History of Project Management publication · PhD, PMP, IPMA-D, Cert.APM History of Project Management publication “Lessons From the Past that Assist the Projects of Today to Shape

© 2017 Mark Kozak-HollandRisk Management in Projects www.lessons-from-history.com

Workshop - Risk Management in ProjectsLessons in Risk Tolerance (Lindbergh & the Orteig Prize)

Mark Kozak-Holland PhD, PMP, IPMA-D, Cert.APM

History of Project Management

publication

“Lessons From the Past that Assist the Projects of Today to Shape the World of Tomorrow”

http://learn.genxus.com/

http://learn.genxus.com/

© 2017 Mark Kozak-Holland

Charles Lindbergh and the Orteig Prize

20 May 1927

Risk Tolerance and the Impossible Project (The Spirit of St. Louis)

I learned that danger is relative, and the inexperience can be a magnifying glass.

Charles A. Lindbergh


He had one of the worst safety records in the history of aviation. In his career he had four emergency bailout

3 Risk Management in projects www.lessons-from-history.com


Why It Can’t Be Done (The Spirit of St. Louis, 1926-1927 CE)

▪ Competitors have more experience, money, & head start.

▪ Building the Spirit of St. Louis wasn’t started late.

▪ Lindbergh planned to fly solo.

▪ The other teams had multiple pilots.

▪ The Spirit of St. Louis had only one engine.

▪ The contest had already taken six lives.



Short on cash and short on time, he ignored the conventional wisdom and adopted a design and strategy filled with risk.

▪ Lindbergh argued that:

– 3 engines tripled chance of engine

failure

– multiple pilots/engines increase

weight, and fuel consumption



Adjustments to aircraft to minimize weight and add range, and to keep control



No front windshield -- it was covered by fuel tanks, the oil tank acted as a firewall. This had a better center of gravity



How did Lindbergh plan and execute the project?



The Spirit of St. Louis over Newfoundland, May 20, 1927

“Look, Mr. Lindbergh, I don’t mean to belittle you, but, after all, New York to Paris isn’t like dropping off a mail bag in Keokuk, Iowa.” — Charles Levine, president of the Columbia Aircraft Company


The Route of Lindbergh's Transatlantic Flight was the Great Circle route along the earth’s curvature rather than direct.



20 May 1927


Exercise – Did Lindbergh make the right decision in accepting the high levels of risk? Complete a risk assessment

▪ There were 5 problems area

1. Finances – small budget

2. Organizational – limited support, 1 pilot

3. Environmental - weather

4. Technical – approach, use of technologies

▪ Project constraints

– Distance and route

– Environment, weather, temperature,

– Equipment and supplies

– Timeframe

▪ Complete the following:

1. Analyze all the alternatives within the

decision

2. Evaluate the risks for each alternative

3. Options & best approach to tackle risks

4. Highlight any opportunities

▪ Hints

– Who did this affect?

– Could he have completed the flight without this?

– Pay close attention to Internal risks

• Project objectives

• Approach, methods

• Experience, culture

12 Risk Management in Projects www.lessons-from-history.com


Recent LFH workshop – 3/11/15 - Exercise – Did Lindbergh make the right decision in accepting the high levels of risk?



YES - Team 1 suggested Lindbergh took the only approach available (accept the risk) with no other feasible option


CONSTRAINTS

– LIMITED BUDGET

– EXPERIENCED COMPETITORS

– COMPETITION

– TECHNOLOGICAL LIMITS

IT I WANT TO WIN I HAVE TO GO!!

ACCEPT RISKS AND TRANSFORM TO

OPPORTUNITY

– GOOD EXPERIENCED PILOT

– PARTICIPATION IN AIRPLANCE

DESIGN


YES - Teams 2 and 3 concluded Lindbergh was highly motivated personally with nothing to lose


CONSTRAINTS

– FIXED BUDGET

– HIGH QUALITY COMPETITION

– TIME PRESSURE

– UNTESTED AIRCRAFT

BUT WITH HIGH RISK TOLERANCE

– AIRCRAFT - LESS COMPLEXITY, LESS

PROBLEMS, SIMPLE PLAIN DESIGN FOR

ONE SINGLE MISSION

3 OPTIONS

– KILL THE PROJECT – LOSE OPPORTUNITY

TO BECOME FAMOUS

– ACCEPT LESS RISK – NOT VIABLE

– LETS TRY ANYWAY - NOTHING TO LOSE

ACCEPTING THE LEVEL OF RISK (ACCEPT

HIS LIFE).

RISK ANALYSIS: HIGH RISK

▪ RUN OUT OF FUEL

▪ RELIABILITY OF ENGINE

▪ LOW SAFETY

▪ NO EXTENSIVE TESTING

BUT

▪ HIGHLY MOTIVATED AND NO

SPONSOR (LINDBERGH WAS

SOLE DECISION MAKER)


NO - Team 4 recommended holding the project and finding new funding sources as risks were too high


FIND NEW FUNDING

▪ (ROYALTIES ON MISSION BOOK)

RELIABLE AFFORDABLE, AND CHEAP

TECHNICAL SOLUTION

▪ BUT TOO HIGH RISK OF FAILURE

▪ BUILD 2 ENGINE AIRCRAFT

▪ PUT SECOND PILOT ON BOARD


NO - Team 5 would just kill the project unless funding is found as risks were far too high


RISK EVALUATION

UNTESTED AIRPLANE

ONLY ONE ENGINE

ONLY ON PILOT

NO SAFETY ACCEPT DINGY

NO METEROGICAL INFO

FUEL TANK IN FRONT OF PILOT

6 PEOPLE DEAD ALREADY FOR

SAME MISSION

PERISCOPE COULD FAIL

NO FUNDES FOR IMPROVING

RELIABILITY

CONCLUSION: KILL THE PROJECT OR

CHANGE PROJECT FINANCING


Conclusion - What was the secret to Lindbergh’s amazing victory?

▪ Decide how much risk you can

accept — and accept it.

▪ I learned that danger is relative, and the

inexperience can be a magnifying glass.

– Charles A. Lindbergh



Learning check - Questions

Based on your experience as a PM:

1. Have you been able to change a project constraint by

reviewing and changing your risk management plan?

2. In what type of projects would you alter the level of risk

that you accept or risk tolerance ?



Learning check - Questions

Based on your experience:

1. What type of projects warrant undergoing a level of

scenario planning?

2. With scenario planning where would you focus your

efforts?

3. How would you communicate this to decision makers

(senior managers)?



Thanks!

Mark Kozak-Holland

[email protected]

http://ca.linked.com/in/markkozakholland

www.lessons-from-history.com

Twitter @LessonsfromHist

You tube – ProjectLessons


Quotes

▪ The readiness to blame a dead pilot for an accident is nauseating, but it has

been the tendency ever since I can remember. What pilot has not been in

positions where he was in danger and where perfect judgment would have

advised against going? But when a man is caught in such a position he is

judged only by his error and seldom given credit for the times he has

extricated himself from worse situations. Worst of all, blame is heaped

upon him by other pilots, all of whom have been in parallel situations

themselves, but without being caught in them. If one took no chances, one

would not fly at all. Safety lies in the judgment of the chances one takes.

– Charles Lindbergh, journal entry 26 August 1938, published in The Wartime

Journals, 1970.

▪ I learned that danger is relative, and the inexperience can be a magnifying

glass.

– Charles A. Lindbergh

22 Risk Management in Projects www.lessons-from-history.com

Documents

History of Project Management publication · PhD, PMP, IPMA-D, Cert.APM History of Project Management publication “Lessons From the Past that Assist the Projects of Today to Shape