EVM Consulting

Also known as “Earned Value Consulting” or “EVMS Consulting”. EVM consulting is support services that an expert in Earned Value Management (EVM) provides to an organization to help them implement an Earned Value Management System (EVMS).

EVM Training – Decision Making and Charlie Munger Tendency Toward Misjudgment – Part 3

By / / , , ,
, , ,

EVM-Training-Decision-Making-Charlie-Munger-Part-3-Tendency-Toward-Misjudgment

Tendency Toward Misjudgment – Part 3

Are Your People Being Manipulated?

In part 1 and part 2 of this topic we learned about Charles (Charlie) T. Munger, Vice Chairman of Berskshire Hathaway and partner of Warren Buffet, and his listing of 25 innate human tendencies toward misjudgment that we harbor. In those two blogs we started to learn from him and we will continue that learning in this blog. Charlie was born in 1924 so, at the time of this blog, Charlie is 94, a wise old man from whom we should learn.

As mentioned in Parts 1 and 2, I went through each of the 25 “tendencies” that are defined and discussed by Charlie and tried to think about how the tendency could disadvantage or could potentially aid decision making.

Is there a possibility that people in your decision-making processes are being manipulated? Have you ever been manipulated and known it? Have you ever been manipulated but didn’t know it? Of course, that question can only be answered by thinking back now; if you didn’t know it then, maybe you can see it with hindsight.

The Future of the Industry

Very recently a representative from a company called our leadership and asked for some help with gaining knowledge about the future of our industry. We are in the same industry and compete sometimes, so it seemed odd that this was happening. Along with the request for a favor came an offer; an offer to attend a session with others of their clients and associates on the future of the industry during which we would be given the chance to make even more valuable inputs.

What was going on? What a massive ego-stroking effort. I think it was application of the Ben franklin effect. Simply stated in Franklin’s own words about a situation where he had an opposition figure he needed to deal with, “Having heard that he had in his library a certain very scarce and curious book, I wrote a note to him, expressing my desire of perusing that book, and requesting he would do me the favour of lending it to me for a few days. He sent it immediately, and I return’d it in about a week with another note, expressing strongly my sense of the favour. When we next met in the House, he spoke to me (which he had never done before), and with great civility; and he ever after manifested a readiness to serve me on all occasions, so that we became great friends, and our friendship continued to his death.” In this story notice the use of the words “serve me.” Just asking for and receiving the smallest favor from the man changed the man’s attitude toward Franklin.

Enhancing Opinions

It can be analyzed like this: asking someone at work, with whom we may be opposed or with whom we are ‘on-the-outs’ can tell them that we consider them to have something valuable that we do not have, and we need. It might be made to sound as if they have more information, more under-standing, more ability. If they respond positively and give us something as slight as their time and attention, we stand a chance of enhancing their opinion of us because they then cannot see us as someone simultaneously unworthy and worthy. They just saw us as worthy of their time and atten-tion, so obviously we recognize and have acknowledged their value.

How does this play into decision-making? You need to be aware of the dynamics of any situation and to watch out for the subtle ways that influence can be used to maneuver a decision to the spot desired by someone or some faction. You need to be especially watchful if the person or faction doing the maneuvering is one you believe to not have the best interests of the project at heart.

More Tendencies

Let’s cover more of the tendencies and carry on our discussion about developing a sound decision making process farther. Please note that Charlie Munger named these tendencies, and sometimes I think he made up words that do not sit well with Microsoft spell checking tools.

Tendency #9

Tendency #9 is the one just discussed as the Ben Franklin effect. Munger named it the “Reciprocation Tendency.” It is the tendency to reciprocate favors and disfavors and can be a strong subconscious motivator. If the person being manipulated by Franklin had thought, “There’s that wily Ben again trying to win me over by asking me for help,” the ploy would not have worked. It must be subconsciously received. Isn’t this tendency why procurement departments prohibit buyers from taking favors from sellers? Judges do not associate with defendants. That is a procedural way to stop the potential for misuse of the tendency.

Tendency #12

Tendency #12 could be easily related to the Ben Franklin effect. Munger calls this the “Excessive Self-regard Tendency.” We have all known someone who has a very highly inflated opinion of themselves and we may even have seen the risk in that. This person can, and often does, misjudge his/her own knowledge, competence, capability to the high side. These people choose to associate with people like themselves, and they definitely are partial to their own ideas and conclusions. These people also can be negatively motivated when provided with a counter argument. They are dangerous in decision making because they may not be motivated by facts. They may just be on that personal voyage known as the ego trip. You could even worry that someone else has used the Ben Franklin ploy to get this ego-challenged person to align with this thinking.

Tendency #13

Tendency #13 may align with #12 since it is Munger’s “Over-optimism Tendency.” This is the human tendency to err on the side of optimism when thinking about the future, the work required, and the outcomes possible. For this person there is no time spent better than time walking down the primrose path trying out their new rose-colored glasses. There are so many opportunities for optimism to cause damage on a project, it is sobering. An overly aggressive schedule or budget that is seen as do-able is not going to work. A defined product or set of tasks that would be very hard to achieve could be seen as not-that-tough with the disastrous outcome you would expect. Your deci-sion-making process should force a way to look at facts realistically. Quickly committing to the impossible would be a death warrant. Also, a decision-making process should avoid the potential that an overly optimistic person is also one who has excessive self-regard. Using experts or others, who are not going to have to live with the decisions, can help bring reality into the process. Don’t you go to the doctor to hear the truth?

Conclusion

This is the third blog on the topic of Munger’s human tendencies toward misjudgment. Analyses like these blogs can be helpful to us at Humphreys & Associates in our support of clients and in our formulation of training materials. Hopefully this information has started you or helped you on your way to creating or beefing up a process for decision making that curbs or circumvents these human tendencies.

Review:
EVM Training – Decision Making & Charlie Munger – Part 1
EVM Training – Decision Making & Charlie Munger – Part 2

EVM Training – Decision Making and Charlie Munger Tendency Toward Misjudgment – Part 3 Read Post »

EVM Training – Decision Making & Charlie Munger – Part 2 – Tendency Toward Misjudgment

By / / , , ,
, , ,

EVM Training - Decision Making & Charlie Munger - Part 2 - Tendency Toward Misjudgment

Tendency Toward Misjudgment – Part 2

Tendency Toward Misjudgment

In part 1 of this topic we learned about Charles (Charlie) T. Munger, Vice Chairman of Berskshire Hathaway and partner of Warren Buffet and his listing of 25 innate human tendencies toward misjudgment that we harbor. I went through each of the 25 “tendencies” that are defined and discussed by Charlie and tried to think about how the tendency could disadvantage or could potentially aid decision making.

Decision-Making is Critical

Humphreys & Associates emphasizes in its EVM training material that the process of decision-making is critical, and I was greatly pleased to learn that Charlie thought that same way. In the first part of the blog we discussed just two of the list of tendencies Munger provided. It appears we humans are fraught with innate tendencies that, if not blocked, can lead us to make a misjudgment. A misjudgment would be a wrong decision in terms of this blog. With all that follows in the blog about misjudgment, we are trying to discern a sound process for decision making, with tools like decision trees, that can help avoid or counter the influences of the counterproductive tendencies. Developing your decision-making process should involve findings tactics that help you avoid or defeat or neutralize these tendencies in your processes.

Liking/Loving Tendency

Tendencies #2 and #3 are total opposites but very much related. Tendency #2 is called the “Liking/Loving Tendency.” It should be familiar to us all. The foundational notion is that people seek affection and approval. Maybe not all people do this, but it is a basic human tendency and we believe that most people have it. This tendency can be a problem when it gets in the way of rational thinking; for example, if people on your team ignore faults of people they like then how will they fairly evaluate proposals floated by those they like? What about when they favor the products, actions, or ideas of those they like? People may not even consciously understand the underlying bias is operating in any given situation, so we need to find a way to circumvent this tendency when we are processing a decision. We need to make a neutral playing field in order to get a fair evaluation.

Disliking/Hating Tendency

Tendency #3 is the opposite of that. It is the “Disliking/Hating Tendency” that can motivate people to ignore or devalue the works or opinions or ideas of those they dislike simply because they do not like the person. This tendency can be strong enough to lead to distortion of facts or judgment. Maybe you have worked with someone that you have strong negative “feelings” about. Can you remember that and imagine if you had that bias operating in a decision-making environment? Maybe the negative tendency toward bias would be operating below the conscious level just far enough to be influencing them, but without their understanding. They sincerely think they do not like the idea and that has nothing to do with the person posing the idea. Our problem is to devise a decision-making process that can work in the face of such underlying, and perhaps invisible, motivations.

Doubt/Avoidance Tendency

Tendency #4 is unrelated to those two. It is the “Doubt/Avoidance Tendency.” That is our tendency to avoid being in doubt and our penchant for moving to certainty. This can be a powerful motivator to move to a quick decision; perhaps before all the homework of deciding has been accomplished. It is human nature to make quick decisions and certainly we can understand that hasty decisions may not be the best decisions. This tendency can potentially rise to the level where it creates irrationality and the pressing need to remove doubt. Unfortunately, this tendency becomes stronger when we are under pressure; that means just when we need to be at our level-headed coolest and most deliberative, unfortunately, our motivation is to just make a decision and get on with it to rid ourselves of doubt. Again, our challenge is to not let this tendency dictate our decision-making process. A little pressure can be a good thing. Too much pressure, along with the unchecked tendency to want to move quickly away from doubt, can be ruinous.

Curiosity Tendency

Perhaps tendency #6 can help us here. This is a beneficial tendency of human nature; the tendency to be curious. Charlie Munger simply called it the “Curiosity Tendency.” It is our nature to be curious and that curiosity has brought humankind from the cave dwellers to the high-rise dwellers. If we can harness that tendency in our decision-making process, maybe it will help counter some of the negative and damaging tendencies. Maybe our curiosity will want to lead us to getting the facts before we decide emotionally.

Hopefully you get the idea now. The first two blogs together have not covered the entire list of tendencies; far from it. When things permit, the rest of the list developed by Charlie Munger will be presented here in terms of the process of decision-making. Meanwhile you can certainly look at your decision-making processes at work and maybe even at home to see if you have planned to subvert these tendencies.

Review EVM Training – Decision Making & Charlie Munger – Part 1

EVM Training – Decision Making & Charlie Munger – Part 2 – Tendency Toward Misjudgment Read Post »

EVM Training – Decision Making & Charlie Munger – Part 1

By / / , , , , ,
, , , , ,

Large Radio Antenna with Dawn Sky in the Background image for EVM Training - Decision Making and Charlie Munger blog post

Tendency Toward Misjudgment – Part 1

Charlie Munger and EVM Training

So, what does Charles (Charlie) T. Munger, Vice Chairman of Berskshire Hathaway and partner of Warren Buffet have to do with EVM training? Decision Making.  You can imagine the big-money decisions he has helped Buffett make during the many years of building up the legendary outfit. Along the way, he kept track of the happenings around him that through various speeches and writings espoused some clear thinking. Born in Omaha in 1924, Charlie began working with Warren at Buffett & Son, a grocery store owned by Warren Buffett’s grandfather. Eventually graduating magna cum laude from Harvard Law in 1948, Charlie moved into the business world.

Psychology of Human Misjudgment

This blog is narrowly focused on what I gleaned from Charlie’s writings about the “psychology of human misjudgment.” Looking to see how this information could be used to help guide a EVM training workshop on the topic of decision making, I went through each of the 25 “tendencies” that he defined and discussed. I would never have guessed that we humans have 25 tendencies that impinge on our thinking processes, but after studying his list, I think he nailed it. Most of the tendencies are backed up with some reference to psychological studies; so be assured Charlie did not make them up. This blog will treat them in numerical order and will add thoughts from the Humphreys & Associates earned value training material on decision making that will make the Charlie Munger points more specific to the subject at hand.

In our EVM training material, we emphasize the process of decision making is critical, and Charlie thought so way before I did. Bad decisions can come from good processes, but that is less likely than bad decisions coming from no process or, even worse, from a bad process. At one point Munger advises the use of checklists can help navigate through the minefield of human tendencies toward misjudgment. An amazingly timely idea, because here at Humphreys & Associates we are just wrapping up our work on “The Big Book of Project Management Checklists” that is aimed at doing just that.

Blocking Human Misjudgement

What about human misjudgment? It appears we humans are fraught with innate tendencies that, if not blocked, can lead us to make misjudgments. A misjudgment would be a wrong decision in terms of this blog. With all that follows in the blog about misjudgment, we are trying to discern a sound process for earned value decision making, with tools like decision trees, that can help avoid or counter the influences of the counterproductive tendencies. Developing your decision-making process should involve findings tactics that help you avoid or defeat or neutralize these tendencies in your EVMS processes.

Tendency #1 – Reward and Punishment Super-Response

Let’s cover one tendency as an example. Tendency #1 is called the “Reward and Punishment Super-Response Tendency.” The word “super” attached to the idea of response to reward is to emphasize that this is a case of over responding. We all know people move toward what is incentivized; they seek the reward. It must be obvious that, if the wrong thing is incentivized, people will be moving in the wrong direction. According to Munger, there is a strong tendency to move toward the reward; an overly strong tendency. Charlie cites some great examples from his experience. Your decision-making process should include some “clearing the minefield” efforts early on in the process to make sure that the decision will not be made in a move toward a reward that would be wrong for the situation. A simple example could be that you are involved in deciding about launch-ing a long-term effort that would cost quite a bit that does not have certainty to the outcome. If you are incentivized toward short terms profits, then you have the biased tendency to discard the idea in favor of short term gains.

Deprival Super-Reaction Tendency

There is a potentially related tendency called the “Deprival Super-Reaction Tendency.” This is the tendency to feel more pain from a loss than to feel pleasure from a gain of the same amount or thing. According to this tendency, there is more motivation associated with avoiding pain than making a gain. The see-saw is weighted in one direction. How counterproductive is that tendency toward carefully considered decision-making? If we are trying to make a gain in our decision process, we are not only fighting the facts of the situation but also our innate bias against taking a risk. The idea can be seen in the commonly observed action of throwing good money after bad. A loss is imminent, so the decision is to spend more to head it off to potentially save the day and avoid the pain; is that wise? Think about the situation where someone says or is known to think that “I will not be denied no matter the cost.” You probably do not want that kind of thinking involved in your decision making. Now think about a situation where tendency #1 and tendency #2 both align against one of the options being considered. Would an option that faces the tendency to risk some pain of loss and to move against a potential reward stand a chance if those tendencies were not neutralized?

Blog Series

Hopefully you get the idea now. This blog will be followed by another that covers some of the remaining tendencies identified by Charles T. Munger. I hope to learn more from and will translate what I learn here and in our EVM training material. Stay tuned.

EVM Training – Decision Making & Charlie Munger – Part 1 Read Post »

Summary Level Planning Packages (SLPPs) Misnomer and Alias

By / / , ,
, ,
Summary Level Planning Packages (SLPPs) Misnomer and Alias

Origins

One of the confusing terms in the world of Earned Value terminology is “Summary Level Planning Packages” or SLPPs. The term first appeared in Section 1 of the Earned Value Management Implementation Guide (EVMIG), published in 1996 which read:

Summary Level Planning Packages (SLPP) – “When it is clearly impractical to plan authorized work in control accounts, budget and work should be identified to higher WBS or organizational levels for subdivision into CAs at the earliest opportunity.” At this time, EIA-748 was still in draft form.

When 748-1998  was released, the SLPP reference was included with a slight modification to its use being limited to; “work scope for business reasons, is not yet allocated to responsible control accounts”.

With that being said, the term was never specifically included in the EVMS Guidelines (neither the original 35 criteria nor the initial 32 EIA Standard Guidelines)!  The concept itself was again put forth in 748-B where the title changed to “Higher Level Account”, but the SLPP was still not referenced.  With 748-C, the same phrasing is found.  Throughout this time, Guideline 8 has not changed, where it continues to say (underlines added):

“Budget for far-term efforts may be held in higher-level accounts until an appropriate time for allocation at the Control Account level.”

Higher Level Accounts

The term was “Higher Level Accounts” (HLA if you prefer an acronym), and that is the only mention in any of the Guidelines themselves.  In their 25 June 2015 Cross Reference Checklist, however, the DCMA felt the need to clarify the term in several spots:

8.a.(2) Higher level WBS element budgets (where budgets are not yet broken down into control account budgets) also known as a Summary Level Planning Package?

  1. b. Does the Contractor’s system description or procedures require that the sum of control accounts, Summary Level Planning Package (SLPP) budgets, Undistributed Budget(UB), and Management Reserve(MR) reconcile and trace to the CBB or Negotiated Contract Cost (NCC) plus the estimated cost of AUW) for any recognized OTB?
  2. b. Are ETCs developed at the work package, planning package, and Summary Level Planning Package (SLPP) levels, or where resources are identified if lower than the work package level?
  3. j. Are VACs calculated and analyzed with corrective actions at the control account (at a minimum) and Summary Level Planning Package (SLPP) levels?

Created to Help

The term “Higher Level Accounts (HLA)” was created to help contractors comply with the government requirement to distribute budgets from Undistributed Budget (UB) within two full accounting periods after definitization of the contract value.  Many contractors on large, long term contracts were struggling with distributing work and budget for far-term effort about which they were not yet sure where or by whom the work would be performed.

The government allowance to create Higher Level Accounts enabled the contractors to “distribute” the scope and budget to an account – as though it were a Control Account – where someone would “tend it” until the contractor could better define where and by whom the work would be performed.  While in the HLA status, the assigned higher-level manager (the PM or a functional manager designee) would be responsible to ensure the time phasing of the high-level budget was current and that the EAC for the work in the HLA was up to date (rates and time phasing ).  Once the contractor determined the appropriate Control Account Manager responsible for getting the work performed, the scope, schedule, and budget in the HLA would be transferred (distributed) from the Higher Level Account to the Control Account.

Misnomer

As stated earlier, the origin of the term “Summary Level Planning Package – SLPP” is not really known, and it is really a misnomer:

  1. It is not a Summary Level (i.e., other Control Accounts do not summarize into it).
  2. It is really not a Planning Package (the responsible Higher Level Manager does not perform any planning for the work in the HLA – it is just a holding point until it can be distributed to, and planned by, the ultimate CAM).

This last point is where some people become confused.  Being called a “Planning Package,” some people think the SLPP is part of a Control Account that is at a higher level within the Control Account than a Planning Package.   That is another distinction between an SLPP (HLA) and a Planning Package – an SLPP can NEVER be directly detail planned into Work Packages.  The budget in an SLPP must be transferred to a Control Account for that CAM to detail plan the work as necessary over the period of performance of the Control Account.

To be fair to the CAM receiving the HLA/ SLPP scope, schedule, and budget, the project should also have a “Rolling Wave Planning” approach for the HLA/SLPP, one that is at least 30 days in advance of the normal CAM Rolling Wave Planning process.  This would give the CAM time to incorporate the work and budget time phasing into the Control Account (generally in one or more Planning Packages within the Control Account) in order to then be prepared for any necessary detail planning into Work Packages as part of the normal Rolling Wave Planning process.

Final Thought

Some people do not even consider Higher Level Account to be an appropriate description since the HLA/ SLPP is essentially at the same level as the Control Account.  The “Higher Level” aspect means it is assigned to a higher level manager than a Control Account Manager (CAM) for that manager to “tend to” the scope, schedule, and budget until it is distributed to a CAM.

So even though HLA is what it is, SLPP is what it has become.

Higher Level Accounts or Summary Level Planning Packages can be confusing and often an area where projects need some help.   A Humphreys & Associates EVM Consultant can provide the guidance you need for your unique production or development project.  Please contact us for more information.

Summary Level Planning Packages (SLPPs) Misnomer and Alias Read Post »

Scroll to Top