlook crucial factors that influenced the outcome. By solely focusing on outcomes, Project Managers may fail to recognize and learn from mistakes or ineffective decision-making processes. This can lead to repeating similar mistakes in future projects or missing out on valuable insights for improvement.

Mitigation:

To overcome Outcome Bias, it is essential for Project Managers to evaluate decisions based on their merits at the time they were made, rather than solely relying on outcomes. This involves analyzing the decision-making process itself, considering the available information, assessing potential risks and uncertainties, and taking into account factors beyond their control. The key is to focus on continuously improving the decision making process and risk management strategies, regardless of the outcome.

Overconfidence Bias

Description:

This bias occurs when people overestimate their abilities or the accuracy of their judgments or their ability to predict and control outcomes. This overestimation can lead to a failure to adequately plan for potential risks. Overconfidence bias can also affect how risks are assessed and managed.

Mitigation:

To mitigate the effects of overconfidence bias, it is crucial to foster a culture of open communication and critical thinking within the project team. Encourage team members to challenge assumptions and provide diverse perspectives during risk assessment and decision-making processes.

The team should consider the range of potential outcomes and the likelihood of each outcome. From this starting point, the Project Manager can develop risk management strategies that account for the full range of possibilities. Additionally, utilizing historical data and conducting thorough risk assessments can help provide a more realistic view of project uncertainties. By promoting a systematic approach to risk management, you can help counteract overconfidence bias and make more informed decisions.

Remember that acknowledging the presence of overconfidence bias does not imply doubting the abilities and expertise of team members. Instead, it is about recognizing that biases exist in everyone and taking proactive steps to minimize their impact on project outcomes.

Status Quo Bias

Description:

Humans have a tendency to prefer the current state of affairs over potential alternatives, even when those alternatives may be objectively better. They are naturally resistant to change, even if it may reduce risk or improve outcomes.

Project teams members might resist changes to established processes or methodologies, even if those changes could lead to increased efficiency or improved outcomes. They may feel more comfortable sticking to what they already know, rather than embracing the uncertainty and disruption that change can bring.

Mitigation:

To mitigate the impact of Status Quo Bias, create an environment that encourages open communication and idea-sharing. Foster a culture where an organization or team members feel comfortable challenging the status quo and suggesting improvements, where they are happy to consider a range of options and alternatives. Its important to highlight the potential benefits of change and provide clear explanations for why certain changes are necessary.

Actively involve your team in decision-making processes and provide them with opportunities to contribute their insights and perspectives. By involving them from the beginning (get buy-in), you can help reduce resistance and increase their ownership in the project. There is a great deal of study on Change Management, starting with John Kotter's 8 step process.

Survivorship Bias

Description:

Survivorship Bias means that we tend to analyze and learn from only the projects or endeavors that have been successful, while neglecting those that have failed. This can be problematic because we miss out on valuable insights from unsuccessful projects, which could provide crucial lessons and help us avoid similar pitfalls in the future.

This bias occurs when people focus on successful outcomes and ignore failures or negative outcomes

Mitigation:

To mitigate Survivorship bias, you should consider both successful and unsuccessful outcomes, and learn from past failures to improve risk management strategies. Here are a few ways you can actively work to counteract it: 

• Gather comprehensive data: Ensure that you collect and analyze data from both successful and unsuccessful projects. By examining both outcomes, you gain a more complete understanding of potential risks and factors contributing to success or failure.
• Emphasize lessons learned: Encourage team members to share their experiences and lessons learned from both successful and unsuccessful projects. By fostering an open environment for sharing failures, you create opportunities for growth and improvement.
• Seek diverse perspectives: Engage with colleagues, industry experts, and stakeholders who have experienced both successes and failures. Their insights can provide a balanced perspective and help mitigate the impact of Survivorship Bias. 
• Conduct post-mortems: When a project fails, conduct thorough post-mortem analyses to identify the root causes of failure. This process should involve an unbiased examination of all factors contributing to the outcome, allowing for meaningful adjustments in future projects.

Negativity Bias

Description:

This bias occurs when people give more weight to negative information or risks than positive information. This can lead to an overly cautious approach to risk management. While noting the 'Margin of Safety' its possible for experienced Project Managers to fall prey to the negativity bias as they are more likely to remember previous negative events, feedback, or risks more vividly and for longer periods of time. This bias can influence decision-making, perceptions, and even team morale.

Mitigation:

To avoid negativity bias, project managers should consider both positive and negative outcomes, and weigh the likelihood and impact of each outcome. Project Managers can consciously acknowledge the positive achievements and milestones. They can celebrate successes, providing regular updates on progress, and encouraging open communication to help create a more balanced perspective within your team.

Margin of Safety

Description:

This concept involves planning for unexpected events or risks by adding a buffer to estimates or resources. It accounts for uncertainties, potential risks, and unforeseen circumstances that may arise during the course of your project. By building a Margin of Safety into your project, a project manager affords themselves time to respond to unforeseen risks rather than having to react to them.

Mitigation:

Project managers can add a 'Margin of Safety' to project estimates and timelines to account for unexpected events or risks. To implement the 'Margin of Safety' you should consider various factors such as time, resources, budget, and scope. Allocate additional time for tasks and activities to account for potential delays or complications. Ensure that you have sufficient resources at hand to handle unexpected requirements or emergencies. Set aside some extra budget to accommodate unforeseen expenses that may arise during the project. And finally, define a clear scope but also consider potential changes or adjustments that might be needed along the way. By adopting the 'Margin of Safety' mindset, you are demonstrating your commitment to effective risk management. It instills confidence in your team, stakeholders, and clients by showing that you are prepared for any scenario that might come your way.

Inversion

Description:

Inversion involves thinking about a problem or situation in reverse, in order to identify potential risks and negative outcomes. This practice encourages you to think backwards and consider the opposite of what you want to achieve. By doing so, you can identify potential obstacles and find innovative solutions. Inversion also helps in identifying hidden assumptions or biases that may be clouding your judgment.

Mitigation:

Project managers can use inversion to identify potential risks and negative outcomes in advance, and take steps to prevent them from occurring. Instead of asking how a project can succeed, ask what can you do to make it fail. Note these points down and do the opposite. For example, if you're planning a product launch, instead of focusing solely on what needs to be done to ensure success, inversion prompts you to consider possible failure points. This could involve identifying potential supply chain disruptions, market saturation risks, or even customer dissatisfaction. By tackling these concerns early on, you can develop strategies to prevent or minimize their impact.

Hindsight Bias

Description:

This bias occurs when people believe that an event was more predictable after it has occurred, leading to the belief that they could have prevented it. This can lead to a false sense of security and overconfidence in predicting future risks. When affected by this bias, a Project Manager may falsely believe that they had all the necessary information and foresight to make perfect decisions, even though that might not have been the case at the time.

Mitigation:

Review and analyze past project risks and outcomes to identify areas where they could improve their risk management strategies. Compare the initial Risk Registers from projects with the Lessons Learned and see which risks were identified up. Do this across multiple projects and try to identify a trend.

Confirmation Bias

Description:

When an idea or belief is held by someone, they next seek out information that confirms their existing beliefs. They ignore information that contradicts those beliefs. This can lead to overconfidence in the success of a project and the underestimation of risks.

Mitigation:

Project managers should actively seek out information that contradicts their assumptions and beliefs, and engage in open-minded discussions with team members to consider different perspectives.

Availability Bias

Description:

People make decisions based on information that comes to their mind quickly, even if it may not be the most accurate or relevant information. They then focus on this information and this can lead to overlooking important risks that are not immediately apparent.

Mitigation:

To avoid availability bias, project managers should make a conscious effort to consider a wide range of potential risks, including those that may not be immediately obvious. Here are a few strategies to consider:

1. Seek a variety of perspectives: Actively seek out diverse sources of information and opinions. This will allow you can gain a more comprehensive understanding of the situation and reduce the influence of the availability bias.

2. Gather data systematically: Instead of relying solely on anecdotal evidence or personal experience, implement a systematic approach to collect relevant data. This could include conducting surveys, brainstorming, pre-mortems, analyzing historical project data, or consulting subject matter experts.

3. Challenge assumptions: Encourage yourself and your team members to document and question assumptions in order to explore alternative explanations. By challenging preconceived notions, you can uncover hidden biases and make more balanced decisions.

4. Keep an open mind: Remind yourself that the most accessible information may not always be the most accurate or representative. Stay open to new information and be willing to revise your judgments based on fresh insights.

The OODA Loop

Description:

The OODA Loop is a risk mental model that stands for Observe, Orient, Decide, and Act. It was developed by military strategist John Boyd and is widely used in various fields, including project management to rapidly assess and respond to changing risks. The OODA Loop helps project managers navigate through uncertainty and make effective decisions in a rapidly changing environment. This is done in the following way for Project Managers:

• Observe: This step involves gathering information about the project's current state, including potential risks and opportunities. It requires keen observation and analysis of both internal and external factors that may impact the project's success.
• Orient: Once you have gathered relevant information, it's time to analyze and interpret it. This step involves assessing the implications of the observed data on your project's objectives and understanding how different variables interact with each other. By orienting yourself correctly, you can gain a better understanding of the risks involved and identify potential strategies to mitigate them.
• Decide: Based on your analysis and understanding, it's time to make a decision. This step involves evaluating various courses of action and selecting the one that aligns best with your project objectives while minimizing potential risks. It is crucial to consider both short-term gains and long-term consequences when making decisions.
• Act: The final step of the OODA Loop is taking action on the chosen decision. This means implementing your chosen strategy promptly and effectively. It's important to remember that as a project manager, you should continuously monitor the progress and assess if any adjustments or modifications are required based on new information or changing circumstances.

Mitigation:

To utilize the OODA Loop in project risk management, a project manager should focus on developing a thorough understanding of risks by closely observing project performance, orientation, and taking appropriate steps to decide and act.

The OODA Loop will help project managers improve their ability to anticipate risks, adapt quickly to changes, and make informed decisions. It provides a structured approach to managing uncertainty and enhances overall risk management capabilities within projects.

The Ladder of Inference

Description:

The Ladder of Inference is a mental model that describes how people tend to make assumptions and draw conclusions based on limited information. In project risk management, this could lead a project manager to make decisions based on incomplete or inaccurate information, which could increase the likelihood of risks.

The Ladder of Inference illustrates the process by which we select information, make assumptions, draw conclusions, and take action based on our own beliefs and experiences. The model suggests that individuals tend to unconsciously climb a "ladder" of thinking steps when processing information.

The first step on the ladder is data. We start with raw data or observations that we perceive from our environment. However, due to the vast amount of information available, we have to selectively choose which data points to pay attention to.

The second step is making meaning. We assign meaning to the selected data by adding our own interpretations, beliefs, and past experiences into the mix. This step is heavily influenced by our individual biases and assumptions.

The third step is making assumptions. Based on the meanings we have assigned, we begin to make assumptions about the situation or people involved. These assumptions may not always be accurate or based on solid evidence.

The fourth step is drawing conclusions. We take our assumptions and draw conclusions about the situation based on them. These conclusions are often influenced by our pre-existing beliefs and attitudes.

The final step is taking action. We act based on the conclusions we have drawn, which can lead to a feedback loop where our actions influence future observations and reinforce our original assumptions.

Mitigation:

Project Managers seek out and gather as much accurate and relevant information as possible before making decisions. They can encourage open dialogue, challenge assumptions, and ensure that decisions are based on accurate data rather than biased interpretations.

By actively promoting a culture of reflection, questioning assumptions, and seeking diverse perspectives, Project Managers can mitigate the risks associated with the Ladder of Inference and improve overall project success.

The Gamblers Fallacy

Description:

The Gambler's Fallacy is the belief that past events influence future outcomes in a statistically independent system, such as a coin toss or a roulette wheel. In project risk management, this could lead a project manager to make decisions based on the assumption that a particular outcome is "due" or "overdue" to occur, rather than based on objective analysis of risks and probabilities.

Mitigation:

A Project Manager should rely on objective information, statistical analysis of risks & probabilities and data-driven analysis rather than making decisions solely based on gut feelings or assumptions about future outcomes.

Project Schedule Management

Dealing with schedules

A list of mental models and biases that are relevant to the PMI knowledge area of Project Schedule Management

The Pareto Principle

Description:

The Pareto Principle is also known as the 80/20 rule. It states that 80% of effects come from 20% of causes.

This principle can significantly benefit project managers when planning and decision-making. Project Managers can use the Pareto Principle to identify and prioritize the most critical tasks or issues that contribute to the majority of project delays or problems. By focusing on these key areas, project managers can allocate their time, resources, and efforts more effectively to achieve better outcomes. For example: Suppose you are managing a software development project.

Applying the Pareto Principle means identifying and addressing the 20% of tasks that are causing 80% of the delays or bottlenecks. By doing so, you can optimize your resources and prioritize efforts where they will have the greatest impact.

Mitigation:

Identify and prioritize the critical 20% of activities and ensure that they are completed on time, while still monitoring and managing the remaining 80% of activities. Project Managers can also use techniques such as critical path analysis to identify and prioritize the activities that are most important to the project timeline. Additionally, project managers can build in extra time buffers for the remaining 20% of activities to allow for any unexpected delays or issues that may arise.

Project Scope Management

Dealing with scope

A list of mental models and biases that are relevant to the PMI knowledge area of Project Scope Management

Occam's Razor

Description:

Occam's Razor is a mental model that suggests that the simplest explanation is often the best.

During the project scoping exercises this mental model can be helpful in ensuring that the project team does not overcomplicate the project scope by including unnecessary features or requirements. However, it is also important to ensure that the project scope is comprehensive enough to meet the needs of stakeholders. To effectively utilize Occam's Razor, consider the following steps:

• Identify the problem: Clearly define the issue at hand and the desired outcome.
• Evaluate available explanations or solutions: Gather all possible alternatives and assess their complexity levels.
• Prioritize simplicity: Give preference to solutions that are straightforward and require fewer assumptions or variables.
• Seek evidence: Gather supporting data or evidence for the chosen solution to further validate its simplicity.

Mitigation:

Remember, Occam's Razor should be used as a guiding principle rather than a rigid rule. One way to mitigate the potential negative impact of Occam's Razor is to use a structured approach to project scope management, such as the use of a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS). A WBS helps to break down the project scope into smaller, more manageable pieces, which can help to identify areas where the project team may be tempted to oversimplify the project scope. Additionally, regular communication with stakeholders can help to ensure that the project scope is meeting their needs and is not overly simplified.

While Occam's Razor can be a valuable tool, it's important to be aware of its potential negative effects. Sometimes, overly relying on simplicity alone can lead to oversimplification or disregarding important factors that may contribute to a more accurate solution. To mitigate these effects a project manager should: 

• Consider alternative perspectives: Encourage diverse viewpoints and opinions from team members or subject-matter experts to challenge assumptions and explore different angles.
• Conduct thorough analysis: While simplicity is important, ensure you don't overlook critical details during your evaluation process. Pay attention to relevant complexities that may impact the overall outcome.
• Test assumptions: Validate the assumptions underlying your chosen solution through experimentation, prototyping, or pilot projects. This can help uncover any hidden complexities that were initially overlooked.

Project Stakeholder Management

Dealing with Stakeholders

A list of mental models and biases that are relevant to the PMI knowledge area of Project Stakeholder Management

The Golden Circle

Description:

The Golden Circle is a model that suggests that individuals and organizations should focus on why they do what they do, rather than just what they do or how they do it. In the context of project stakeholder management, stakeholders may be more engaged and invested in a project if they understand the project's purpose and goals.

Mitigation:

Get project buy-in by communicating the project's purpose and goals clearly and regularly to stakeholders, and by emphasizing the importance of the project's mission and impact.

Ownership Bias

Description:

We place a higher value on things they own, simply because they own them. We place a higher value on things they control, simply because they have control over them. This bias can have a significant impact on decision-making processes and can influence how resources are allocated or how risks are evaluated within a project.  A stakeholder who feels a strong sense of ownership over a project may be more invested in its success or failure.

When team members develop ownership bias, they may become overly attached to their ideas or solutions, leading to resistance in embracing alternative approaches. This can hinder collaboration and prevent the project from benefiting from diverse perspectives.

Mitigation:

To take advantage of the Ownership bias, communicate regularly with stakeholders to ensure that they feel involved in the project and have a sense of ownership over its outcomes. To mitigate the negative effects of Ownership Bias, consider the following strategies:

• Foster an open and inclusive culture: Encourage team members to share their ideas without fear of judgment or rejection. Create an environment where everyone feels valued and empowered to contribute their expertise.
• Promote diverse perspectives: Actively seek input from different team members with various backgrounds and skill sets. By considering multiple viewpoints, you can reduce the influence of ownership bias and make more objective decisions.
• Encourage experimentation: Encourage your team to explore multiple solutions and be open to trying new approaches. This helps prevent individuals from becoming overly attached to a single idea or solution.
• Implement structured decision-making processes: Develop clear criteria for evaluating options and making decisions. By focusing on objective factors rather than personal attachment, you can minimize the influence of ownership bias.
• Seek external feedback: Engage stakeholders who are not directly involved in the project to provide objective opinions and insights. Their fresh perspective can help challenge ownership bias and bring valuable insights to the table.
• Emphasize data-driven decision making: Encourage the use of data and evidence to support decisions. This helps shift the focus from personal attachment to objective evaluation, reducing the impact of ownership bias.

Groupthink

Description:

Groupthink happens when a group of individuals make decisions or form opinions in a way that discourages dissenting viewpoints. They do this due to the desire for consensus or conformity.

This desire within the group overrides critical thinking and independent judgment. This can lead to flawed decision-making and a lack of creativity or innovation. It is crucial to be aware of the potential risks associated with groupthink. It often arises in teams that are highly cohesive, where members may feel pressured to conform to the dominant opinion or avoid conflict. This happens at the detriment of the project.

Mitigation:

To mitigate the negative effects of groupthink, consider the following strategies:

• Encourage diverse perspectives: Actively seek out different opinions and encourage team members to express their thoughts openly. By fostering an environment where dissenting views are valued, Project Managers can promote healthy debate and challenge assumptions. 
• Assign a Devil's Advocate: Designate someone within the team to play the role of a critical thinker or devil's advocate. This person should question assumptions, challenge prevailing ideas, and present alternative viewpoints. This can help prevent the group from succumbing to narrow thinking patterns.
• Create psychological safety: Establish an atmosphere of trust and psychological safety within the team. Encourage open communication, respect for differing opinions, and ensure that team members feel comfortable expressing their thoughts without fear of negative consequences. 
• Seek external input: Engage external experts or stakeholders who can provide an outside perspective on the project. Their fresh insights can help break any existing patterns of groupthink and introduce new ideas into the decision-making process.
• Conduct anonymous feedback sessions: To encourage honest feedback, consider conducting anonymous feedback sessions where team members can freely express their opinions without fear of repercussions. This allows individuals to contribute candidly and reduces the pressure to conform.

The above steps help promote critical thinking, innovation, and better decision-making within your project team.

Circle of Influence 

Description:

The Circle of Influence model suggests that individuals have control over certain areas of their lives and can influence outcomes within their control. It was popularized by Stephen Covey in his book "The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People".

For Project Managers, the Circle of Influence represents the areas and aspects that a they can directly impact and have control over. This includes decisions related to project planning, resource allocation, team management, and overall project execution. Project Managers can effectively drive progress and achieve successful outcomes, by focusing on these areas.

Mitigation:

Firstly, note that there are always elements outside the Project Manager's control, such as external factors like market changes, economic conditions, or unexpected events that can impact the project's success.

Project stakeholders may have with varying levels of influence and control over the project outcomes. If a stakeholder has a limited Circle of Influence over the project, it may be difficult for them to bring about the conditions to ensure the projects success. It may be possible to influence these factors in the following way:

• Identify and prioritize: Clearly identify and prioritize the elements within the Circle of Influence that have the most significant impact on the project. This will allow you to allocate your time and resources effectively.
• Collaborate and communicate: Foster open communication and collaboration with stakeholders, team members, and other relevant parties. By involving them in decision-making processes, you can expand your Circle of Influence and address concerns from a broader perspective.
• Adaptability and flexibility: Embrace adaptability and flexibility in your approach to manage unexpected changes or challenges that may arise from the Circle of Concern. By being open to alternative solutions and adjusting plans when necessary, you can maintain control over what is within your influence.
• Continuous learning: Invest in your professional development by staying updated with industry trends, best practices, and emerging technologies such as AI. This will enhance your ability to influence outcomes positively and make informed decisions within your Circle of Influence.

By understanding the concept of the Circle of Influence and implementing these mitigation strategies, project managers can navigate challenges effectively, drive successful project outcomes, and minimize the impact of factors outside their control.

Project Time Management

C.T.O.

A list of mental models and biases that are relevant to the PMI knowledge area of Project Time Management

Brooks Law

Description:

Brooks Law was coined by Fred Brooks in his book "The Mythical Man-Month". This mental model states that adding more people to a late project only makes it later. In other words, adding more resources to a project that is already behind schedule can actually delay it further due to the need for additional communication and coordination. This is primarily due to the time required for new team members to get up to speed, establish communication channels, and understand the project's complexities. Additionally, as the team grows larger, coordination and management become more challenging.

Mitigation:

Carefully analyze the project schedule and determine if adding more resources is truly necessary. Instead of simply adding more people to the team, they should consider alternative solutions, such as reassigning tasks, increasing the efficiency of existing resources, or negotiating more realistic project deadlines. The following strategies are worth considering: 

• Evaluate the existing team: Before considering adding new members, assess the skills and capacity of your current team. Determine if there are any bottlenecks or areas where additional support is needed.
• Optimize communication: Enhance communication channels within the team to ensure everyone is well-informed about project goals, progress, and potential challenges. This will help minimize misunderstandings and improve collaboration. 
• Focus on knowledge transfer: Instead of immediately adding new team members, invest time in sharing knowledge and expertise among existing members. Encourage mentoring and knowledge-sharing sessions to enhance skillsets and productivity within the current team.
• Prioritize tasks: Identify critical project tasks and prioritize them based on dependencies and potential impact on overall timelines. This allows you to allocate resources more effectively and ensure that the most important aspects are addressed promptly.
• Consider outsourcing or contracting: If additional resources are genuinely required, explore options such as outsourcing or contracting specialized professionals who can contribute immediately without disrupting the existing team dynamics.
• Continuous monitoring and adjustment: Regularly monitor the project's progress and reevaluate resource allocation as needed. This will help you identify any potential issues early on and make necessary adjustments to keep the project on track.

Bottlenecks

Description:

Bottlenecks refer to constraints or limitations in the project schedule that prevent it from progressing as planned; the throughput slows down to the rate of the bottleneck. It is the part of the process that restricts the overall speed and efficiency of the entire system.  A bottleneck could be caused by any number of factors, such as a delay in obtaining a critical resource or a sudden change in project scope.

Mitigation:

 Here are a few steps you can take:

• Identify bottlenecks: Start by analyzing the flow of your project and pinpoint any stages or resources that are causing delays or creating a backlog.
• Prioritize tasks: Determine which tasks are most critical to the project's success and focus on those first. By prioritizing strategically, you can minimize the impact of bottlenecks on the overall timeline.
• Allocate resources wisely: Ensure that resources, such as personnel, equipment, or materials, are available when and where they are needed. This may involve redistributing resources from non-critical areas to alleviate bottlenecks.
• Optimize processes: Look for ways to streamline processes and eliminate unnecessary steps or redundancies. This could involve reassigning responsibilities, implementing automation tools, or improving communication channels.
• Monitor and measure: Continuously monitor the progress of your project and track key performance indicators (KPIs) relevant to bottleneck areas. Regularly measure and analyze data to identify patterns and potential solutions. 
• Collaborate and communicate: Foster open communication channels among team members to ensure everyone is aware of potential bottlenecks and their impact on the project. Encourage collaboration and problem-solving discussions to find efficient solutions together. 
• Implement contingency plans: Prepare backup plans in case bottlenecks cannot be completely eliminated. Having alternative routes or resources readily available can help minimize disruptions caused by unforeseen challenges.

In Systems Thinking, leverage points are used to alleviate bottlenecks. These are areas that require a small amount of input or change and produce a oversized effect. Look for such leverage points in your project environment.

Recency Bias

Description:

We have a tendency to give more assign greater importance or value to the most recent information or experiences that we have encountered when making decisions or evaluating progress. In other words, people tend to remember and give more weight to events or data that have occurred recently, while diminishing the significance of older information. Project Manager may overemphasize recent progress or setbacks, leading to inaccurate assessments of the project's overall timeline. If a Project Manager solely relies on the most recent feedback from stakeholders or team members, then valuable insights may be overlooked.

This is why exercises such as Lessons Learned sessions (and their review before a new project) are so important.

Mitigation:

Project Managers should take a holistic approach to evaluating project progress, considering both recent events and the project's overall timeline. They should also maintain accurate and up-to-date records of project progress to avoid relying solely on their memory or subjective impressions. Specifically;

• Seek diverse perspectives: Actively encourage input and feedback from different team members and stakeholders throughout the project. This will help you gather a wider range of information and avoid solely relying on the most recent inputs.
• Maintain comprehensive records: Keep thorough documentation of project milestones, decisions, and feedback received from various sources. By having a complete historical overview, you can refer back to relevant information and ensure that decisions are based on a holistic view rather than just recent events.
• Utilize data-driven analysis: Incorporate objective data and metrics into your decision-making process. By relying on quantifiable measures and trends, you can reduce the influence of subjective biases such as Recency Bias.
• Encourage reflection and review: Regularly take time to reflect on past decisions and outcomes. This allows you to assess the long-term impact of your actions and helps counteract any bias towards recent events.
• Foster open communication: Create an environment where team members feel comfortable expressing their opinions and concerns openly. Encourage constructive dialogue and ensure that all voices are heard, regardless of when they were shared.

Planning Fallacy

Description:

Individuals, including project managers, underestimate the amount of time and resources required to complete a task or project. It is a cognitive bias that leads people to be overly optimistic about their ability to meet deadlines and deliver outcomes within the anticipated timeframe. This can lead to unrealistic project timelines, missed deadlines, and budget overruns The Planning Fallacy can have significant negative effects on project planning and execution. When individuals are overly optimistic about their abilities, they often fail to account for unexpected delays, unforeseen obstacles, or the complexity of tasks involved. This can result in missed deadlines, cost overruns, and overall project failure.

Mitigation:

A project manager can mitigate this bias by:

• Historical Data Analysis: Review past projects that are similar in nature to the current one. Analyze how long they took to complete and identify any patterns or common challenges. This will provide a more realistic basis for estimating timeframes.
• Breakdown Tasks: Break down complex tasks into smaller, more manageable sub-tasks. This Work Breakdown Strucuture (WBS) approach will help identify potential roadblocks and allow for a more accurate estimation of time and resources required for each step.
• Consult Experts: Seek input from subject matter experts who have experience in similar projects. Their expertise can provide valuable insights into potential challenges and help in creating more realistic plans. Instead of asking them for one estimate, take a PERT analysis approach and ask for three; the Optimistic estimate, the Realistic estimate and the Pessimistic estimate. Ask for these estimates after agreeing on what is involved in the 'Definition of Done' (DOD).
• Contingency Planning: Allocate extra time for unforeseen delays or unexpected issues that may arise during the project. This buffer will act as a safety net and help avoid unnecessary stress when faced with unexpected obstacles.
• Regularly Review and Update Plans: Continuously monitor progress against the initial plan and make adjustments as necessary. Use either Earned Value Management (EVM) or is simplier approach which just focuses on the project schedule called Earned Schedule to track and forecast the project. Flexibility is key in managing projects effectively, so be prepared to adapt timelines and resource allocation when needed.
• Review & Learn: Conduct post-project reviews to evaluate performance, identify lessons learned, and improve future project planning.

Parkinson's Law

Description:

Parkinson's Law is a mental model that states, "Work expands to fill the time available for its completion." In simpler terms, it means that if you have a task or project with a deadline, you will likely take all the time allocated to complete it, even if it could have been done in a shorter period. Think of this in terms of college assignments where students always work up to the deadline, even if they had months to undertake the work.

Mitigation:

Parkinson's Law can impact time management and productivity within a project. If not managed properly, it can lead to inefficiencies and delays. Here are some ways to mitigate its negative effects:

• Set realistic deadlines: Avoid assigning excessive time for tasks. Instead, set reasonable and challenging deadlines that encourage efficiency and focus.
• Break tasks into smaller parts: Divide projects into smaller, manageable tasks with specific deadlines. This helps prevent procrastination and ensures progress is made consistently.
• Use time-tracking tools: Utilize technology to monitor the actual time spent on tasks. This allows you to identify any instances where Parkinson's Law might be causing unnecessary delays.
• Prioritize tasks: Clearly define the most critical tasks and allocate appropriate time for them. By focusing on what truly matters, you can avoid wasting time on less important activities. 
• Embrace accountability: Encourage team members to take ownership of their work by regularly reviewing progress and providing timely feedback. This helps maintain focus and prevents unnecessary delays. 
• Practice effective communication: Foster an environment where team members feel comfortable discussing any challenges they face in meeting deadlines. Open communication allows for better planning and problem-solving.
• Set intermediate milestones: Breaking down larger projects into smaller milestones with intermediate deadlines or milestones that can help maintain a sense of urgency and prevent procrastination.
• Allocate resources wisely: Ensure that resources such as manpower, equipment, and materials are appropriately allocated to avoid unnecessary delays caused by lack of resources. 
• Avoid unnecessary extensions. Extending the project timeline unnecessarily could lead to inefficiencies and delays for tasks that were previously not on the critical path.

Address

Dublin, Ireland

Contact

[email protected]

Menu

Follow me