Rob Tieman - Transportation Project Management-Wiley (2023)

Transportation Project Management
Transportation Project Management
Rob Tieman
This edition first published 2023
© 2023 Rob Tieman
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise,
except as permitted by law. Advice on how to obtain permission to reuse material from this title is
available at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.
The right of Rob Tieman to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with
law.
Registered Office(s)
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USA
John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK
For details of our global editorial offices, customer services, and more information about Wiley products
visit us at www.wiley.com.
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats and by print-on-demand. Some content
that appears in standard print versions of this book may not be available in other formats.
Trademarks: Wiley and the Wiley logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of John Wiley & Sons,
Inc. and/or its affiliates in the United States and other countries and may not be used without written
permission. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. is
not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book.
Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty

While the publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this work, they make no
representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this
work and specifically disclaim all warranties, including without limitation any implied warranties
of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by
sales representatives, written sales materials or promotional statements for this work. This work is
sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. The
advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with
a specialist where appropriate. The fact that an organization, website, or product is referred to in this
work as a citation and/or potential source of further information does not mean that the publisher
and authors endorse the information or services the organization, website, or product may provide or
recommendations it may make. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may
have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read. Neither the
publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but
not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.
A catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress
Hardback ISBN: 9781394185474; ePub ISBN: 9781394185498; ePDF ISBN: 9781394185481

Obook: 9781394185504
Cover image: © Veni/E+/Getty Images

Cover design by Wiley
Set in 9.5/12.5pt STIXTwoText by Integra Software Services Pvt. Ltd, Pondicherry, India
v
Contents
1 Project Management 101 1

1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Triple Constraint 3
1.3 The Project Management Plan 5
1.4 Organizational Basics 8
1.5 A Look Ahead 13
2 Project Development Process 15

2.1 Safety First 15
2.2 Overview 19
2.3 Scoping Phase 22
2.4 Preliminary Design Phase 28
2.5 Detailed Design Phase 30
2.6 Final Design and Right-of-Way Acquisition Phase 34
2.7 Advertise Plans 36
3 Budgets and Estimates 41

3.1 Overview 41
3.2 The Basics 45
3.3 Types of Estimates 50
3.4 Managing the Budget 57
3.5 Performance Metrics 62
4 Scope 67
4.1 Scoping Process 68
4.2 Schedule and Budget Baselines 74
4.3 Roles and Responsibilities 75
4.4 Scope Management 77
5 Schedule 83
5.1 Critical Path Method (CPM) 83
5.2 Schedule Management Plan 92
5.3 Scheduling Issues 94
vi Contents
6 Managing Risk 99
6.1 Why Risk Management Matters 99
6.2 Risk Management Plan 101
6.3 Risk Identification 102
6.4 Risk Analysis 106
6.5 Risk Responses 109
6.6 Monitoring Risks 113
7 Managing Resources 119

7.1 Developing and Managing a Team 119
7.2 Personality Assessments 125
7.3 Resource Planning 140
7.4 Managing Consultants 142
8 Managing Quality 151

8.1 Defining Quality 151
8.2 Monitoring and Controlling Quality 155
8.3 Measuring Quality 161
8.4 The Costs of Quality 164
9 Communications 169
9.1 Project Communications 169
9.2 Stakeholder Involvement and the Stakeholder Engagement Plan 175
9.3 Media Relations 185
10 Controlling the Project 195

10.1 Managing Expectations 195
10.2 Monitor/Control the Project 206
10.3 Change Management 213
10.4 Balancing Innovation – Performance-Based Design 216
10.5 Goals and OKRs 218
10.6 Project Management Methodologies 219
11 PM Soft Skills 243

11.1 The Importance of Soft Skills 243
11.2 Characteristics of a Successful PM 245
11.3 Meetings 247
11.4 Time Management 251
11.5 Influence Management 254
11.6 Advancing and Refuting Arguments 261
11.7 Professional Development 266
Contents vii
12 Real-World Challenges 269

12.1 Ethics 269
12.2 Project Continuity 270
12.3 Managing Chaos 272
12.4 Surviving an Audit 274
12.5 Scaling Project Approaches 278
12.6 Guidance Pyramid 281
12.7 Planning Fallacy 283
12.8 Closing Thoughts 285
Index 287
1
Project Management 101
“Leaders think and talk about the solutions. Followers think and talk about the problems.”
– Brian Tracy
1.1 Introduction
“Expect the best, plan for the worst, and prepare to be surprised.”
– Denis Waitley
What is a Project Manager?

A) Someone convinced they can successfully leverage nine women to deliver a baby in one
month.
B) An organizational leader dedicated to the imposition of order upon chaos, even if chaos
is perfectly happy with the status quo.
C) The person assigned by the performing organization to achieve the project objectives.
While there may be some truth in each of these options, the sixth edition of the Project
Management Institute (PMI) Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK)
defines a Project Manager (PM) as choice C. After twenty-five years of transportation
project, program, and portfolio management, I like choice B.
The mental image of boldly facing the raging tempest and taming the chaos seems espe-
cially relevant to transportation projects. Most other engineering disciplines operate in
closed systems where you can quantitatively define, and directly control, most project
risks. Transportation projects are decidedly different.
Project boundaries and scopes can be expanded with citizen input. Project objectives and
success criteria can unpredictably change with the political tide. Legislative action and
agency promulgation can dramatically change the rules of engagement mid-project by
modifying processes, procedures, standards, and grandfathering new regulations. Weather
can directly impact your schedule. Market conditions may increase your estimates even as
your disconnected budget is declining. Other private entities are also constantly playing in
your sandbox and often do not coordinate their efforts with your project. You work closely
Transportation Project Management, First Edition. Rob Tieman.

© 2023 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Published 2023 by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
2 1 Project Management 101
with a myriad of local, state, and federal organizations that often have very different defi-
nitions of “a helpful and timely response.” Bureaucratic inertia, indecision, and personal
and professional agendas are commonplace. And so much more.
Transportation Project Management is a fascinatingly complex game. It will challenge
your patience, intelligence, and determination. And it will fill you with pride as you develop
and deliver tangible and enduring products that improve the safety and quality of life for
the community.
This book will paint a broad-stroke, contextual picture of foundational transportation
knowledge, provide a comprehensive examination of project management fundamentals,
and offer practical guidance on how to efficiently plan, develop, and deliver public trans-
portation projects.
1.1.1 The Big Picture

At their core, most transportation owner-operators are funding organizations. This is
increasingly the case as more design, development, construction, maintenance, and oper-
ations activities are being contracted out and not performed with in-house staff. Public
agencies operate under completely different paradigms than private companies. They are
not a for-profit enterprise. They are also not a bank. Their continued existence and success
is not dependent upon the size of their cash reserves or its ability to optimize a positive finan-
cial advantage in the transaction of goods or services. Their directive is to spend the money
in a reasonable and responsible way that directly and significantly improves the public’s
safety, mobility, and quality of life. While the public entity may own and operate the trans-
portation asset, it is important to understand that the money that flows through its various
projects, programs, and portfolios supports and enables a host of other public agencies, con-
sultants, contractors, manufacturers, suppliers, and services that drive an entire industry
with far-reaching economic impacts.
Most state Departments of Transportation (DOTs) have remarkably similar mission state-
ments. They typically include planning, delivering, operating, and maintaining safe, acces-
sible, and reliable multimodal transportation systems that enable efficient movement of
people and goods, enhance the economy, and improve the overall quality of life. Most DOTs
also cite shared values that typically include safety, trust, honesty, integrity, accountability,
transparency, fiscal responsibility, innovation, sustainability, and responsive service. These
are ambitious and noble goals. The PM plays a critical role in the execution of this mission.
To meet these challenges, DOTs and other transportation system owners and operators
must work collaboratively and strategically to ensure they are planning, developing, and
delivering the right projects. Significant time and effort is spent evaluating and prioritizing
the projects that make cost-effective and significant impacts to the transportation systems
and the traveling public. Once a project is selected, funded, and initiated, it becomes the
PM’s responsibility to develop and deliver the project.
I have yet to meet an engineer who went through the gauntlet of an engineering educa-
tion so they could live their dream of filling out forms and shuffling papers. Engineers solve
problems. Engineers create and innovate. Engineers build things. That is why we are engi-
neers. A transportation PM has to juggle many factors and risks, work with a wide range of
stakeholders, all while strategically and stubbornly navigating their project to satisfy
1.2 Triple Constraint 3
sometimes complex and conflicting success criteria. At times this can be exhausting and
overwhelming. Resist surrendering that sense of wonder and excitement you had building
Lego creations as a kid. Remember, the goal is to build a solution that solves a problem and
improves the community’s quality of life. That is a noble goal.
Life is short. Harvey Mackay said, “Time is free, but it’s priceless. You can’t own it, but you
can use it. You can’t keep it, but you can spend it. Once you’ve lost it you can never get it back.”
In your professional career you only get so many projects to manage and lead. Seize the
limited opportunities to make a tangible and significant difference in the world.
1.2 Triple Constraint
“Nothing is so simple that it cannot be misunderstood.”

– Freeman Teague, Jr.
In 2016, the worldwide management consulting firm McKinsey & Company estimated
large transportation projects typically finish 80% over budget and 20% beyond the original
schedule. Pending the sample set of projects, the results can be even more bleak. Bent
Flyvbjerg, of Oxford Business School, estimated 90% of mega projects go over budget.
Meanwhile, on the other end of the spectrum, small local transportation projects may be no
better. While the lack of holistic and consistent performance metrics over the life of the
project and across state and locality lines can make it difficult to determine if transporta-
tion organizations are developing and delivering projects on-time and on-budget compared
against a common schedule and budget baseline, there is no denying transportation pro-
jects have a history of being chronically late and over budget.
Why is this? In a recent Gallup poll of most trusted and ethical professions, engineers
rank second behind nurses, ahead of medical doctors and pharmacists. Top college engi-
neering programs are among the most competitive for entrance, and most rigorous to
complete. Transportation professionals are typically well-intentioned, bright engineers
who are driven to solve problems and build solutions. Where is the disconnect?
Many of the reasons for this uninspiring performance will be discussed and addressed in
this book. Some of these reasons are outside of our control, but most are not. An organiza-
tion or individual cannot expect success if their level of transportation project management
expertise and experience is low. This book will equip you to succeed.
We start at the very beginning. Project Management 101
is the Triple Constraint. It is so simple. Most every engi-
neer, manager, or administrator can describe it. Yet project
performance indicates most don’t understand it, properly
utilize it, or grasp its power.
As PM, the Triple Constraint is fundamental to all you
do. It is graphically shown as a triangle, with the three legs
being labelled for Budget, Scope, and Schedule.
This triangle, illustrated in Figure 1.1, represents your
project. Your project’s budget, scope, and schedule are
individual constraints that are inherently interconnected. Figure 1.1 Triple constraint.
Once set, you cannot change one without impacting the other two. Think of the area within
the triangle as fixed. The option of simply enlarging the triangle is rarely realistic without
compromising the project’s success. So, if you extend the schedule line, the budget and/or
scope must decrease in order for the area within the triangle to remain the same. This
results in the common quip that you can have your project fast, cheap, or good – pick two
of the three.
It is important to recognize that you don’t have a project unless that project has a budget,
scope, and schedule. You may have an idea, a hope, a plan, or even a commitment, but you
do not have a project until you have a budget, scope, and schedule. Once the project is
active, the triple constraint is established. Once established, the PM lives within this tri-
angle. All project work should be conducted within this space. To be successful, you must
fiercely monitor and guard these three critical constraints. As PM, this is your primary job.
George Box said, “All models are wrong, but some are useful.” This is true of the Triple
Constraint. The three constraints have very different units of money (budget), time
(schedule), and content (scope). As such, there may be other constraints of similar units. For
instance, a decrease in funding, an anticipated funding shortfall due to a revised construction
cost estimate, or higher than anticipated project expenses may all fall under the budget of
the Triple Constraint. It can be tempting to try to read too much into this model. However,
while the concept is an oversimplification, it does effectively illustrate a project’s fundamental
competing and interdependent constraints. This understanding and mindset correctly
frames the context for successful Project Management and Change Management. The PM
must constantly search for, and find, balance between these three constraints.
When considering the Triple Constraint, it is important to realize it provides different
insights in different scenarios. When two of the three constraints are fixed, it can be prob-
lematic to adjust the third. If your budget and schedule are fixed, it is difficult to increase
scope by adding design features. If your budget and scope are fixed, the project cannot
extend its schedule without complications. If the schedule and scope are fixed, a budget
decrease may jeopardize success.
The situation is different when only one constraint is fixed. In these situations, the remain-
ing two constraints must be adjusted to balance the project. If the scope is fixed and your
schedule is extended, your budget may need to be increased. If your scope is fixed and your
budget is decreased, you will need to compress your schedule. If your schedule is fixed and
your scope is increased, you may need to increase your budget. If your schedule is fixed and
your budget is decreased, you may need to reduce scope. If your budget is fixed and your
schedule is accelerated, you may need to reduce scope. If your budget is fixed and your scope
is increased, you may need to fast-track your schedule.
In reality, most projects experience some variance in all three constraints. The scope may
be increasing, which necessitates extending the schedule and increasing the budget. Or the
schedule is suddenly accelerated, which necessitates increasing the budget to add resources
and reducing scope by eliminating nonessential design elements. Or the budget is cut,
which necessitates reducing the scope and modifying the schedule.
In all of these cases, effective Change Management is critical to project success. As PM,
you need to strategically be preparing and moving the game pieces so that you are posi-
tioned to win, meaning that you develop and deliver the project on-time and on-budget in a
way that satisfies the Project Management Plan (PMP) and achieves established success
criteria.
Effectively managing a project’s Triple Constraint requires purposeful action. In the life
of most projects, the Triple constraints will be strained. Past performance shows us these
situations are not always handled well. Successful PMs are flexible in approach and adapt-
able to change while maintaining a laser-like focus on objectives, risks, and constraints.
Planned change is one of the most powerful tools a PM can use to nimbly develop and
deliver a successful project. Conversely, nothing will jeopardize a project faster than
unplanned or unmanaged change. The PM is fully responsible to monitor and manage any
and all changes to the Triple Constraint. Change Management is discussed at length in
Chapter 10, Controlling the Project, Section 10.3, Change Management.
Many mature organizations have a project-centric approach. For our purposes, this
means that every project has a schedule. Every schedule has essential tasks. Every task has
a responsible resource. Every schedule has a defined critical path. Every project has a PM.
Every project has a budget. Every dollar has a project. Every scope is defined. Every change
is processed per approved change management procedures. Underlying all of these tenets
is a fundamental reliance upon the triple constraint, which is the unyielding foundation for
all successful projects.
While your primary responsibility as PM is the Triple Constraint, there are other factors
you must also consider. Underlying the Triple Constraint of Budget, Scope, and Schedule,
are the constant undercurrents of Risk, Resources, and Quality. None of these are inherently
project constraints; although changes to budget, scope, and schedule may be dependent
upon, or directly impact, Risks, Resources, and Quality. As such, any of these may become
constraints that become entangled with the Triple Constraints. Identifying, managing, and
responding to Risks can directly impact any or all of the triple constraints. The same can be
true for Resources and Quality. Intentionally and proactively managing Risks, Resources,
and Quality will position you for project success. Conversely, ignoring or mismanaging
Risks, Resources, and Quality will almost certainly lead to failure. Each of these will be
discussed at length in subsequent chapters.
1.3 The Project Management Plan
“An hour of planning can save you ten hours of doing.”

– Dale Carnegie
A project’s Purpose and Need defines the Why of the project. The project scope details the
What to satisfy the Why. The Project Management Plan (PMP) details the How, Who, and
When. This living document provides guidance and clarification on how the final product
will be managed during development. It provides clarity and consistency, and serves as a
tremendous resource during unexpected times or in the midst of critical staff transitions.
The PMP is the responsibility of the PM.
When you see “Plan,” think “How.” The project schedule is not the PMP. At its core, the
PMP is a collection of other plans, each one detailing how a critical area of the project will
be managed. Much of this may already be defined in your organizational guidance. The
intention of the PMP is not to recreate it, but to highlight key components. The final PMP
should not be a physical or virtual binder that sits proudly on a shelf. The PMP should be a
living document and a dynamic tool that is used and leveraged throughout the project.
All projects should have a PMP. Larger and more complex projects can have massive
PMPs. However, even smaller projects can benefit from a very quick and simple PMP.
Many organizations have PMP guidance or templates that should be used and followed.
While each project is unique, the format can remain consistent. The content and level of
detail should be tailored to the size and complexity of the project, per your organization’s
guidance. If your organization does not have PMP guidance or template, you may use the
following format illustrated in Figure 1.2.
•Purpose and Need, Objectives, Goals

Project Details •Project Narrative, Phase Details, Project Delivery Method
Resource Management •Organizational Chart

Plan •Roles and Responsibilities
•Project Development Approach

Scope Management Plan •Issue Log
Schedule Management •Project Schedule

Plan •Baseline Schedule
•Project Budget and Estimates

Cost Management Plan •Baseline Estimate
•Risk Register
Risk Management Plan •Assumption Log
•Stakebolder Engagement Plan

Communications Plan •Stakeholder Register
•Quality Assurance - the process

Quality Management Plan •Quality Control - the product
•Change Management Procedures

Change Management Plan •Change Log
Figure 1.2 Project management plan template.
1.3.1 Project Details

Every PMP should start with a section on Project Details. This should be tailored to the
protocol and expectations of your organization. Typically, this would detail the project’s
Purpose and Need, objectives, and goals. This section should also include a project narra-
tive. High-level summaries of project phase details and the selected project delivery method
should also be incorporated. If your organization requires a Project Charter or a Consultant’s
Scope of Work, it should be included in this section.
1.3.2 Resource Management Plan

The Resource Management Plan details how the project team will interact throughout the
project. An organizational chart and list of Roles and Responsibilities are critical components
of this plan. Detailed information on developing and managing project teams is included in
Chapter 7, Managing Resources. Additional information on the Resource Management Plan
is included in Section 7.3, Resource Planning.
1.3.3 Scope Management Plan

The Scope Management Plan details how the project scope is defined, validated, and con-
trolled throughout the project. This should describe the project development approach.
The project’s Issue Log is a critical work product within this plan. Detailed information on
Scopes is included in Chapter 4, Scope. Additional information about the Scope Management
Plan is included in Section 4.4, Scope Management.
1.3.4 Schedule Management Plan

The Schedule Management Plan details how the schedule will be developed, monitored,
and controlled throughout the project. The Project Schedule and Baseline Schedule are
critical work products under this plan. Detailed information on schedules is included in
Chapter 5, Schedule, with Section 5.2, Schedule Management Plan, focusing specifically on
the Schedule Management Plan.
1.3.5 Cost Management Plan

The Cost Management Plan details how the project budget and estimates will be developed,
monitored, and controlled throughout the project. The project’s budget and estimates, along
with the baseline estimate, are critical work products under this plan. Detailed information
on these financial issues included in Chapter 3, Budgets and Estimates. Additional information
on the Cost Management Plan is included in Section 3.4, Managing the Budget.
1.3.6 Risk Management Plan

The Risk Management Plan details how risk will be identified, analyzed, and managed
throughout the project. This includes the processes that will be followed, and the tools that will
be utilized. The Risk Register and Assumption Log are key documents that should be part of this
plan, and regularly updated. Detailed information on risk management and the Risk Management
Plan are included in Chapter 6, Managing Risk, and Section 6.2, Risk Management Plan.
1.3.7 Communications Plan

The Communications Plan details how information will be collected and disseminated to
the project team, leadership, and stakeholders throughout the project. The Stakeholder
Register and Stakeholder Engagement Plan will be large components of the Communications
Plan. Detailed information is included in Chapter 9, Communications, particularly in

Section 9.1, Project Communications, and Section 9.2, Stakeholder Involvement and the
Stakeholder Engagement Plan.
1.3.8 Quality Management Plan

The Quality Management Plan details how quality will be defined and measured throughout
the project. This should address both process (via Quality Assurance) and the product (via
Quality Control). Detailed information is included in Chapter 8, Managing Quality.
Information specific to the Quality Management Plan is included in Section 8.2, Monitoring
and Controlling Quality.
1.3.9 Change Management Plan

Change is inevitable. The Change Management Plan details how change will be managed
and processed throughout the project. Established Change Management Procedures are
critical to project success. The Change Log documents all project changes throughout the
project. Detailed information on Change Management Plan is included in Chapter 10,
Controlling the Project, within Section 10.3, Change Management.
1.4 Organizational Basics
“The war is not won with bayonets, but with effective organization.”
– Unknown
1.4.1 Organizational Structures

Organizations develop and deliver projects under different frameworks. These frameworks
have far-reaching implications for how your organization operates, including who makes
what decisions. Generally speaking, there are three different types of organizational struc-
tures for project management: Functional, Matrix, and Projectized. Matrix organizations can
be subdivided into Weak Matrix, Balanced Matrix, and Strong Matrix organizations. Figure
1.3 shows the full range from Functional on one end to Weak Matrix, to Balanced Matrix, to
Strong Matrix, with Projectized on the other end. This spectrum represents the scale of an
organization from being Department Oriented to Project Oriented. The balance of power and
authority between the Functional Manager and Project Manager transition along this range.
A Functional Organization is divided into discipline-specific departments. Resources are
controlled within their functional group, which is controlled by the functional manager.
Employees are specialized by area. Rigid, disconnected organizational hierarchies can cre-
ate “silos” that forces team members to first go up their own vertical chain of command for
information outside of their silo. While this structure can concentrate expertise within effi-
cient departments, it can also isolate resources and introduce turf battles. Decision making
can be slow, and loyalty can first be to the silo and not the organization or project. In this
arrangement, PMs have little-to-no power or authority over the project or team resources.
Department Oriented Project Oriented
Matrix
Functional Organization Projectized
Organization Organization
Weak Balanced Strong
PM Authority
Functional Manager Authority
Figure 1.3 Organizational structures for project management.
On the other end of the spectrum are Projectized Organizations. These organizations are
highly project focused, and arrange their staffs accordingly as all activities are intentionally
managed through projects. In this framework, the PM has tremendous power and authority.
Resources are completely controlled by the PM within this dynamic and adaptive environ-
ment. This structure can enable nimble progress as decisions can be quickly made for a
team that is first loyal to the project success. However, the inherent temporary nature of
this structure can challenge continuity and introduce employee uncertainty as they may be
reshuffled after each project. Additionally, while encouraging collaboration, it can limit
discipline-specific expertise that is essential in technical industries.
Most transportation organizations are Matrix Organizations. A Matrix Organization sits
comfortably in the middle, offering the best, and worst, of both worlds. An organization
can tailor their resources and strengths to enable flexibility and encourage efficiencies
across multiple objectives. Here resources answer to both the Functional Managers and
PM. Which manager has more power and authority determines if the organization is
Weak, Balanced, or Strong. In a Weak Matrix, the budget and schedule are controlled
by the Functional Managers. The PM may be part-time and is more of a coordinator.
In a Strong Matrix, the budget and schedule are predominantly controlled by the PM.
Functional Managers fill a valuable support role. In a Balanced Matrix, they share con-
trol of the budget and schedule. Typically, the PM will lead project-related tasks while
the Functional Manager is responsible for resource-related issues. This dynamic structure
enables concentration of expertise and successful collaboration across department lines.
However, it does necessitate effective communication to clarify potentially competing
roles, responsibilities, and objectives.
1.4.2 Project Management Office (PMO)

PMI’s PMBOK defines a Project Management Office (PMO) as, “A management structure that
standardizes the project-related governance processes and facilitates the sharing of resources, meth-
odologies, tools, and techniques.” This typically means the PMO defines and maintains project
management standards, while realizing economies of scale in project development. They should
be the organization’s experts in project management practices and methodologies.
Not all PMOs are created equal. They too can have different structures and focus. There
are three basic types of PMOs: Supporting, Controlling, and Directive. Think of them as a
range, in this order.
A Supporting PMO encourages the PMs by providing optional resources, almost in a con-
sultant, advisor, or coach role. Typically, they would provide templates, best practices,
lessons learned, training, and manage any PM information systems. This structure sup-
ports the PMs by offering advice and guidance on an as-needed basis, if asked. Since inter-
actions are voluntary, their control, influence, and authority are low. Consequently, this
type of PMO can be summarily ignored without repercussions as they cannot enforce
anything. A Supporting PMO can be effective where projects can be successfully managed
in a loosely controlled environment.
The most common type of PMO is a Controlling PMO, which strikes the balance between
being hands-off and a taskmaster. In this sweet spot, they emphasize support, governance,
and conformance. Typically, they would also provide project management policies, proce-
dures, forms, reporting, and other tools. This type of PMO works to establish the project
management framework, and then enforces compliance with organizational practices and
methodologies. A Controlling PMO can be extremely effective in complex environments
where compliance with established practices is critical to success, such as in the transpor-
tation industry.
A Directive PMO directly manages the projects. In these instances, all PMs work directly
for the PMO. Success requires strong governance framework as their goal is to become effi-
cient project execution factories. A Directive PMO can be very effective in rigid, highly
regulated, high-risk environments, or in larger matrix organizations.
Assuming your transportation organization has a PMO, it is likely some version of a
Controlling PMO. As such, it will likely have some common objectives regarding project
management, including but not limited to: Governance, Standards, Policies, Processes,
Resources, Forms, Templates, Documentation, and Training. This all enables the organiza-
tion to provide consistency in project development and delivery between PMs and across
district, divisional, or department lines. This includes establishing and maintaining
common processes and performance metrics. It also often includes administrating the
organization’s project management software, tracking, and management tools.
The PMO should promote a pervasive project management culture that provides consis-
tency and harmony while increasing productivity and consistent results. The influence
footprint of a successful PMO is much larger than might be expected. It can be the tiny
rudder that turns the entire ship. Often one of the most important responsibilities of a PMO
is to minimize conflict and improve efficiencies at the critical links between people,
processes, and technology. As such, the PMO may be in a unique position to break down
organizational silos and build bridges of innovation. As a Transportation PM, understand
the expertise within your PMO and leverage it to your advantage.
1.4.3 Projects, Programs, and Portfolios

Projects, programs, and portfolios are three distinct entities. Understanding the implica-
tions of their fundamental differences will better enable you to successfully manage your
projects within your organization’s structure.
A Project is a temporary effort to develop and deliver a product within the established
budget, scope, and schedule. A Program is a collection of projects that share a meaningful
relationship. A Portfolio is the full collection of projects and programs that share the same
strategic objectives. To use a music analogy, consider each individual song to be a project. An
artist’s individual albums would be separate programs. The artist’s full catalog of albums and
stray songs would be their portfolio. In transportation, every project is a project. Projects may
then be grouped into Programs by some meaningful relationship between the projects. This
may be a geographic district, a specific funding source, a defining discipline (e.g., bridges),
who is administering the project (e.g., DOT managed or Locality managed), or some other
useful distinction. For the purpose of performance metrics, projects may be analyzed in more
than one program. For instance, you may first look at a geographic district’s entire program,
and then look at all bridge projects across district lines. Every project should have a PM.
Pending the size and structure of your organization, you may also have Program Managers.
The portfolio would then be the entirety of programs and projects that share a strategic
objective. This will typically be all construction projects within your organization’s multiyear
funding plan. Figure 1.4 illustrates the relationship between these three entities.
Portfolio
Suite of programs and projects
Portfolio managed to optimize enterprise
value in alignment with
organizational objectives
Project
Program
Program
Project
Strategic collection of projects
designed to produce identified
Project
Program business value
Project Project Project

Temporary effort of defined tasks
to create unique product within
established budget and schedule
Figure 1.4 Projects, programs, and portfolios.
Projects, programs, and portfolios operate at different levels that all need to work together
to ensure organizational success. Those responsible at each level operate at very different
altitudes and levels of expertise. It is helpful to realize each may have different focus and
success criteria. Pending the size and maturity of your organization, these different levels
may be clearly delineated or mostly blurred. The same person may fill one or more of these
roles in smaller organizations. Larger transportation organizations may have different
managerial and leadership individuals or entities at each level. For instance, there may be
a hierarchy of PMs that are under District program PMOs, that in turn are under the
Portfolio (or Enterprise) PMO in Central Office.
It is worth discussing the differences in approaches. On one side of the spectrum is

Project Management, which is uniquely tactical in nature. This concentrates on doing,
resolving the how, and focusing on day-to-day execution. Project Management drives the
deliverables, and wants to improve “what is.” On the other side of the spectrum is Portfolio
Management, which is uniquely strategic in nature. This concentrates on planning, deter-
mines the what and why, and focuses on defining the future. Portfolio Management drives
the outcomes, and considers “what can be.” Program Management hovers in the middle,
balancing strategic direction with tactical realities. Figure 1.5 summarizes some of the
major differences between each level.
Comparison Project Program Portfolio
Purpose Develop and deliver the Satisfy program’s objectives by Support

scoped project on-time executing projects organization’s
and on-budget mission by guiding
and administering
strategy
Goal Output Capacity and effect Strategic
implementation
Priorities Budget, Scope, Schedule, Validation, Resources, Strategic alignment,
Quality Prioritization governance, synergy
What is it Efficiency Effectiveness Agility
about?
Key Imperative Doing things right Realizing benefits Doing the right things
Key Activities Planning, scoping, Verification and validation Strategic planning
managing budget, scope, and governance
schedule, risks, resources,
and quality
Key Management skills Leadership skills Analysis, problem
Competencies solving, strategic
thinking, and
decision making
How do you Was project delivered Did completed projects deliver Did aggregate
define success? on-time, on-budget, program’s expected benefit? performance satisfy
within scope, and with Did you spend the money? Did strategic objectives
acceptable customer you meet target performance and defined priorities
satisfaction? metrics? in business plan?
Success Budget, Scope, Schedule, Efficient utilization of Strategic objectives
Measures and Quality resources to meet business and enterprise
objectives performance
Leadership Task delivery within Managing relations and Adding value and
Focus defined success criteria conflict resolution improving processes
Management Task performance Project performance and Enterprise
Focus program’s efficacy performance and
achieving business
objectives
(Continued)
1.5 A Look Ahead 13
(Continued)
Comparison Project Program Portfolio
Key Technical knowledge and Leadership, support, and Insight, innovation,

Management interpersonal skills organization and synthesis
Skills
Scope Well-defined (Budget, Larger objectives to satisfy Business scope to
Scope, and Schedule) expected program benefits accomplish defined
strategic objectives
Change Fully managed with Manage change within Monitor and react in
established change program (trade-offs) to broad environment to
management processes maintain program’s expected maintain strategic
benefits objectives
Risks typically Threats Opportunities, balanced Deviations from
viewed as… against threats leadership
expectations
Tries to answer Eliminate uncertainty Reduce ambiguity and focus on Bring clarity of vision
questions to… and forward project program benefits and eliminate
progress systemic obstacles
Monitoring Work packages that Process of program, and project Aggregate
control and produce the progress to meet expected performance,
project deliverables benefits resource allocations,
risks, and changes to
strategic objectives
Guidance, Follow it Implement and Establish it
Policies, and enforce it
Procedures
Figure 1.5 Comparison of projects, programs, and portfolios.
1.5 A Look Ahead
“Man’s mind, once stretched by a new idea, never regains its original dimensions.”
– Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
When a PM traverses their completed transportation projects, they see the improvement in
ways no one else does. They see the property with the belligerent owner who tried to kill the
project. They see the now grassed area of the test hole that confirmed they had a massive
utility conflict. They see the pipe outfall that needed to be extended and required additional
survey that stressed the schedule. They see the storm inlets in the roundabout that were
nearly impossible to adequately drain on the challenging incline. But that is not all they see.
They also see the median break strategically positioned to accommodate the church’s mas-
terplan for expansion. They see the pedestrian path that was extended to connect two
neighbourhoods so residents could safely walk and bike to the nearby swim club. They see
the improved roadway geometry and safety features that dramatically reduced accidents.
They see the innovative bridge abutment design that saved that massive old oak tree.
When a PM looks at their completed project, they see so much more than just the com-
pleted assets. They see how the finished product came to be. They see the journey. Some of
these memories are wildly successful tales of innovation and persistence. Others are pride-
swallowing lessons learned. But they are all part of the story. They are all part of your
journey.
Whether each memory and issue went your way or not, they are all testimonials to suc-
cessful resolutions. PMs solve problems and make things happen, from megaprojects that
change the landscape and character of cities and corridors, to small projects that improve
safety at a pedestrian crossing. There are very few systems that directly impact our lives as
much as the transportation network. Be it our individual travel for work or pleasure, or the
transport of goods and services that enables our economy to survive and thrive. The
economic and time benefits of transportation improvements are real.
It is said PMs find a way, or an excuse. As PMs, you drive this ship. You have the power
to push development of an effective and efficient design. The larger your organization,
perhaps the easier it is to lose the urgency of your mission. If the project is delivered next
May or next September, does it really matter? If you are improving traffic efficiency, think
of all the time you are saving and giving back to each person who drives that road. If you
are improving a bike or pedestrian facility, think of the added joy families have using it,
and of those who now run on it every day. If you are improving safety, think of those who
may have been in serious or fatal accidents if the project were delayed. I guarantee that
their loved ones would say your efforts mattered a great deal. This is exciting! You are mak-
ing a difference. This should motivate you to wake up each day and drive your projects
forward. You are making a very real and tangible difference in the lives of the community
in which you and many, many others live, work, and play. As Ralph Waldo Emerson said,
“The reward of a thing well done is to have done it.”
15
Project Development Process
“If you can’t describe what you are doing as a process, you don’t know what you are
doing.”
– William Edwards Denning
The PM is very similar to the conductor of an orchestra. They don’t need to know how to
play the viola, oboe, or timpani, but they do need to know the instruments’ capabilities and
constraints. They acknowledge the musicians are the experts, and work to position them to
perform their best. The conductor approaches the performance from a different perspec-
tive. They see the entirety of the score, understanding how and when which instruments
can be combined to enhance the results. They make adjustments to the plan to emphasize
key musical components. They guide and shape the performance in a way that enables the
full orchestra to reach their collective potential. And while they may speak for the full
orchestra, the conductor graciously thanks all those involved, highlighting key musicians
and soloists.
2.1 Safety First

“Safety isn’t expensive, its priceless.”
– Jerry Smith
2.1.1 A Matter of Life and Death

In the transportation industry, “Safety First” is more than a slogan. It is a mantra. Safety is
a foundational tenet of transportation policy and practice, upon which we should be ever
vigilant.
The National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) clearly advocates that a licensed
Professional Engineer (PE) should hold paramount their obligation to protect the health,
safety, and welfare of the public. PEs bear an ethical responsibility to do so, and can lose
their licensure if it is determined they were negligent in this regard.
Roadway safety is a global issue. In 2021, the World Health Organization (WHO) esti-
mates traffic accidents are responsible for approximately 1.3 million fatalities each year,

16 2 Project Development Process
with an additional 20 to 50 million annually suffering nonfatal injuries. More than half of
all traffic road deaths are pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists. Over 90% of the world’s
traffic fatalities occur in less developed countries. These deaths come with considerable
economic impact, costing most countries 3% of their gross domestic product.
Developed countries are not immune from these tragedies. Traffic deaths are rising in
the United States. The National Highway Safety Traffic Administration (NHSTA) esti-
mated there were 42,915 traffic fatalities in 2021. This represents a 10.5% increase over
2020. It should be noted that estimated vehicle miles traveled in 2021 increased by about
325 billion miles, representing an 11.2% increase over 2020. Normalized for miles traveled,
2021 saw a decrease to 1.33 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled, down from 1.34
in 2020. While this may seem like good news, perhaps we should think about it this way –
33 states experience more than one traffic fatality each day, with California, Florida, and
Texas experiencing over 10 traffic fatalities each day. Each death is a tragic loss that shat-
ters the world of their family and loved ones. This is unacceptable.
2.1.2 The Usual Suspects

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) and Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI)
thoroughly examine fatality crash data. There are some interesting and unsurprising themes.
Human error causes most fatalities. Distracted driving, impaired driving, speeding, and
other unwise behavior decisions are major causes of fatalities. Younger drivers are more
likely to have a fatal crash by lane mile than experienced drivers. States that have legal-
ized marijuana are seeing an increase in traffic fatality numbers and rates. About half of
all highway fatalities are unbuckled. This percentage is even higher in pickup trucks. And
so forth.
Other behavior themes can be more directly addressed with proactive, redundant safety
designs. Such as about half of all fatalities, including about ¾ of bike and pedestrian deaths,
occur at night. About ¼ of all traffic fatalities and about ½ of severe accidents occur at
intersections. About half of all highway fatalities are roadway departures. And so forth.
The root causes of traffic fatalities have largely remained unchanged; however, what is
changing is how we approach addressing this situation.
2.1.3 Safe System

Traffic safety is a complicated problem. It extends beyond any one engineering discipline
and lends itself to broader systems thinking. Peter Senge said, “Systems thinking is a disci-
pline for seeing wholes. It is a framework for seeing interrelationships rather than things, for
seeing ‘patterns of change’ rather than static ‘snapshots.’ It is a set of general principles span-
ning fields as diverse as physical and social sciences, engineering and management.” This
seems especially applicable to traffic safety.
Safe System is an intentional engineering and system approach that aims to eliminate fatal
and serious injuries for all road users. This philosophy has been embraced and adopted by a
number of countries throughout the world which involve some significant mindset shifts
from traditional transportation methodologies, some of which are detailed in Figure 2.1.
2.1 Safety First 17
Traditional Approach Safe System Approach
Prevent crashes Prevent deaths and serious injuries

Improve human behavior Design for human mistakes and limitations
Control speeding Reduce system kinetic energy
Individuals are responsible Share responsibility
React based on crash history Proactively identify and address risk
Figure 2.1 Traditional vs. Safe system.
In America, the Federal Highway Association (FHWA) has embraced this safe system
approach. This important initiative is built upon the following six guiding principles:
1) Deaths and serious injuries are unacceptable
2) Humans make mistakes
3) Humans are vulnerable
4) Responsibility is shared
5) Safety is proactive
6) Redundancy is crucial
These six principles should be advocated and applied to all five elements of a safe system:
1) Safe road users
2) Safe vehicles
3) Post-crash care
4) Safe roads
5) Safe speeds
It is worth noting that transportation system stewards and designers can only directly
impact these last two elements: safe roads and safe speeds. Implementation of this philos-
ophy involves anticipating human mistakes, and designing transportation infrastructure to
reduce and mitigate risks of fatal or serious accidents in a holistic and overlapping manner.
As transportation system stewards and designers, we need to recognize that users make
mistakes and bad decisions. It is incumbent that we take measures to keep those impacts
at tolerable levels. At its core, injury severity is all about kinetic energy (Kinetic Energy = ½
mass × velocity squared). All auto safety features being relatively equal, in a head-on
collision you can’t avoid the law of conservation of momentum (momentum = mass ×
velocity). In both these simple equations, velocity is critical. Figure 2.2 is a FHWA prepared
graphic that shows anticipated fatality risks based on impact speeds.
These sobering realities should motivate designers to encourage safe speeds and manip-
ulate crash angles to reduce injury severity. This understanding has accelerated efforts
like traffic calming, speed management, and focusing on target speeds. Similarly, inno-
vative intersections are being embraced and advanced, including roundabouts, Diverging
Diamond Interchanges (DDI), Restricted Crossing U-Turns (RCUT), Continuous Flow
Intersections (CFI), and the like.
100%
o
n
n
jec
ut
ria
-O
ts A
Ob
ead
est
pac
Ped
xed
oH
Fatality
e Im
Aut
Fi
Hits
Risk
Hits
Sid
Hits
to
to
Au
to
to
Au
Au
Au
0%
10 30 40 50 60 70
Impact Speed (MPH)
Figure 2.2 Fatality risks based on impact speeds.
2.1.4 Standards Do Not Equal Performance

It is critical to recognize and acknowledge that designing and building a project to stan-
dards does not directly equal safety performance. Figure 2.3 shows how historically most
transportation owner operators have behaved as if meeting or exceeding design standards
will inherently ensure acceptable levels of safety, while failure to meet the standards may
seriously jeopardize safety. Roadways that meet the minimum standards are deemed to be
nominally safe, by the fact that they meet the established standards.
Standards
Crashes
Design
Figure 2.3 Safety standards – historic approach.
In some situations, there is an instantaneous increase in realized safety benefits at certain

design decision points or detailed demarcations; however, Figure 2.4 shows how it is far
more common that most safety benefits are gradual in nature. This more progressive
approach shifts away from nominal safety toward substantive safety, which focuses on the
expected or actual long-term safety performance of the road.
This approach does not diminish the importance and significance of safety and design
standards. They remain the north star of design, but it shouldn’t end there. In certain situa-
tions, design standards may not provide the best achievable level of safety. The transportation
industry is steadily moving toward Performance-Based Design (PBD), which relies on stan-
dards but grants flexibility to more easily use engineering judgment and context-sensitive
2.2 Overview 19
Standards
Crashes
Design
Figure 2.4 Safety standards – progressive approach.
solutions that tailor solutions to each specific project. This mindset is perfectly suited toward
identifying and implementing reasonable and effective safety measures.
Every transportation project presents an opportunity to increase safety. As transportation
stewards and designers, we need to ensure the design is about decisions, not just dimensions.
A safe system culture places safety first and foremost in the system investment decisions.
2.2 Overview
“Slow down. Calm down. Don’t Worry. Don’t Hurry. Trust the process.”
– Alexandra Stoddard
2.2.1 Five Project Stages

A public transportation project has five stages during its development and delivery, before
it is transferred to operations. Different states or localities may vary in how they delineate
these phases, but key elements of the workflow remain, as shown in Figure 2.5.
Initiation is the stage where the idea evolves and becomes a project. Before you manage a
project, there has to be a project to manage. This first stage involves project planning, prioritiza-
tion, selection, and initiation. Every project begins with an idea that originates from some-
where. Perhaps it is a corridor study, citizen input, economic development, political desires,
accident data, structurally deficient ratings, or an obvious need; regardless, this idea somehow
gains momentum and support over other ideas. This can be inclusion in strategic long-term
plans, a political champion, or a connection to economic development. Once the idea is prop-
erly prioritized, adequate funding must be identified. Our transportation systems have many
more identified needs and wants than available resources. As such, each idea is inherently com-
peting against other ideas for limited dollars. Be it through a criteria-based application processes,
strategic processes, or political decisions; some prioritized ideas are selected for funding and
become projects. Project initiation includes vetting the idea, identifying funding, setting up the
project in all applicable systems, and including the project in all applicable multi-year transpor-
tation plans. This stage typically ends around PE Authorization when the project is assigned to
a PM to develop. One enduring challenge in this stage is building and establishing the prelimi-
nary budget, scope, and schedule with very little information.
Preliminary
Initiation Advertise Construction Closeout
Engineering
Figure 2.5 Five project stages.
Preliminary Engineering is the process by which the idea of the initiated project is
designed to advance the project to construction. This is the Project Development Process
(PDP) that will be discussed at length in this chapter. The PDP is the responsibility of the
PM. While you should understand the other stages, you need to know your agency’s PDP.
Advertise is the process that incorporates advertisement and award of the construction
contract. These activities are unique in that they have one foot in project development and
the other in delivery. While it involves both design and construction, it is neither. More
accurately, it is the agency’s transition between development and delivery. At its heart,
these are procurement tasks aimed at the agency eventually making the business decision
whether to award the contract or not. Since many PMs guide their projects through this
stage, we will discuss this in more detail later in this chapter.
Construction is project delivery. This is the actual construction of the project. While its
official start and stop may vary by agency, it generally starts when the owner agency issues
the Notice To Proceed (NTP) to the contractor, and ends with Final Acceptance. Start trig-
gers may vary slightly, such as the contract execution date, or the actual date the con-
tractor begins working the site. NTP is most typical as the Contractor will often order
supplies and submit required paperwork submissions prior to mobilization, which is still
part of the delivery effort. Prior to Final Acceptance, there may be Conditional Acceptance
and Punch List resolution. Final Acceptance may also incorporate resolution of all
construction change orders, payment of Final Invoice, and release of any retainage.
Delivery activities are typically not overseen by the Development PM, but rather the owner
agency’s Construction staff, or their appointed representatives.
Closeout is the backend office work to balance and reconcile all accounting and program-
ming records. This involves reconciling all outstanding bills, settling claims, finalizing paper-
work, closing federal phase agreements, and archiving project records. The ultimate closeout
goal is to close the project in a timely way that maintains systemic records and financial
integrity, while identifying surplus funds that can be transferred and put to use on another
project. Some organizations require project expenditure certifications throughout the life of
the project (e.g., quarterly) which can tremendously expedite administrative closeouts.
A common standard for PM expense certification approvals is “reasonable” and “expected.”
2.2.2 The Project Development Process (PDP)

The federal government and state Departments of Transportation (DOTs) have their Project
Development Process (PDP) well documented in manuals, policies, procedures, interactive
webpages, and color-coded workflow schematics. Many of these show process granular-
ities down to the task level with dependencies. Many localities have similar resources.
Devour these resources.
2.2 Overview 21
While the PDP is well documented, it is often not well understood by those who rely on
its information. As Charles Kettering said, “Knowing is not understanding. There is a great
difference between knowing and understanding; you can know a lot about something and not
really understand it.”
The PDP are the rules by which the transportation development game is played. Imagine
gathering with family or friends to play a new, very complicated board or card game, but choos-
ing not to read the rules or instructions because you kind of have an idea how it should gener-
ally work. When confusion and frustration inevitably ensue, someone looks for a specific
answer to the specific question at hand, only to realize they have been doing some things wrong
that now need to be redone. So, the group takes multiple steps backward to take one step for-
ward, only to repeat this same predictable cycle again and again. Likewise, many transportation
projects follow this example because the PM doesn’t understand the rules of the game.
Discipline-specific engineers are that discipline’s Subject Matter Experts (SME) on the
PDP. By contrast, the PM needs to know the entire PDP, understanding the purpose of each
milestone and the relationships between tasks.
There are five questions every PM should be able to answer at any time on their projects:
WHAT needs to be done
WHO on the team needs to do it
WHEN it needs to be done
WHY it is important
HOW it impacts the PDP
Figure 2.6 Five questions every PM

should be able to answer.
Within accepted organizational limitations, the PM may be allowed to expand or com-

press the standard PDP based upon the specifics and complexity of the project. Exceptional
PMs are effective decision makers. This is only possible if they understand the PDP, and
can answer the five questions in Figure 2.6. PMs should only adjust the PDP when they
fully grasp the significance and interconnectivity of tasks between disciplines, and can
articulate its implications to the project’s budget, scope, and schedule. Additionally, at the
federal and DOT level, most milestones and tasks are directly or indirectly tied to federal
and state requirements. So, while there can be flexibility to modify some of these processes,
proceed with caution. Be sure your workflow changes do not unknowingly compromise
your project, or conflict with governing requirements.
Established PDPs can vary for a variety of reasons, including specific policies, laws,
agreements, funding source requirements, asset ownership, maintenance responsibilities,
and historic precedents. In spite of that, much of the transportation Design-Bid-Build PDP
remains the same.
Most of the guidance displays PDP workflow in a waterfall model that clearly delineates
a linear path of sequential steps. Federal authorizations are for separate and sequential
phases; first Preliminary Engineering (PE), then Right-of-Way (RW), then Construction
(CN). The 30% design meeting proceeds the 60% Design meeting, which proceeds the 90%
design meeting. Citizen Information Meetings proceed the Public Hearing which must
happen before you secure Design Approval. Wetlands are flagged, then confirmed, then
you move forward with applicable permits. Traffic counts are collected, then they are
integrated into the traffic models which drives the traffic study that recommends intersec-
tion design improvements. And so forth. These linear relationships are easy to define, and
powerful to display, particularly for tasks within each engineering discipline.
Mature PDPs use these linear relationships for higher level milestones as their framework,
while recognizing and optimizing the concurrent opportunities within different engineering
disciplines. The many separate, but related, engineering discipline trains should be running
down their own tracks, strategically positioned and timed to converge at key milestones. The
PM needs to keep everyone focused and on schedule, ensuring all are doing what needs to be
done, when it needs to be done, so the project will progress as planned. The only way for this
to happen is if the PM actually knows and understands the entire PDP workflow.
The power of concurrent engineering is realized only when the interconnectivity bet-
ween disciplines is well understood. The water resources train of tasks may appear rather
straightforward until you realize the hydraulic analysis can be an iterative process with the
structural engineer as they collectively optimize the bridge design to pass the required
design storm with the most cost-effective structure. The Traffic Signal design may appear
straightforward until a utility test hole dictates the traffic pole placement must be moved,
which impacts right-of-way and easement lines, which impacts limits of disturbance,
which impacts Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) quantities and requires additional
measures that must be accommodated. The noise abatement train of tasks may appear
straightforward until the designers place the noise wall on top of the proposed drainage
pipes which necessitates redesigning the storm sewer, which was already redesigned once
because of a sanitary sewer extension betterment that was added to the scope. And so forth.
Exceptional PMs study and know the PDP. They have a breadth of experience that grants
them insight into the unique and sometimes complex interconnectivity of engineering dis-
cipline tasks. They have the knowledge to prioritize, and the wisdom of perspective. They
are humble. They ask questions. They strategically push the envelope a bit. They build a
strong team, and then get out of the way.
2.2.3 Five PDP Phases

While much of the workflow is the same, different DOTs and organizations may divide
their PDP into different numbers of phases. For our purposes, we will discuss project
development in the five phases shown in Figure 2.7.
2.3 Scoping Phase
“Deciding what not to do is as important as deciding what to do.”

– Steve Jobs
Scoping generally begins after PE is authorized and ends after the 30% design meeting. This
critical phase positions the project for success. When PE is authorized, you have an idea. This
Scoping Preliminary Detailed Final Design Advertise

Design Design
% Plans
0% 30 % 50 % 60 % 90 % 100 %
Key Milestones
Assemble VE RW RW acquisition PS&E
project team Public Hearing authorization URL Advertise
Scoping Design Approval UFI 90% Plans Award
30% Plans 60% Plans
Figure 2.7 Five PDP phases.
may be a mature idea that was thoroughly researched, planned, and vetted. Or perhaps it was
not. At project initiation, you should have the prescoping level budget, scope, and schedule. The
Scoping Phase further develops these preliminary ideas and transitions them into a project.
As PM, the Scoping Phase oscillates between hurry-up-and-wait and herding cats. It can
feel like you are captain of a ship that has just left to cross the ocean. However, as you set
sail you are still gathering your crew, the ship itself is still under construction, and your
destination is still being finalized.
The PM’s primary responsibility is to develop and deliver the project within the
established triple constraint of budget, scope, and schedule. The challenge in this first PDP
phase is that these constraints are not yet settled. Preliminary expectations have likely been
established that can guide you. But the whole point of the Scoping Phase is to clearly define
the triple constraint of budget, scope, and schedule in which you will operate for the
remainder of the project. Meanwhile, you are assembling your team, identifying stake-
holders, and building the Project Management Plan.
This phase has three overarching goals: Data Collection, Scoping, and 30% plans. Each of
the activities within this phase should forward one or more of these objectives.
During the first part of the Scoping Phase,
imagine a giant funnel, as shown in Figure 2.8. Inputs
A wide variety of inputs go in the top which are Data, Risks, Stakeholders, Constraints,
sifted and combined and evaluated and eventu- Design, Objectives, etc.
ally filtered to output the Triple Constraint of
the Scoped Budget, Scope, and Schedule.
As PM, you control and guide the inputs. You
are the project’s primary gatekeeper and facili-
tator. It is important to make sure all that
should be considered is, and that which should
not is not. This begins with any information
that was prepared during project initiation. Scope 30%
(Triple Constraint) Plans
Field data from all relevant engineering disci-
plines should then be added. At this stage, data Figure 2.8 Scoping inputs.
collection is primarily from noninvasive investigations (e.g., ground and aerial survey, wet-
land flagging, traffic counts, etc.). Invasive investigations (e.g., geotechnical borings, test
holes, historic resource digs, etc.) are typically performed in the next PDP phase. Other criti-
cal inputs may include internal and external stakeholder expectations, financial realities,
political constraints, and all other nontechnical considerations.
As information is input into the top of the funnel, the PM is responsible to navigate the
scoping process. This can be a bit iterative as all relevant information will not be available at the
same time. The challenge is to leverage this information and work with the applicable SMEs to
qualitatively identify project risks. Each engineering discipline will identify its own risks. The
PM must find the interdependence between the disciplines, evaluate the identified threats and
opportunities, and synthesize these with the project’s objectives and resources. Risks will likely
not change the project’s Purpose and Need, but they may significantly impact design, resources,
constraints, and securing stakeholder buy-in. These qualitatively identified risks must then be
quantitatively converted to project impacts that are reflected in the Triple Constraint of budget,
scope, and schedule. Effectively identifying, analyzing, and responding to risk is the very
essence of scoping. These processes are further described in Chapter 6, Risk Management.
Scoping clarifies the project expectations, constraints, and resources, while setting up the
schedule and budget baselines against which you will be measured for the remainder of the
project. These scoping baselines are essential in order to correctly position the right
amounts of the right types of money at the right times in the multi-year improvement plan
so the projects and programs can be successfully developed and delivered. The Scoping
Process is further described in Chapter 4, Scope.
Most every project should have a kick-off and scoping meeting. Often these are combined.
The purpose is to gather the team together. This may be the first time many members are
interacting. As such, a meet-and-greet may be important, as well as discussing expected
roles, responsibilities, and ground rules for the project and future team interactions. This is
a great chance to share initial thoughts and set the tone for project expectations, while
laying the foundation of the desired team culture. Many of these points should be included
in the Project Management Plan.
NEPA is the National Environmental Protection Act. This is a fundamental federal
law that directs federal agencies to conduct environmental reviews to consider a proj-
ect’s potential environmental impacts. The range of NEPA’s scope is vast, and expand-
ing. The size and complexity of the proposed transportation project will determine the
type of required environmental document. The three main types, in ascending order of
complexity, are Categorical Exclusion (CE or CX), Environmental Assessment (EA), and
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The time and effort associated with these docu-
ments varies widely. Where a CE can be relatively painless, an EIS can drive the multi-year
project development schedule. If a project represents little to no impact on the environ-
ment, one can pursue a Findings of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
The details of NEPA, and its associated workflows, are complicated, nuanced, and evolv-
ing. This can be true for both the regulations and their interpretations, at the federal and
state levels. The more complex the project and required environmental document, the
more critical it is to engage environmental professionals who live and breathe these regu-
lations. Beyond their specialized knowledge, exceptional environmental experts also bring
with them positive and productive working relationships with the various decision-makers
and entities that hold some influence or jurisdiction for this process.
Environmental professionals will swim in their lane, and shepherd the NEPA process
throughout the life of the project. From a PM perspective, it is imperative that you under-
stand your project’s environmental commitments and risks. It is crucial that you connect
the environmental professional to the rest of the team, particularly the designer and
hydraulics SMEs, to ensure each discipline is aware of existing and changing constraints
and commitments throughout the development process. During the scoping phase, it is
essential that the PM works with the environmental professionals to determine the envi-
ronmental document type and help navigate this restrictive and prescriptive workflow.
Once the environmental document type is determined, the budget, scope, and schedule
should be adjusted to accommodate it, if needed.
Pending the type of environmental document, there may be associated stakeholder
engagement requirements. The PM should work closely with the environmental profes-
sionals to integrate NEPA-related public outreach into the project’s broader stakeholder
engagement plan, if and when it makes sense.
Generally speaking, environmental activities should never be critical path tasks. The PM
should endeavor to ensure concurrent engineering is utilized such that environmental
tasks are pursued at the proper time, but such that they never become critical path tasks.
This can require attention at both ends of the schedule spectrum. First, you must confirm
all necessary and required paperwork is prepared, submitted, and approved at the proper
time such that it does not delay progress. Conversely, a PM should ensure environmental
permits and the like are not secured too soon. Environmental activities become trouble-
some when they are completed either too late or too early.
The Scoping Phase can produce a number of important deliverables. Each engineering
discipline may produce a preliminary work product that includes data collection and pre-
liminary thoughts, recommendations, or design solutions. The Project Management Plan
should be assembled, as further described in Chapter 4, Scope. Risks should be appropri-
ately documented, as further described in Chapter 6, Risk Management. Stakeholders
should be engaged, as further described in Chapter 9, Communications. Scoping is closed
with the formal approval of a Scoping document, as per your organizational requirements.
The different discipline building blocks all come together in the 30% plans. Your DOT or
organization may refer to the 30% design meeting by another name, such as Preliminary
Field Inspection (PFI), Preliminary Design Meeting, or Staff Review Meeting. The design
percentage may also vary slightly, but is typically between 20% and 30%. While the exact
name and percentage is subjective, the intent and purpose of this first plan submission
should be the same. The goals are to pull together all the initial thoughts, identify and
answer big questions, and chart the course for a design solution.
The first challenge in data collection is to ensure you have all the information you need.
This discovery process can seem relatively straightforward. Were the wetlands flagged and
confirmed? Are there Threatened and Endangered species in your corridor? Where are the
underground utilities? Did Traffic collect all the needed counts for the intersection analysis?
Did the survey collect all the data points to evaluate sight distance on that complicated curve?
And so forth. The second challenge is to absorb and synthesize this information across disci-
plines. Do you need to collect additional survey since the Hydraulics Engineer had to chase a
creek farther than expected to demonstrate an adequate outfall? Do you need to expand your
wetland delineation footprint since it appears you may need more temporary pavement for
Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) since you cannot close the road during construction? The PM
should work closely with the lead designer and team to ensure the right engineering disci-
plines, SMEs, and decision makers are involved in the right conversations to pull all these
thoughts and issues together in a way that paints a more complete project picture. The power
and expertise of the whole project team is greater than the sum of its parts.
The 30% plans provide an opportunity to ask and answer big project questions. What are
the high-risk issues that could significantly impact the project if not resolved? These are the
proverbial forks in the road whose chosen course of action will directly and indirectly
impact the design solution. Can you close the road during construction, or do you need to
keep it open to traffic? How many left-turn lanes will be at the signalized intersection? Is
there space to stage a crane for the bridge construction? Do you have an adequate outfall?
Because if you don’t have an outfall, you don’t have a project. The PM and lead designer
should concentrate on questions like these with focused intensity as they need to be aggres-
sively addressed and resolved at this stage in the project, before it is formally scoped.
While the 30% plans paint the design solution with broad strokes, some details are starting
to emerge. There may not be too much meat on the bones, but the bones should be there. For
roadway projects, the goal is to define the horizontal alignment. You should have all field
survey and located subsurface utilities. Any required Interchange Access Report (IAR) should
be secured. The environmental document type should be settled. Horizontal and vertical
roadway alignments are proposed, along with typical sections. It is understood that vertical
details may need to be adjusted as the storm sewer design or related utility work advances. You
should demonstrate an adequate outfall. Stormwater management approaches are reflected,
along with conceptual MOT strategies. The design approach should be logical and consistent
with the existing corridor characteristics, the project stakeholder expectations, and the proj-
ect’s purpose and need. The PM should work closely with the team and all stakeholders to
facilitate the close cooperation that is needed to define and address all risks and issues that
may impact the road’s horizontal alignment, across all engineering disciplines.
The 30% plans should be routed for review by all applicable engineering disciplines,
SMEs, and other appropriate reviewing entities. Comments should be received and evalu-
ated to discern if other major qualitative risks or conflicts were identified that should be
quantitatively converted to time and money in the scoping schedule and budget before it is
officially submitted, reviewed, and approved.
The PM should then assemble the formal scoping documents, as required by your orga-
nization. This should detail, at a minimum, the project’s budget, scope, and schedule. This
may be a form, a report, or be presented in another format. Regardless, this documentation
should then be reviewed and approved in a manner consistent with your organization’s
applicable procedures. The approved Scoping document should be retained by the PM, and
routinely used as the guiding reference for the budget, scope, and schedule constraints
within which they are to operate for the remainder of the project.
During the scoping phase the team is forming, as further described in Chapter 7,
Managing Resources, and each engineering discipline is running full steam ahead down
their own critical path. The PM must know the pulse of their progress, and be able to
quickly identify when to pump the brakes and bring other disciplines in on specific issues.
Otherwise, David G. Farragut’s “Damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead” approach will
necessitate rework down the line. The PM doesn’t need to know all the answers, but they
should know the right questions to ask at the right time. Team communication, as further
described in Chapter 9, Communications, is critical to Scoping success.
It is difficult to overemphasize the importance of field visits for the PM and the entire team.
Walk the site. Despite increasingly detailed and accurate remote tools and applications, there
is no substitute for walking the site. It can provide invaluable context. If possible, walk the
site with key team SMEs from each engineering discipline. You might be surprised how
quickly and efficiently risks can be identified and potential solutions flushed out at a high
level if you have the right people on site at the same time.
Figure 2.9 provides general guidance on key activities, milestones, and deliverables dur-
ing the Scoping Phase, divided by engineering discipline. While each discipline has its own
Preliminary Detailed Final

Scoping Advertise
Design Design Design
PE
Authorization
Time
Key Kickoff Scoping Scoping budget Scope the 30% 30% Design
PMP
Milestones Meeting Meeting and schedule project Plans Meeting
% Plans 0% 30%
Constructability
Construction
review
Wetland delineation Various Env screening Permit Start Env

Env Scope
and confirmation and evaluations determination documents
Preliminary
Materials Scope
soils report
Programming
Alignment Initial Roadway Design Limits of

Roadway Scope
alternatives line, grade, typical sections construction
RW Scope RW data sheet
Bridge / Structures
Structures Scope Bridge typical section
alternatives evaluation
Ground and
Survey Scope
aerial survey
Traffic data Conceptual

Traffic Scope Traffic study
collection MOT
Subsurface utility
URL
evaluation
Water Adequate outfall Hydraulic Bridge hydraulic

Scope
Resources analysis analysis analysis
Figure 2.9 Scoping phase.

critical path, their work is remarkably interconnected. Exceptional PMs understand and
leverage these interdependencies to increase efficiency and drive productivity.
2.4 Preliminary Design Phase
“Design is thinking made visual.”

– Saul Bass
Preliminary Design generally begins after the 30% design meeting and ends with Design
Approval. This is the phase where the design starts to put some meat on the bones. The PM
should build on the scoping momentum and continue to push the project within the triple
constraint criteria of budget, scope, and schedule that were established during Scoping. It
is especially important that the PM actively manage the triple constraint as Scope Creep is
common in this phase due to public involvement and the pace at which the design solu-
tions are being refined.
After coming together for the 30% preliminary plan design review meeting, it may seem
like the engineering disciplines then retreat back to their respective corners to focus on
their own work. This is expected and beneficial. However, the PM needs to continue to
ensure issues that may have ripple impacts with other engineering disciplines are appropri-
ately elevated, shared, addressed, and resolved. This is the time when some disciplines’
work is also uniquely intertwined. One example is how hydraulic and structural engineers
may iteratively collaborate as the hydraulic report may influence the structure span design
specifics. Effective PMs often use regularly scheduled team meetings, project status updates,
and the updated risk register to proactively identify and resolve cross-discipline issues and
opportunities.
As the project design advances, the plans continue to develop. Horizontal and vertical
roadway geometry advances. Typical sections are finalized. Drainage and Stormwater
Management take shape. Cross-sections are prepared as the earthwork picture becomes
clearer. Easement and Right-of-Way limits are finalized. Maintenance of Traffic plans
solidify MOT approaches. The plan sets begin to take form within your organization’s
applicable styling and protocol. Title sheets are drafted. Layouts are formatted. The plans
are beginning to look like real plans.
If your project meets the applicable federal and organizational thresholds, a Value
Engineering (VE) study may need to be completed. This can range from a straightforward to
involved examination of the plans by independent reviewers to identify risks and cost-sav-
ing opportunities. Such a review is appropriate at this time in order to ensure any selected
recommendations can be successfully integrated into the plan before the right-of-way and
easement lines are finalized. VE is further discussed in Chapter 8, Managing Quality.
During the early part of this phase, the PM should spend time evaluating project risks
that may impact the project footprint. One major focus of this phase is to finalize the
right-of-way and easement lines. Details like signs, signals, lighting, and landscaping may
seem premature at this stage, but the PM needs to ensure their conceptual solutions do not
adversely impact the proposed right-of-way and easement lines.
With the additional design information and project limit becoming defined, the necessity
and extent of invasive investigations becomes clear. Did the historical survey determine
2.4 Preliminary Design Phase 29
follow-up digs are necessary? Does it appear you need test holes in any location to nail down
potential utility conflicts? Where does the structural engineer need soil borings to advance
bridge abutment foundation design? And so forth. This additional information will enable
the respective discipline designers, engineers, and scientists to refine their designs with
increased clarity. It is important to determine this information now since the resultant
decisions and actions may influence the RW and Public Hearing (PH) plans.
The additional design solutions and field data should push utility conversations. Utility
designations should be completed, along with any needed test holes. This is also the appro-
priate time to initiate conversations with impacted utility owners. Schedule a Preliminary
Utility Field Inspection meeting to discuss possible conflicts and resolution strategies. Early
coordination can go a long way to expediting preparation of requested utility easements.
Concurrent with all of these activities is continued environmental progress. Pending
project specifics, there may be a whole host of permits and studies that need to be conducted,
reviewed, and approved. A critical part of most every project is the Draft Environmental
document that must be completed prior to Public Hearing. Do not try to navigate this reg-
ulative minefield by yourself. Rely on your organization’s or team’s environmental experts.
Actively develop a productive partnership that is commonly focused on responsibly pro-
gressing the project within its budget, scope, and schedule constraints.
One primary focus of the Preliminary Design phase is public participation. Stakeholder
input and involvement is crucial. All tasks in this phase are working toward the public
involvement and securing Design Approval. The collaborative coordination of interdepen-
dent engineering discipline tasks remains a top PM priority. Proactive Risk Management
and effective Communication are critical to success in this phase as the plans advance to the
point of RW plan submission. This means all aspects of the plans should be sufficiently
advanced such that all limits of disturbance, easements, and rights-of-way are firmly
established. While specifics within these boundaries will continue to evolve, the project and
acquisition footprint, limits of disturbance, should be settled. As such you should have all
needed easements and rights-of-way defined, this should include any needed private utility
easements (blue lines). Any needed design exceptions or waivers should be secured.
Locations for all Storm Water Management (SWM) basins or facilities should be known. Env
should have completed the Draft environmental document. Additionally, to that end, as you
triage and prioritize discipline specific issues, it is especially important that you press to fully
grasp the horizontal plan impacts. Is the redesigned stormwater basin changing its foot-
print? Does shifting the traffic signal pole to avoid underground utilities shift the sidewalk
enough that the slopes are not able to tie back into the existing landscape within the pro-
posed easements? Do the updated Maintenance of Traffic and Sequence of Construction
plans fit within the proposed Limits of Disturbance? And so forth.
Public Participation may begin with an organization choosing to hold one or more Citizens
Information Meetings (CIM) prior to the Willingness or Public Hearing. CIMs are voluntary,
and as such may assume a variety of formats to satisfy differing objectives. A formal presen-
tation format followed by an orderly question and answer session may work best for contro-
versial projects with lots of public interest. An open house format may be preferred for
smaller projects with less public dissent, while allowing staff to connect with the adjacent
landowners and address their specific concerns. Meanwhile, a town hall format may be
preferred to workshop the problem or gain feedback from local businesses. Whatever the
format or objective, be intentional. These are often held in coordination with other outreach
efforts conducted through a variety of virtual and in-person initiatives. Effective CIMs can
be instrumental in facilitating a smooth Public Hearing. Public involvement is further
detailed in Chapter 9, Communications.
While it may be different pending your project specifics and your applicable regulations
and organizational expectations, many projects have a Willingness or Public Hearing.
A Willingness is a commitment your organization publicly posts that you are willing to
host a public hearing should it be requested. If any citizen does request a public hearing,
the organization may meet with them to see if they can address their concerns. If they do
not, then the organization must hold a public hearing. If no one responds to the Willingness
within the specified time, then the organization can assume the project has public support
and they are not required to hold a public hearing.
There are two types of Public Hearings: Location and Design. Location is predominantly
used when there is roadway on a new location. Design is a chance for the public to com-
ment on the design solution, be it on a new or existing alignment. Pending the project, the
Location and Design Public Hearings may be combined. The format of a Public Hearing
can vary pending your specific guidelines and expectations. There are some commonal-
ities. The public should have a chance to review the plans and submit comments. The orga-
nization should then respond to all received comments. This can typically be done in
person, or by a variety of virtual methods.
Following public involvement and the Public Hearing, the project should pursue Design
Approval. Prior to Design Approval, the plans should be updated to incorporate any design
changes prompted by VE or public involvement efforts. Design Approval is a formal
approval by the authorized entity that confirms consensus on the design solution.
The Public Need is established when the appropriate governing body formally grants
Design Approval. The Public Need is required to allow government transportation organi-
zations access to the available legal options of Eminent Domain, which will be further
discussed in Section 2.5, Detailed Design Phase. As such, many of the rules and require-
ments surrounding Willingness, Public Hearing, and Design Approval are detailed in state
and local legal codes. Be sure you consult your SMEs to ensure all appropriate rules and
regulations are meticulously followed.
ing the Preliminary Design Phase, divided by engineering discipline. While each discipline
has its own critical path, their work is remarkably interconnected. Exceptional PMs under-
stand and leverage these interdependencies to increase efficiency and drive productivity.
2.5 Detailed Design Phase
“Engineering isn’t about perfect solutions; it’s about doing the best you can with limited
resources.”
– Randy Pausch
Detailed Design spans from Design Approval through the 60% design meeting. This phase
requires close collaboration with all involved disciplines as detailed design is added to the
Public Hearing plans, advancing them from approximately 50% plans to approximately

Scoping Advertise
30% Design
Meeting
Time
Key Public Hearing Public Design
VE
Milestones plans Hearing Approval
% Plans 30% 50%
Constructability
Construction
review
Noise Abatement
Env Noise study Env documents Env coordination
design
Geotechnical Bridge foundation

Materials
investigation recommendations
Programming
Preliminary road design Preliminary

Roadway
line, grade, cross-sections MOT and SOC
RW Right-of-Way and Easement assessment
Preliminary structures or bridge design

Structures
plan & elevation, typical section, special details
Survey Additional survey
Preliminary traffic design

Traffic signs, signals, lighting
Utility easement
URL Preliminary UFI Test holes URL plans
assessments
Water Preliminary hydraulic Floodplain Preliminary bridge

Resources and ESC design revisions hydraulic design
Figure 2.10 Preliminary design phase.
60% plans. The PM should work closely with the lead designer to ensure the different engi-
neering disciplines’ respective progress is consistent with, and does not conflict with, the
overall strategic solution. As the plans dive deeper into the weeds and risks are worked to
resolution, the PM is responsible to ensure the project remains within the defined triple
constraint of budget, scope, and schedule. Any risks to the triple constraint should be
actively tracked, and any resulting adjustments should follow your organization’s appli-
cable change management procedures.
Design Approval officially settles the design solution and approach. Once you pass
through this gate, the design team works to advance the plans to the important 60% plan
review meeting. Organizations may call this critical event by different names (e.g., Field
Inspection, Detailed Design Meeting, 60% Staff Review Meeting, etc.). Regardless of the
name, this meeting is a critical project development milestone. These review meetings pro-
vide the unique opportunity for all the disciplines’ work to come together on a set of plans.
For a moment, the plans which are dynamically changing during design are static, allow-
ing a thorough review by the different disciplines and applicable SMEs. This allows unique
insight into how the entirety of the plan fits together and how it can be constructed. As
with other plan review meetings. Details are important and should be noted, but you need
to prioritize identifying and resolving multi-discipline conflicts. Section 11.3, Meetings,
provides further details on how a PM can effectively run project review meetings.
By the 60% design meeting, the plans should be starting to look significantly more
complete. Roadway alignment, grade, and typical sections should be finalized, along with
the pavement design, drainage design, traffic signal design, and Stormwater Management
facilities. Final sound wall, major structure and bridge plans, and traffic control device
plans should also be included, if applicable. The Maintenance of Traffic (MOT), or
Transportation Management Plan (TMP), should be well advanced, along with a proposed
Sequence of Construction (SOC) and Erosion and Sediment Control (ESC) plan. In short,
the permanent asset improvements should be well defined while the temporary measures
(e.g., MOT, SOC, ESC, etc.) should be advanced enough to demonstrate constructability.
This means issues like construction traffic shifts and ensuring positive drainage during all
phases of construction should be discussed and resolved.
Earlier in this phase, the different engineering disciplines should finalize their respective
reports. This may include, but is not limited to, hydraulic report, geotechnical report, noise
report, hazardous materials report, and so forth. Other Environmental documentation
should also progress during this phase. This may include, but is not limited to, stream and
wetland compensation credits or mitigation plans, the Finding Of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) or final environmental document approval, water quality permits, and other mis-
cellaneous permits (e.g., Coast Guard, etc.).
Design Approval establishes the Public Need that enables your organization to pursue
needed easement and right-of-way acquisitions. Generally speaking, most organizations wait
until after the 60% design meeting to begin acquiring the needed easements and rights-of-way.
This makes good sense as you then have the benefit of the additional design details. The
exception to this is if you have any Total Takes, which is when it has been determined that you
require the entirety of the parcel. This can involve relocations of a business or resident. Due to
the involved nature of the relocation process, it can be beneficial to begin the total take acqui-
sitions during this phase, which is typically before one begins partial take acquisitions.
During this phase the PM will work with the designers, surveyors, and Right-of-Way SMEs
to prepare to begin partial take acquisitions after the 60% design meeting. This typically
involves preparation of the Right-of-Way plans (or individually prepared plats if your organi-
zation acquires by plats), updating property owner information on the right-of-way data
sheet, and initiating or coordinating with utilities. The more complicated the utility situation,
the earlier coordination should begin. If not before, during this stage, you or your RW SMEs
should coordinate with all public and private utilities whose assets will be impacted by your
project. The PM should schedule a Utility Field Inspection (UFI) meeting in which all util-
ities come together to discuss the planned improvements, potential conflicts, and proposed
relocation plans. Pending the project, it can be helpful to walk the site together. Plans should
be distributed to the utilities before the meeting so those attending the UFI meeting can be
informed and any risks or conflicts can be discussed in a cooperative manner by all involved
parties. Take this opportunity when all are in the same room to press issues to resolution.
ing the Detailed Design Phase, divided by engineering discipline. While each discipline has

Scoping Advertise
Design
Approval
Time
Key Utility Field 60% plans 60% Design
Milestones RW Plans Inspection Meeting
% Plans 50% 60%
Constructability
Construction
review
Final Env Wetland and Detailed noise Env

Env
documents stream mitigation abatement design coordination
Geotechnical Pavement
Materials
Report recommendation
RW
Programming
authorization
Detailed roadway design Detailed MOT

Roadway
alignment, grade, cross-sections and SOC
RW and easement RW acquisition
RW
acquisition relocations
Detailed
Structures
bridge design
Detailed traffic design

Traffic signs, signals, lighting
Utility Utility relocation

URL
Agreements plans (Blue Lines)
Water Detailed hydraulic Bridge scour

Resources and ESC design analysis
Figure 2.11 Detailed design phase.

its own critical path, their work is remarkably interconnected. Exceptional PMs under-
stand and leverage these interdependencies to increase efficiency and drive productivity.
2.6 Final Design and Right-of-Way Acquisition Phase
“A goal without a plan is just a wish.”

– Larry Elder
This phase advances the plans from 60% to 90% complete. However, there is so much more
happening in this phase that prepares the plan for Advertisement and construction success.
Shortly after the 60% design meeting that closes the Detailed Design phase, the project’s
critical path transitions to acquiring RW and relocating utilities. An organization can
benefit from formalizing the handoff of this critical path in order to set realistic expecta-
tions of budget, scope, schedule, and deliverables. This can be the most unpredictable part
of the project development process as so much of the critical progress is outside of your
direct control. The speed with which your acquisitions progress is largely dependent upon
the parties involved, the property’s ownership, your organization’s expectations as to how
acquisitions will proceed, and your organization’s willingness to pursue condemnation
when necessary.
Eminent Domain is the government’s ability to assume control and ownership of private
property for a public need at a fair, market price. This is a legal right that is described and
detailed in applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations. While many easement and
right-of-way acquisitions may be friendly and voluntary, others are not. If difficulty is encoun-
tered, Eminent Domain provides a predictable legal path of access and acquisition that enables
the project to continue while ensuring all citizens are fairly treated and compensated.
The processes of acquisitions are well documented, and may differ slightly by state or
region. In general, Real Property research is conducted based upon the plans. Legally pre-
scribed dollar thresholds determine the level of effort to establish fair market value of the
acquisition. An offer is prepared and presented to the land owner. Negotiations may ensue,
and the acquisition is legally transferred for the agreed compensation. Should the two
parties not reach agreement, the organization may file a Certificate of Condemnation with
the courts. This grants the organization access to the acquisition while negotiations con-
tinue. If unresolved, these may end up in court where the judicial system will determine the
amount to be paid. There are also “friendly condemnations,” where both parties agree that
filing a Certificate of Condemnation is the best path forward. This may be a property whose
title cannot be cleared for a variety of reasons, such as a church who intentionally keeps a
founding member listed as a trustee even after he died. In these circumstances a friendly
condemnation can be the quickest way to facilitate the legal transaction. If negotiations are
proceeding well, but access is needed to keep the project moving forward, another option is
a Right-of-Entry Agreement which grants the organization access to the acquisition while
negotiations continue, per specifications within the Agreement.
Right-of-Way activities are inherently legal processes. As such, they are directly
dependent upon the specific federal, state, and local directives. This may be especially true
should there be residential or business relocations. Some states may also have other legal
considerations in acquisitions, such as allowances for loss of business during construction.
2.6 Final Design and Right-of-Way Acquisition Phase 35
Because of the need to ensure all the i’s are dotted and t’s are crossed in exactly the right
order, Right-of-Way acquisitions are best left to those professionals who know and under-
stand the governing regulations, specializing in this uniquely focused aspect of project
development.
As PM, your role in acquisitions is likely to coordinate and facilitate, more than to actu-
ally do the related tasks. As such, it is imperative the designers and RW team members are
well connected. The design within the designated easements and rights-of-way may
change, but if the evolving design solution prompts any movement of permanent, tempo-
rary, or utility easements or rights-of-way, you need to immediately bring the RW SMEs
into the discussion. Similarly, if the acquisition negotiations introduce new conditions or
constraints you need to bring the appropriate engineering discipline SMEs into the
discussion. Any design changes prompted by the negotiations and settlement terms should
be reflected and incorporated into the plans.
Once all rights-of-way and easements are cleared, utility relocations may begin. This may
require separate approvals by your organization, one for each separate utility relocation
agreement. Consult your experts as to who pays what for utility design and relocation costs.
This can vary greatly pending the legal instrument by which the utilities’ assets are in your
rights-of-way.
Utility relocations can frustrate project progress due to occasionally unpredictable
response times. A utility’s relocation prioritization, especially those at their own expense,
may not match your own. There are other real considerations that may be out of your con-
trol. If your relocation crew is union and they go on strike, your job sits. If there is a natural
disaster (e.g., a hurricane or other natural disaster) and your crews are pulled to another
state to assist in emergency relief, your job sits. This can introduce real schedule and budget
risk into your project. Wise PMs leverage their organization’s URL experts and their exist-
ing professional relationships with utility contacts to effectively influence progress. Early
and consistent communications of expectations and project schedule constraints can go a
long way to forming successful partnerships.
This same mindset can also be beneficial when the project touches or crosses a railroad.
The presence of a railroad immediately introduces significant schedule and budget risk
into your project. In larger part, this is often due to unpredictable responses as it can seem
they dance to the beat of their own drummer. A bridge engineer once described a typical
roadway-railroad interaction with following example. Imagine you are playing ball in your
backyard with friends and it accidentally goes over the privacy fence into your neighbor’s
yard. You go to their front door and a grumpy curmudgeon opens the door. You explain the
situation, and his response is “so your ball is in my yard, forgive me if I don’t share your
urgency in retrieving it for you”, and then shuts the door. Obviously, there are talented,
cooperative people in rail who want to successfully partner with roadway projects.
However, it can sometimes feel like this example. In large part, this is due to the nature of
their rights-of-way. They were often here first, and may have special legal status. They also
have their own workflows that may not fit into your plans or schedules. Suffice it to say, if
you have rail on your project, you need to remain proactive and vigilant as any rail related
task can quickly become a critical path task. Seek out the experience and wisdom of those
with previous experience with the rail company on your project. These can often be the
structure and bridge engineers. Rail introduces significant risks on your project that must
be actively monitored and managed.
Many organizations have mechanisms to extend the window for acquisitions and utility
relocations to Advertisement, Award, or even into Construction, if needed. However, these
approaches introduce significant schedule and budget risks into the project. While appro-
priate in certain extenuating situations, they should be actively avoided.
While rights-of-way and easements are being acquired and utilities are being relocated, the
design is concurrently being finalized. This includes, but is not limited to, roadway, bridge, major
structures (e.g., retaining walls, etc.), traffic control devices, landscaping, Erosion and Sediment
Control (ESC) plans, Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) or Traffic Management Plans (TMP), and
Sequence of Construction (SOC). Another concurrent path is to prepare all that is necessary
outside of plans to proceed to Advertisement. This includes, but is not limited to, securing all
necessary permits and ensuring all wetland, stream, and water-quality credits are purchased.
Once all these concurrent paths are complete, the project is ready to proceed with the
90% Design meeting. Some organizations refer to this as the 100% Design meeting, which
is often called the Pre-Advertisement Conference (PAC). This is the final design meeting
and is often the handoff from the designers to the contracting agents in the Advertise Plans
phase. It is a critical opportunity to openly discuss the constructability, work zone regula-
tions, MOT/TMP, ESC, SOC, communicate environmental permit constraints, expected
Construction and Engineering Inspections (CEI) efforts, and remaining project risks.
This is also the time when the designers prepare and submit the Plans, Specifications, and
Estimate (PSE). The specifications should be all that is needed for the contracting agent to
prepare the Advertisement package; this includes any special provisions. Pending your
organization’s workflow, this may be the window in which your Construction division
reviews and approves the bid specs and special provisions. As PM, if you know your project
has unusual or uncommon special provisions, it is a good idea to vet these early through
your reviewing and approving entity so as not to hold up progress at this point. The Estimate
should be the final submission estimate, which is the most accurate estimate and last
estimate that will be prepared before the Engineer’s Estimate.
The 90% design meeting is one of the critical milestones of design. As such, the PM should
ensure that the project is still progressing within its approved budget, scope, and schedule. If
there are any discrepancies (e.g., final submission estimate exceeds the budget), prompt action
should be taken to resolve any remaining issues so the project can proceed to Advertisement.
ing the Final Design Phase, divided by engineering discipline. While each discipline has its
own critical path, their work is remarkably interconnected. Exceptional PMs understand
and leverage these interdependencies to increase efficiency and drive productivity.
2.7 Advertise Plans
“There are no shortcuts to any place worth going.”

– Beverly Sills
This final project development phase takes the final plans, advertises the project, and
extends through project award. This can be a very busy time for the PM, but in a very dif-
ferent way than every other phase. The steps in this phase center around procurement. The
Advertise Plans phase name may more accurately be called construction procurement. In

Scoping Advertise
60% Design
Meeting
Time
Key 90% plans 90% Design
Milestones Meeting
% Plans 60% 90%
Specifications and Constructability Biddability

Construction
Special Provisions review review
Wetland and Final noise Secure

Env
stream mitgation abatement design permits
Materials
Programming
Final road Final MOT Specifications and

Roadway
design and SOC Special Provisions
RW acquisition RW and easement Update RW

RW
NTP acquisition data sheet
Final bridge Specifications and

Structures
design Special Provisions
Final traffic Specifications and

Traffic
design Special Provisions
Utility Utility
URL
relocation NTP relocations
Water Final hydraulics Floodplain revision Water Quality

Resources and ESC design approvals calculations
Figure 2.12 Final design phase.
essence, the plans are being packaged for Advertisement (Ad), and then shepherded
through procurement until a contractor is secured and the bid has been Awarded by the
governing authority.
It begins with the final design meeting that ends the previous phase. In it, the final
sealed and signed Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (PSE) are prepared and submitted
to your organization’s contracting agent. In some organizations this may be your pro-
curement office, in others it may be your construction division. Regardless, their function
is much the same. The bid package is assembled, a biddability review is conducted, bid
proposals are prepared, the project is advertised, pre-advertisement conferences may be

held where the project is presented to potential bidders and clarifying questions can be
asked and answered, bids are received and opened (bid letting), bids are evaluated against
the sealed Engineer’s Estimate, a business decision is made regarding award recommen-
dation for the low bid, required contractual paperwork is secured and processed, and the
Award is presented and approved by the applicable governing authority. This procure-
ment process is typically very strict and prescriptive in nature. It is important that you
rely on your organization’s experts to ensure all applicable federal, state, and local pro-
curement regulations are satisfied. Particularly on federally funded projects, this may
include a number additional requirements, such as civil rights compliance, job training,
and so forth.
Prior to Advertisement, it is the PM’s responsibility to ensure all disciplines are prepared
for Ad. This typically includes at least ensuring all permits are secured, certifying all ease-
ments and rights-of-way are cleared, certifying all applicable utilities relocated, and veri-
fying funding. Most organizations do have waiver procedures by which projects may be
advertised while RW is not yet cleared or utilities are still being relocated. In general, this
is not a recommended approach as it can introduce significant schedule and budget risks
to the contract. However, there may be times when it makes sense to accept that risk and
push the project to Ad before RW is cleared or all utilities are relocated.
The Engineer’s Estimate is sealed until after bid opening (letting). This estimate is used
by the organization to assist in evaluating the received bids and determining whether to
approve or reject the low bid. Pending your state and local guidance and practices, your
organization may choose to release the Engineer’s Estimate after Award, or it may be kept
confidential in perpetuity.
During this phase, it is critical the PM works closely with the contracting agent. The PM
should respond quickly with anything they need to keep the process moving forward. This
may include, but is not limited to, coordinating responses to contractor questions,
coordinating preparation of any needed plan addendums, and resolving any remaining or
new funding issues.
It should be noted, the overview that has been heretofore provided is for the typical
Design-Bid-Build process. This typically has the organization designing the project
in-house or hiring a design consultant through a professional service procurement. The
designer prepares the PSE. Sealed bids are received and the organization awards the
contract to the lowest responsible bidder.
At its conclusion, the project is typically transferred to the organization’s construction
division for contract administration and oversight. Organizations should have clear
descriptions of this handoff, including all applicable roles and responsibilities. This extends
to who has the responsibility for the project’s budget, scope, and schedule. For some orga-
nizations the PM for project development extends into construction and they shepherd the
project from cradle to grave, from initiation through final closeout. Other organizations
transition project responsibilities during this time.
ing the Advertise Phase, divided by engineering discipline. While each discipline has its
own critical path, their work is remarkably interconnected. Exceptional PMs understand
and leverage these interdependencies to increase efficiency and drive productivity.

Scoping Advertise
90% Design
Meeting
Time
Key Bid
PSE Advertise Award
Milestones opening
% Plans 90% 100%
Biddability Engineer's
Construction
Review Estimate
Certify all necessary permits secured and

Env credits purchased
Materials
Programming Construction authorization
Submit final PSE for

Roadway Seal and Sign Plans
advertisement
RW Certify all RW cleared
Structures
Survey
Traffic
URL Certify all utilities relocated
Water
Resources
Figure 2.13 Advertise phase.

41
Budgets and Estimates
“Engineer (noun): A person who does precision guesswork based on unreliable data
provided by those of questionable knowledge. See also: Wizard, Magician, Magic 8 Ball.”
– Anonymous
3.1 Overview
“Follow the money.”

– Anonymous
3.1.1 Purpose
The big picture in Transportation Program and Portfolio Management is that your organi-
zation should strive to ensure the right amounts of the right type of money are in the right
place at the right time to keep the projects moving forward. In order to effectively do this at
the program and portfolio levels, you need accurate project schedules and estimates. This
requires consistent attention throughout the project development process.
Coexisting with this objective is the reality that transportation owner-operator organiza-
tions (e.g., DOTs, local governments, etc.) are not banks. Beyond planned reserves, sur-
pluses and shortfalls pose complications. Shortfalls can be challenging when you don’t
have enough money to advance and construct projects as planned. Surpluses are to be
avoided in part due to the moral obligation of public agencies to be responsible stewards of
public funds. The public money is to be used for public good. These realities effectively
make transportation owner-operators funding organizations. Money comes in, and money
should go out in a similar fashion. In order to do this well, more mature organizations
embrace the cyclical process shown in Figure 3.1 of selecting the projects, programming
the money, executing the program, closing the project(s), and reallocating resources.
The triple constraint of budget, scope, and schedule are inherently dependent upon each
other, directly constraining the others. You can’t strain all three at the same time. Figure 3.2
illustrates the old adage that you can only have two of the three: good, fast, or cheap. It can be
fast and cheap, but then quality will suffer as the scope is compromised. It can be fast and good,
but the cost will be high. It can be cheap and satisfy the scope, but don’t expect it to be fast.

42 3 Budgets and Estimates
Figure 3.1 Transportation programming cycle.
Good
Expensive Slow
Pick two: Not
Possible
Fast Low Cheap

Quality
Figure 3.2 Pick two.
In transportation development, time is money. The schedule is only but so flexible

without blowing the project budget. The project scope can only be reduced to a minimum
level without sacrificing the intent and benefit of the project. And at the program and port-
folio level there are many more needs than available dollars, so project budgets can be
tight. These three constraints are operating in an environment of scarcity. Managing the
triple constraint can be challenging as none of the three can be pulled too tight without
impacting the other two beyond acceptable thresholds.
Within this environment, managing the Budget can prove the most challenging as project
costs can vary widely over the life of a project given changing market conditions. That is
why, although there are many different purposes for cost estimates, perhaps the most
important is to enable the PM to actively manage the triple constraint throughout the
project to ensure there is enough money at the right times to keep the project moving for-
ward according to the schedule. As risks evolve and market conditions fluctuate, this can
seem like you are chasing a moving target. But this is the job of a PM. And there is perhaps
no worse situation than bringing a project to Advertisement, only not to be able to Award
it due to lack of funds.
3.1 Overview 43
3.1.2 Budgets vs. Estimates

While Budgets and Estimates are certainly related, in transportation projects, they are two
very different entities.
Budgets are not to exceed total cost of the project. This may be the obligated amount, the
allocated amount, or the amount of real money available to complete the project. Federal
Obligation is the legal commitment requiring the federal government to reimburse the state
for the federal share of a project’s eligible costs. Obligated funds can then be Allocated for
spending purposes. It is possible for obligated funds to be allocated across multiple projects.
It is simpler when the total obligated amount equals that which is allocated. Projects may
be funded by a multitude of federal, state, regional, or local sources. Each different funding
source, or color of money, may have different restrictions or requirements associated with
the use of those funds. The total project budget is the combination of all these sources.
Similar to schedules, the PM can best manage their project when there is one project budget,
as opposed to different budgets for different audiences. Transparency builds trust and can
focus the team to work within common constraints and toward a common goal.
Pending the funding source(s) and your organization’s protocol, project budgets may be
set and revised at various times. Some budgets are set at time of project application. Others
at Scoping. Still others are finalized just before Advertisement. In most cases, a preliminary
project budget is established early on in the project planning, and then refined as it prog-
resses through project development. As PM, it is imperative that proper change management
be practiced with each budget adjustment. Work closely with your programming resources
to ensure there are adequate funds to support any budget adjustment. Work with your
design team to ensure the budget adjustment is actually necessary. Your first job as PM is to
operate within the existing triple constraint. If you can adjust the scope or schedule in order
to maintain the existing budget, while not sacrificing quality or critical improvement bene-
fits, you should do so. Adjusting the triple constraint is certainly allowed and appropriate at
times, but only after proper change management has been practiced. This includes adding
betterments to the project, such as a waterline extension to promote economic development,
which can increase the total project budget even if paid for by a third party. This also means
adjusting the budget downward if project savings are realized so that those surplus funds
can be put to work by your organization to make a tangible impact in your community.
Estimates are the quantitative determination of the probable cost. Engineers and estima-
tors use provided tools, historic bid tabs and cost data, market trends, and professional
judgment to make their best educated guess on what the project may likely cost.
The remainder of this chapter primarily addresses the different types of estimates and
their limitations. It is correctly said that estimating is as much art as science. I would
readily accept the opinion of an experienced, gray-haired engineer over that produced from
a shiny-new parametric estimating tool. Of course, ideally you would have that experi-
enced gray-haired engineer using the new tool to produce an even more accurate estimate.
The big-picture purpose of the estimate is to help you, as the PM, ensure there is the right
amount of the right kinds of money in the right places at the right time to keep the project
moving forward in the most efficient and responsible path. Estimates should be updated at
all major project milestones (e.g., major design meetings and public hearing) or when there
are significant changes to the plan or project risks. This provides the PM an invaluable
opportunity to check the project against the triple constraint. If the project estimate
dramatically changes, you should promptly address this with the programming resources
to verify and/or update the project budget.
3.1.3 Process – How to Set a Budget

Pending the requirements of the funding source or your organization, there may be a
variety of ways a project sets its budget. Some funding sources rely heavily on preliminary
or planning estimates to set the project budget. If this is required to secure the necessary
funding, so be it. But this approach introduces inherent and substantial risks that will be
addressed in more detail in Section 3.3, Types of Estimates.
In general, it is preferred to set the project budget at scoping. Each organization may have
their own estimating and budget procedures, but Figure 3.3 outlines the recommended
steps which are to properly set a project budget that is examined throughout project
development, and adjusted, if needed, using approved change management.
1) Define the Scope
The first step in setting a budget should be defining the project scope. Prior to scoping,
at best you have preliminary estimates that are used for initial programming of funds
or funding application submissions. The reality is that the only sure way to increase the
accuracy of an estimate is to advance the plans further into design and burn down proj-
ect risks. You can’t make meaningful progress on the budget until you know what you
are going to build. Additionally, one of the main focuses of scoping is to qualitatively
identify all project risks, and then quantitatively convert them to time and money to
responsibly adjust the scoping schedule and budget before being baselined. Chapter 4,
Scope, details how the scoping process establishes the triple constraint of a project’s bud-
get, scope, and schedule, in which the PM is charged to operate.
2) Generate Cost Estimate
The next step is to prepare a cost estimate, in today’s dollars. This is a preliminary
estimate, as the plans have not yet progressed to the point that construction quantities
are available. This should include the Base cost, Allowances, and risk-based contin-
gencies, all of which are described in Section 3.3, Types of Estimates.
3) Determine Schedule
Time is money. You can’t make meaningful progress on the budget until you know
how long it will take to develop and deliver the project. Finalizing the schedule is an
essential part of scoping, and should be done before setting the budget. Additionally, an
organization may need to consider other time commitments regarding the project com-
pletion. Projects may be expedited to meet political or strategic time commitments, but
accelerating a project development or delivery schedule comes at a cost that should be
reflected in all estimates and budget.
2. Generate
4. Adjust Cost
Estimate (Base + 3. Determine 5. Set
1. Define Scope Estimate for time
Allowance + Schedule Budget
(Inflation)
Contingencies)
Figure 3.3 Process to set budget.

3.2 The Basics 45
4) Adjust the Cost Estimate for time

In order to set the budget, you need to adjust the current year dollar estimate to account
for inflation. Inflation is a critical component of all cost estimates.
5) Set Budget
Once you have defined the scope, established the schedule, and generated the cost
estimate, you are ready to make an informed decision and set the project baseline budget.
It is important to note that many projects do not follow this logical progression. When the
set budget process is completed out of sequence, it frequently launches the project on a
challenging trajectory. For example, a budget that is set to available funds must adjust the
scope and schedule accordingly. This can look very different from responsible value engi-
neering and project change management. Similar challenges can arise when a budget is set
too early. A project budget that is set based upon a preliminary funding application is
inherently constrained in real ways that directly impact the development of the project.
The triple constraint of budget, scope, and schedule is no longer equal as the budget
becomes fixed, based upon a preliminary estimate that cannot reliably provide the necessary
level of accuracy or confidence. As such, any risks or subsequent project change must be
completely absorbed by changing the scope or schedule. Some projects can effectively do
that, others cannot without sacrificing the core purpose and need of the improvement.
3.2 The Basics
“Estimating is what you do when you don’t know.”

– Sherman Kent
3.2.1 Organizational Consistency

From a project perspective, the purpose of estimates is twofold: (1) ensure there is the right
amount of the right type of money in the right place to keep the project moving forward in
a responsible and efficient manner, and (2) confirm the project-related construction pro-
curement is fair and reasonably priced before proceeding.
From a program and portfolio perspective, estimates are critical data points to ensure: (1)
there is the right amount of the right type of money in the right place to keep the project
moving forward in a responsible and efficient manner, and (2) your organization’s multi-
year improvement plan can be balanced.
Notice none of these purposes focus on producing the correct estimate. The range of
construction bids received for a project often vary by a far greater percentage than the orga-
nization’s internal estimate success thresholds. Section 3.5, Performance Metrics, will
address the accuracy of an estimate. In general, informed organizations are programmati-
cally less concerned with the estimate accuracy, and more concerned with its precision.
Consistency matters. Are your organization’s estimates reasonable, defendable, and
repeatable? Does your organization have standards and guidance on estimating processes
and procedures that are routinely and consistently followed? As a public institution that
stewards public funds for public good, transparency is foundational to establishing trust
and building credibility. More importantly, it is the right thing to do. You can’t reasonably
compare projects for prioritization or application selection unless there is a consistent esti-
mating methodology. You need to be able to compare apples to apples. This is often more
challenging than you might at first expect.
3.2.2 Critical Estimate Components

Outside of inflation, a project cost estimate consists of four basic components: Base Cost,
Allowance, Contingency, and Management Reserves. An easy way to think about this is
that each of these represents a different part of a project’s knowledge quadrant regarding
project costs, as shown in Figure 3.4. The knowledge quadrant divides knowledge into four
distinct regions: things we know we know, things we know we don’t know, things we don’t
know we know, and things we don’t know we don’t know.
● Base
The Base is the portion of the estimate where a probable cost of development and
construction can be reasonably determined. These are costs of known items whose require-
ments have been determined and quantified at the current level of project development.
These are the known-knowns.
● Allowance
An allowance is an amount included in the estimate to account for costs of known items
whose requirements are as of yet undefined. This placeholder-like cost component covers
the known-unknowns. An allowance is different from a contingency. As the design prog-
resses, the allowances (known-unknowns) will be converted to the known-known costs
that are accounted for in the Base. Examples of allowances may include, but are not limited
to, an underground utility extension, quantity of unsuitable soils, E&S measures, MOT,
Water Quality Credits (SWM), and Wetland/Stream mitigation costs. If your organization
does not separate out allowances, these risks should be considered in the contingencies.
● Contingency
A contingency is an amount added to an estimate to account for identified and unidenti-
fied risks whose likelihood of occurrence and significance of impact are uncertain. These
are the unknown-knowns. Contingencies can be assigned to tasks, projects, phases, or
engineering disciplines within phases. This is dependent upon which level risks are
assigned by your organization at any stage of development. As a project develops, contin-
gencies should decrease as risks should be more fully understood and properly addressed.
Estimate Knowledge Quadrant
Known-Knowns Known-Unknowns
(KK) (KU)
Base Allowances
Unknown-Knowns Unknown-Unknowns
(UK) (UU)
Contingencies Management Reserves
Figure 3.4 Estimate knowledge quadrant.

3.2 The Basics 47
Contingencies can be calculated sums, but are often percentages of the base, allowance,
or their sum. Your organization should establish and maintain guidelines on acceptable
contingencies. All contingencies should be justified in the Basis of Estimate, which is
a document that identifies the logic, data, methodology, assumptions, constraints, and
calculations used to develop the project estimate. This document should also include the
estimate’s confidence level, which is the calculated or assigned probability that a result
will be within the anticipated accuracy range. Some mature organizations have more
comprehensively addressed this by adapting a risk-based estimating approach, which is
discussed in Section 3.3, Types of Estimates.
● Management Reserve
Management reserves are monies an organization may set aside to address unforesee-
able circumstances that might increase the cost of a project. These are the unknown-
unknowns, such as acts of God, historic storms, labor strikes, etc. Typically, senior
management controls these funds and must approve releasing any management reserves
to a specific project for a specific situation. Many organizations do not have dedicated
Management Reserves. In those cases, contingencies can be adjusted accordingly to
account for the unknown-unknowns, or the organization makes an intentional or unin-
tentional decision not to account for unknown-unknowns in the estimate or budget.
3.2.3 Assembling the Estimate Components

Estimate components should be methodically and predictably assembled to create the
project estimate at each milestone. It is critical that designers and estimators consistently
adhere to your organization’s guidance to ensure allowances, contingencies, and inflation
are consistently considered in all projects. If not, it is easy for contingencies to be hidden
inside other numbers and counted multiple times. This can quickly complicate competitive
applications for specific funding sources, as you want to compare apples to apples in order
to be fair. This can also be extremely problematic when managing programs and portfolios
as reliable and consistent estimates work hand-in-hand with reliable and consistent sched-
ules to ensure the right kind of money is in the right place at the right time to keep the
project progressing in an efficient and responsible manner.
Your organization may have slightly different definitions or guidance; below is a general
summary on how to properly assemble the estimate components. First, you calculate the
estimate to complete the project if executed as planned. It should be unbiased and neutral,
not overly optimistic or conservative. The base cost should include the base, or defined,
items, and all allowances, but should not include identified risks as they will be addressed
within contingencies. The base cost should be in current year dollars, and not include
Inflation. The base cost = base + allowances, and shall specifically exclude contingencies
and inflation. Contingencies should then be added to the base cost which produces the
estimate of expected cost. Some organizations may then add management reserves to your
estimate, as shown in Figure 3.5.
As the project develops, the accuracy of the estimate should improve as the plans advance
and risks are reduced. This will be evident in your estimate components. As plans are
refined with increasingly detailed design, the known-unknowns of allowances become
known-knowns of the base cost. As risks decline, the unknown-unknowns of contingency
should decrease, as depicted in Figure 3.6. Note the schematic below does not include
Management Reserve
(Unknown-Unknowns)
Contingency
(Uknown-Knowns)
Allowance
Expected Cost
(Known-Unknowns)
Base Cost
Base
(Known-Knowns)
Figure 3.5 Cost estimate components.
Risk
Estimated Project Cost
Contingency Contingency Contingency Contingency

Contingency Contingency
Allowances
Allowances
Allowances
Allowances Base
Allowances Base
Base
Base
Base
Base
Time
Preliminary Public Hearing PSE
Project <10% Plans 50% Plans 90% Plans
Milestones Scoping Design Meeting Advertisement
30% Plans 75% Plans 100% Plans
Estimate
Type Preliminary Detailed Engineer's
Figure 3.6 Estimate risks and cost components over time.
management reserves, as many organizations do not have this as a separate cost estimate
component.
3.2.4 Inflation
When the estimate is complete, then inflation should be added. Inflation is the rate at
which the purchasing power of money falls as the currency value decreases over time.
More mature organizations may automate the addition of inflation into an estimate based
upon the PE, RW, and CN phase dates in the project schedule. This automation enables an
organization to control the utilized inflation rate and ensure it is fairly and consistently
3.2 The Basics 49
applied across all projects. If your organization does not have these capabilities, then your
estimate should manually add inflation rates, as approved by your organization.
The selected inflation rates may have various sources, be it historical values, national,
regional, or local indices and trends, or customized rates. While you certainly want to use
the most accurate inflation numbers, you won’t know if they are accurate until the time has
passed. As such, the chosen inflation rate should be reasonable, defendable, and consis-
tently applied across the organization. This consistency of use is imperative for efficient
program and portfolio management.
Pending the complexity of your project, and your organization’s processes, you may use
different inflation rates for different aspects of the estimate. For instance, you may have
one inflation rate for construction costs and another for rights-of-way. Or you may choose
one inflation rate for bridge steel and another for all other construction materials. The
organization should also intentionally choose the point at which the inflation is calculated
(e.g., beginning of the phase, midpoint of the phase, etc.). This approach can provide a
more tailored and precise estimate. If not dictated by your organization’s practices and pro-
tocols, be sure to document all inflation decisions in the Basis of Estimate.
3.2.5 Cone of Uncertainty

The Cone of Uncertainty is a graphic representation of an organization’s expected and
accepted estimate accuracy throughout the project development process. This powerful
tool should be a foundational element to every organization’s estimate program. The
specified ranges can be sourced from industry standards, historical data, peer organiza-
tional performance, or leadership expectations. Regardless of the source, an organiza-
tion’s Cone of Uncertainty should be intentionally set as it establishes the organization’s
estimating expectations throughout the life of a project. Figure 3.7 shows a typical Cone
of Uncertainty.
As the design advances in the project development process, risks should decrease.
Advancing the plan and reducing risks allow the estimate accuracy to improve, thus the
cone of uncertainty narrows as the project moves to advertisement. While the plus/minus
percentages shown in the figure may be general rules of thumb, your organization should
determine its own acceptable variances at each stage of plan development. Some organiza-
tions may embrace risk-based estimation. This approach may necessitate different cones of
uncertainty for varying levels of project complexity.
The Cone of Uncertainty reflects an organization’s risk tolerance and the expected
confidence level of all estimates. Having this documented in such a way that it is consis-
tently used throughout the organization can be critical in managing leadership’s
estimate expectations when the inevitable challenging situations occur. It is said, hard
cases make bad law. There is great value from a project, program, and portfolio perspec-
tive to relying on an established Cone of Uncertainty. How do you know if you have hit
the target, if the target is not defined? How do you know if you have been successful?
You cannot consistently frame the conversation with leadership, stakeholders, or team
members as to define good or successful estimates without an established and approved
cone of uncertainty.
Risk Cone of Uncertainty

Acceptable Variance (%)
+/− 25% +/− 20% +/− 15% +/− 10%

40
+/− 30%
−
+/
Time
Estimate
Type Preliminary Detailed Engineer's
Figure 3.7 Cone of uncertainty.
3.3 Types of Estimates
“Estimating is as much art as science.”

– Anonymous
Before a project is active, it is a candidate project. Different organizations may use different
descriptors, but these are project ideas that may be researched and refined to wide-ranging
levels of maturity. There are a variety of ways in which candidate, or potential, projects are
chosen over others to become active projects. Application-based selections require poten-
tial projects to submit an application in order to be considered. These applications are often
then scored according to preestablished criterium to prioritize selection and funding. More
mature prioritization models often include some benefit–cost analysis. Some projects are
driven by an organization’s responsibility to maintain, repair, upgrade, or replace existing
transportation assets. Many other projects are selected by direct government intervention,
be it legislative or executive direction. This can be at the federal, state, regional, or local
levels. Regardless of how a project become selected and funded, suffice it to say, there are
many more needs and wants than available resources.
The field of transportation planning focuses on this important process of identifying
potential transportation improvement ideas, researching them to ascertain their feasibility,
and preparing planning level cost estimates. These planning level, or conceptual, estimates
are often used as placeholders in long-range plans, or in evaluation as to whether a candi-
date project should be selected for funding. These order of magnitude estimates provide an
early, imprecise idea of the time and money required to complete a project. Due to the vast
amounts of unknowns and assumptions at this state, rule of thumb accuracy levels of these
estimates may range from −25% to +75% of the actual budget.
While this writing acknowledges the significance and implications of preliminary esti-
mates, and the critically important role they play in a transportation program or portfolio,
we will focus our attention on estimates after a project is active. Once a project is selected,
prioritized, put in the organizations, and perhaps state and federal, multi-year transporta-
tion plan, and then funded, it moves from the Planning arena to the Project Development
arena, which is where we will concentrate our discussion.
For active projects, there are three unique kinds of estimates during project development:
Preliminary, Detailed, and the Engineer’s Estimate. Each is differentiated by the accuracy
of the data inputs. To oversimplify, Preliminary estimates are those formed before quan-
tities are known, Detailed estimates are those prepared using construction quantities, and
the Engineer’s estimate is that against which construction bids are considered when deter-
mining whether to recommend Award of contract.
As the project advances, Preliminary estimates are replaced by Detailed estimates. Just
before Advertisement for construction, the Engineer’s estimate is prepared. It is worth not-
ing that the transition from Preliminary to Detailed estimates is rarely clean, meaning there
may likely be a transition period where portions of the estimate are sourced from measured
quantities, while other portions are still calculated using preliminary estimate tools. As the
design advances, project risks should be decreasing and allowances should be clarified,
thereby increasing the accuracy of the estimate. Traditionally, Preliminary estimates are the
least accurate, while the Engineer’s estimate is the most accurate, as shown in Figure 3.8.
Project Development Process
Time
Estimate
Preliminary Detailed Engineer's
Type

Uncertainty (risks)
Accuracy
Figure 3.8 Types of estimates during project development process.
3.3.1 Preliminary Estimates

Preliminary estimates are those created before the design has progressed to the point where
you have an itemized list of materials and projected quantities. These can be tricky business.
They are often crafted by Planners or Engineers that may not have detailed design or
construction experience. Complicating matters is that Preliminary estimates are often
viewed or used in ways that cavalierly disregard a preliminary estimate’s purpose and
inherent limitations. A politician may latch onto the first number they hear and never
forget it. The media keeps referring back to a preliminary cost estimate as they scrutinize a
troubled project. Various funding sources even lock in the preliminary estimate listed on
the application as the project budget. These examples all have others taking action based
upon the underlying assumption that a preliminary cost estimate is both precise and accu-
rate. In reality, while sophisticated organizations may achieve precision, the accuracy of a
Preliminary Estimate is inherently limited.
Preliminary estimates are essential to plan and program funds for all required phases of
a project: Preliminary Engineering (PE), Right-of-Way Acquisition (RW), and Construction
(CN). It should be noted that some organizations may consider four phases, adding Utility
Relocations (URL) between RW and CN. For the purpose of this writing, we will consider
the three approved federal phases (PE, RW, and CN). This assumes URL is part of the RW
phase. Most transportation programs are multi-year plans, and require placeholders until
a project is initiated. Many funding source applications also require a preliminary cost
estimate that is included in the selection criteria. Preliminary cost estimates are also invalu-
able in forecasting future workloads and resource allocations. These are examples of rea-
sonable purposes for preliminary estimates.
Figure 3.9 shows the four main approaches to creating a preliminary cost estimate. Each
has its advantages and limitations.
3.3.2 Analogous Estimating

Analogous estimating is the proverbial “back of the envelope” estimate. This “top-down”
approach is best used when there is limited project information and a quick result is
required. Many engineers can relate to being directed to produce a preliminary cost estimate
in a day, or hour. An individual, or team, relies on their experience of similar past projects
to estimate the duration and cost of a project. Drawing on an “analogy” of similar projects
is inherently limited to the sample set of available projects against which one compares it,
typically those recently completed by your organization. Additionally, there are unique var-
iances and challenges to most projects that often do not directly translate to other projects.
When recognized, estimators often fall back on industry “rules of thumb” that rely heavily
on their experience and judgment to discern when to apply certain assumptions. As with
most aspects of transportation project management, there is no substitute for experience.
While a gut-check cost estimate from an experienced, gray-haired engineer can sometimes
be surprisingly accurate, Analogous esti-
mating is considered the least reliable
approach to preliminary estimates.
Less Information
Analogous Estimates
More Accurate
Parametric Estimates
3.3.3 Parametric Estimating
PERT (Three-Point) Estimates
Parametric estimating leverages historical
Bottom Up Estimates data of recent projects, combining it with
statistical, scalable calculations. As such,
Figure 3.9 Types of preliminary cost estimates. if done correctly, it is inherently more
accurate than Analogous Estimating. Many organizations create parametric tools that vary
in complexity from Excel spreadsheets to complicated databases. The idea is an estimator
can enter known attributes (e.g., length of roadway, number of lanes, number of traffic
signal poles, etc.), and the tool will convert these to defined unit costs and generate a pre-
liminary estimate. Many parametric tools also consider other project factors as integrated
multipliers (e.g., urban-vs.-rural, road classification, pavement section, terrain, likelihood
of encountering unsuitable materials, known presence of rock, etc.).
When creating a parametric tool, one must keep the costs current on the internal tables. The
units by which a cost is calculated must also be scalable in order to generate consistent, accu-
rate, and defendable estimates. For instance, a project requiring a bridge with an 80-foot span,
it is likely not twice the cost of a bridge with a 40-foot span. Business rules regarding scaling of
units should be supported by historic data, and integrated into the tool. It should be noted that
creating and maintaining an effective parametric estimating tool can represent a significant
effort. However, many organizations have determined this is an investment worth making.
Those using parametric estimates would be wise to remember that these tools are just
focused algorithms. As such, garbage in = garbage out. The user must understand the
underlying business rules and be familiar enough with the tool to enter the input variables
in the intended manner. Two estimators using the same tool can produce two very different
estimates if they interpret or define the input parameters differently. Parametric estimating
tools typically do not handle risks well, often requiring the user to manually input risks
with an assigned value. Whether documented or not, every parametric tool has a long list
of assumptions that generally apply for a typical project. In reality, there is rarely a project
where all these assumptions are true. Additionally, some parametric tools are not updated
or equipped to handle more innovative solutions well (e.g., roundabouts, diverging dia-
mond interchanges, evolving types of environmental basins or stream mitigations, etc.).
Understanding the limitations of the parametric estimating approach, and your agency’s
specific parametric tool and its business rules and assumptions, will better enable you to
leverage its powerful benefits and interpret its useful results.
3.3.4 PERT (Program Evaluation and Review Technique) Estimating

PERT, or Three-Point Estimating, builds upon the previous two approaches by statistically
considering risk. The intention is to reduce various estimating biases and lower uncer-
tainties of estimate assumptions. In this approach, one must first generate three separate
estimates for the same project, often utilizing the previous two methods. These are the Most
Likely Cost (Cm), the Optimistic Cost (Co), and the Pessimistic Cost (Cp). The Most Likely
Cost represents the typical workflow, where all goes as usual for your organization. Think
of this as your true best guess. The Optimistic Cost is the estimate should all the stars align
and all the known risks vanish into thin air right before your eyes. The Pessimistic Cost is
the estimate for the worst-case scenario where every risk hits the fan. Once you have these
three estimates, you plug them into the following formula: Ce = (Co + 4 x Cm + Cp) / 6.
This simple equation generates the Expected Cost (Ce), or the PERT estimate. While
more time intensive in that one needs to generate three separate estimates, this approach
is more reliable than the previous two methods in that it normalizes the biases to create a
more accurate estimate.
3.3.5 Bottom-Up Estimating

Bottom-Up Estimating is the most time consuming, and accurate, of the preliminary esti-
mating techniques. In this approach, the Estimator leverages the Work Breakdown Structure
to identify the lowest level of work packages. They then approach the Subject Matter Experts
(SME) for each segmented unit. These are often the individuals who will actually be doing
the design. The SME then evaluates and estimates their piece of the puzzle. The individual
estimates from the lowest level then bubble up and are combined to form the preliminary
estimate. The Estimator, or someone on the team, needs to carefully coordinate this effort,
identify redundancies, and proactively address cross-discipline conflicts.
3.3.6 Detailed Estimates

Detailed estimates are those created by using anticipated construction quantities and unit cost
prices to calculate a total estimate. Most detailed estimates leverage or use other resources.
These may include historic bid tabs, 2D, 3D, or AASHTO design software and estimating tools.
It should be noted that detailed estimates evolve over time. While the arithmetic of multi-
plying the quantities by the unit price to calculate the line-item costs is simple, its implemen-
tation can be a bit more nuanced. As the design progresses, projected quantities will change.
There will also be some line items that are bid as lump sum (e.g., mobilization, MOT, etc.) that
requires some finesse. During earlier stages of design, there may also be an abundance of risks
that may be considered with Allowances or Contingencies. This can be especially challenging
in earlier Detailed estimates where one may feel they are doing a hybrid of quantities and pre-
liminary estimate approaches. As the project advances closer to Advertisement and risks
decrease, the simple math mechanics of conducting a Detailed estimate becomes much easier.
It should be noted many projects seem to conform to the 80–20 rule, where 80% of the
anticipated costs are in 20% of the line items. In these instances, focus your time accord-
ingly on those more critical line-item quantities and costs. Also be aware of the context of
the bid tab information you are using. Are the line items defined by the same standards, or
are different work items included? Are the referenced historic bid tabs low-bid only, or do
they capture all submitted bids? How are special provisions reflected in the historic bid
tabs? Even though the math is simple (line-item cost = quantity × unit cost), there is still
plenty of room for sound engineering judgment.
At every stage, it is important to try to consider all project costs. It is not uncommon for more
inexperienced engineers to unintentionally omit line-item costs that impact the total cost.
Examples may include environmental credit purchases or mitigation costs, rented police
presence during construction, construction CEI, state costs to oversee administration of a
locally-administered project, and so forth. Many organizations have checklists that can be
extremely helpful. These checklists can also be invaluable in bringing consistency to an orga-
nization’s estimates. This consistency should bring defendable precision to the estimates,
while hopefully also increasing estimate accuracy.
3.3.7 Engineer’s Estimate

The purpose of the Engineer’s estimate is to evaluate the low bid and determine whether or
not to recommend Award to the governing body. This is very different from the purpose of
previous project estimates, primarily being: to ensure there is the right amount of the right
color of money at the right place at the right time to keep the project moving forward.
While the Engineer’s estimate may not be the only consideration as to whether or not to
Award (e.g., not enough allocations, contractor determined to be incompetent, etc.), it is
typically the major tool used to evaluate the reasonableness of the low bid amount.
The Engineer’s estimate should be the most accurate of all estimates. This makes sense.
The Engineer’s estimate is typically prepared concurrent with, or immediately after,
Advertisement. This estimate is prepared using the same Plans and Specifications that con-
tractors are using to prepare their bid. As such, it should be clear who will bear all remaining
project risks. Other critical construction details should also now be settled. Examples may
include construction duration, hours of operation, defined staging areas, miscellaneous or
unusual restrictions, and so forth.
It should also be noted that an Engineer’s estimate attempts to evaluate costs as a con-
tractor would. This means it should consider factors that extend beyond quantities and unit
costs. These may include men, equipment, materials, production rates, proximity to asphalt
plants or suitable material, accessibility of defined staging areas, and so forth. As such,
Engineer’s estimates are typically done by an organization’s most experienced estimators.
Since the purpose of an Engineer’s estimate is to be that by which submitted bids are
compared, it is common for these estimates to remain sealed. Pending the organization and
applicable state guidance, some may unseal this estimate after bid opening, after Award, or
keep them sealed indefinitely.
3.3.8 Risk-Based Estimating

One may assert, at its core, all project management fundamentals are rooted in risk
management. Likewise, one may assert at its core, all estimating fundamentals are rooted
in risk management. This probabilistic and determinist mindset is solidified under the
umbrella of risk-based estimating.
A Risk is an identified uncertain event or condition that if it is realized, could have a
positive or negative effect on the project’s objectives. All significant scope assumptions
should be included in the risk register. Negative risks that could adversely impact a project
are threats, while positive risks that could benefit the project are opportunities. Risks
should be accounted for within the estimate, typically in allowances or contingencies.
Risk-Based Estimating is a methodology that adjusts the Base Estimate to account for
project-specific risks in order to produce a more informed probable cost estimate.
Guidelines for applicable and acceptable contingencies and allowances are specified for
various project risk complexities, which are based on historical data. AASHTO has defined
a Risk-Based Estimate process wherein Risks are analyzed and Contingencies assigned
based upon the following three project types:
● Type I – Risk-Based Percentage Contingency
● Type II – Risk-Based Deterministic Contingency
● Type III – Risk-Based Probabilistic Contingency
Type I, a risk-based percentage contingency approach is the simplest form of risk analysis,
where contingencies are assigned based upon provided percentage guidelines. The
percentage guidelines often have low-, medium-, and high-risk values at various stages
throughout the project development process. The default contingencies used for estimates
should be the medium percentage guideline. Any variance should be justified within the
Basis of Estimate. Any contingency percentage that is outside of the low to high percentage
guideline range may require organizational approval and should be justified in the Basis of
Estimate.
Type II, a risk-based deterministic contingency approach determines contingencies
through the use of a risk assessment that identifies all applicable projects risks. A specific
contingency is then assigned to each Risk based upon the probability of occurrence and
significance of impact. Applicable details should be included in the Basis of Estimate.
Type III, a risk-based probabilistic contingency approach is reserved for the most com-
plex of projects. Risks on any project warranting a Probabilistic Risk analysis should be
individually evaluated, often utilizing a Monte Carlo simulation. Such risk-evaluations are
rare, highly complex, and should be conducted by experienced subject matter experts.
The essence of risk-based estimating is to assign project and/or task contingencies based
upon project-specific risks. This often takes the form of a pre-set table of acceptable contin-
gencies based upon a selected risk category (e.g., low, medium, or high). The overarching
strategy is that estimates will be more accurate if they are tailored to consider the unique
project- or task-specific risks.
It should be noted that most organizations that embrace risk-based estimates require a
risk matrix and risk register in their basis of estimate documentation. A risk matrix is a
chart used to qualitatively analyze individual risks by rating the risk’s probability against
its impact. A risk register is a dynamic tool used by PMs and project teams to actively track
and monitor project Risks throughout the life of the project. Risks are addressed in more
detail in Chapter 6, Managing Risk.
3.3.9 Estimate Range vs. a Single Number

In general, humans are terrible at estimating just about anything. At a large training event
I once attended, the instructor gave a test to the group where we were to write down our
answers in a range with 90% confidence level of accuracy. The general questions included
the year Mozart was born, length of the Nile River, diameter of the moon, and so forth. It
was astonishing how poorly the group of accomplished engineers scored. We obviously
were far more confident in our estimating ability than we perhaps should be.
Beyond the results, one reason I found this illustration fascinating was that we were to pro-
vide answers in ranges. Engineers are typically preconditioned to solve for x. While there may
be ranges, most of us were trained that there is typically one right answer, or one most probable
answer. It should be noted that some research suggest humans are not inherently inclined to
estimate most anything with a singular number, rather opting for a probabilistic range.
Bringing this concept back to transportation project estimates, should the estimate be a
number or a range? Which makes more sense? Which does your organization encourage or
require?
There are good reasons for a single number. It is difficult to program a range. Most orga-
nization’s multi-year funding plans require a number. Furthermore, most organization’s
multi-year funding plans cannot accommodate a range. Likewise, most funding, planning,
and monitoring systems require a number and cannot accommodate a range. There are
also practical considerations. Most politicians or news outlets don’t say, “this project will
likely cost somewhere between $2.42 million and $4.07 million,” instead opting for, “this
$3.2 million project….” Single numbers are easy to understand, simple to convey, and
pragmatic for associated systems and funding plans.
There are also good reasons for ranges. Estimate ranges allow for consideration of mul-
tiple streams of risk, which can more effectively shape stakeholder expectations and lead to
improved decisions. These can be especially useful on larger megaprojects or more com-
plex projects where the optimistic and pessimistic estimates can vary widely. As the project
advances, this range should shrink until the Engineer’s Estimate is typically a single
number. While most experienced engineers and program managers agree an estimate
range is perhaps more appropriate, system constraints and stakeholder expectations often
drive an organization to revert back to a single number in their estimates.
3.4 Managing the Budget
“Give me six hours to chop down a tree and I will spend the first four sharpening the axe.”
– Abraham Lincoln
3.4.1 Cost Management Plan

The Cost Management Plan is the part of the Project Management Plan that details how
project costs will be estimated, budgeted, managed, monitored, and controlled throughout
the life of the project. Some mega-projects, or more innovative delivery methods, may require
a project-specific cost management plan. For most transportation projects, a tailored cost
management plan is not required. This is predominantly because these workflows are typi-
cally already well established, be it by precedence or applicable guidance and regulations.
At its core, public transportation organizations are funding entities. Money comes in, and
money goes out to build and maintain transportation and related assets. As such, public
transportation organizations should strive to be responsible stewards of public funds. In
most circumstances, much of the money flow is regulated or directed to promote or demon-
strate transparency, responsibility, and a balance of authority. Consequently, much of what
would normally be included in a cost management plan already exists in different formats
in different locations, often spread across an organization’s divisional lines. This is particu-
larly true for how allocations, obligations, and budgets are established, modified, and
approved, which can even be dictated by the funding stream that is being leveraged.
The issue of estimate guidance is often a different story. While it may seem more straight-
forward, that is not always the case. Regardless, your organization should have docu-
mented expectations for the who, what, when, and how of project estimates: who does
them, what they are to look like, when they are required, and how they are to be submitted
and/or inputted into your organization’s system(s).
Remember the big picture of transportation is to have the right money in the right place
at the right time to keep projects moving forward. Estimates, allocations, obligations, and
budgets play an incredibly important role in achieving this objective.
Any project-specific cost management plan should include a section focusing on change
management. Not only is it the right thing to do, it is incredibly important to maintain the
financial integrity of the project.
As with most bureaucratic workflows, an organization should be careful not to venture
into the space where you pass beyond the point of diminishing returns. The best of inten-
tions can quickly lose favor when the juice isn’t worth the squeeze. An organization’s
estimate guidance and requirements should be scaled to be reasonable and appropriate for
the different kinds of estimates throughout the life of the project.
3.4.2 Estimate Validation

There is a growing trend in the transportation industry toward application-based selection
processes to prioritize and select projects for funding. Many organizations see real advan-
tages to this approach, including increased public transparency, making project selections
more objective and less subjective in nature, and being able to direct and emphasize the
shape of future projects by defining and tweaking the selection criterium. Many of these
processes include some form of a benefit–cost analysis. In these instances, it may be deemed
responsible for the administering organization to validate the submitted project estimates.
Organizations should not underestimate the resources and effort required to validate all
submitted estimates. This can be especially concentrated when there is a rush of submitted
applications right before the submission deadline. The validation effort can even be a mul-
tilayered validation, pending the size and complexity of the project. For instance, the first
layer of validation may be thought of as Quality Control (ensuring the validity of the data).
The second layer of validation is often analogous to Quality Assurance (ensuring the integ-
rity of the process). It is important to realize that generating a cost estimate, and validating
a cost estimate are two very different tasks. It is like designing the roadway plans or review-
ing someone else’s work to ensure compliance. The best reviewers were often first designers
who had actually done the work at an earlier time. Similarly, the best estimate validators are
often those that have direct experience generating cost estimates. It is important to note that
estimate validation relies upon the foundation of the cost estimate itself: what is and is not
included, project and estimate assumptions, the estimate’s incorporation of risks, its depen-
dency upon a well-crafted Scope, and an accurate Schedule. This can put estimate validators
in a precarious position if they doubt any, or all, of these foundational assumptions.
One important aspect of estimate validation is to predetermine the actions to be taken
when the validation is complete. What if the validation determines the submitted solution
design is not tenable or constructable? What if the validation suggests the submitted estimate
is woefully low? What then? Does your organization have the ability and authority to revise
the estimate or reject the application? These situations will occur, and it is imperative you
understand the dynamics and know the answer to these questions before they arise.
3.4.3 Managing the Triple Constraint

The primary job of the PM is to advance the project within the confines of the triple con-
straint: Budget, Scope, and Schedule. How do you do that? A successful PM is vigilant in
confirming the scope, monitoring the schedule, updating the estimate, and verifying the
budget again and again throughout the life of the

Verify
project, as shown in Figure 3.10. When this circular and/or Confirm
path is consistent, the project can progress in a healthy Update Scope
manner. Inharmonious inconsistencies represent Budget
project issues that must be addressed, the sooner the
better. Entropy is alive and well in that if a discrepancy
is ignored, the project will inherently digress to
increasing levels of disorder.
Update Monitor
Estimate Schedule
3.4.4 Change Management
Tony Robbins said, “Change is inevitable. Progress is Figure 3.10 Managing the triple
optional.” This may be especially true as it applies to constraint.
project estimates. The reality of the triple constraint
dictates you cannot change one of them (budget, scope, and schedule) without impacting
at least one of the other two. Of the three, one could assert Estimate, or budget, changes are
the hardest to capture. Why?
Scope changes are usually directly reflected in the design plans. If you extend the
sidewalk another 200ʹ, it is right there for all to see. Most scope changes create ripple effects
that must be coordinated and managed by the PM across discipline lines. If the sidewalk is
extended, perhaps there are environmental documents or permits that need to be modified,
perhaps traffic needs to now consider another crosswalk at the intersection, perhaps ADA
requirements on the extension now require additional utilities or storm drains to be relo-
cated, perhaps you need to initiate enhanced stakeholder outreach to update the impacted
neighborhood and their HOA, and so forth.
Schedule changes are also typically transparent within the project team and to leader-
ship. If you are supposed to reach a milestone by a certain date and don’t, it is a binary
result. You didn’t make the date, so you adjust the schedule. Most public transportation
projects have various internal and external touchpoints throughout the project development
process. It becomes readily apparent when a schedule slips and these touchpoints are
delayed or need to be rescheduled.
Budget changes can be relatively straightforward in a top-down situation when a budget
change is driven by funding or allocation changes. For instance, if funds are added to a
project due to a program surplus, then the project has an increased budget. Likewise, if
money is pulled from a project for what could be a variety of reasons, the budget is reduced
and the PM is forced to react and respond accordingly.
Budget changes can be a bit more complicated in bottom-up scenarios, when they are
driven by changes in the estimate. There may be many reasons for this. Quality estimates
are time consuming to generate. They are also snapshots of the developing plans that are
continuing to evolve and increase in detail. As such, most projects generate meaningful esti-
mates only at key project milestones, which typically may include: planning (before project
selection), scoping (or 30% plans), Public Hearing, 60% plan, 90% plans, and 100% plans.
Pending your organization’s workflow, there may be interim milestones as well. Other orga-
nizations may require current estimates, meaning they at least have to be updated annually
for instance. It is evident that estimates are captured at less frequent intervals than the scope
or schedule is evaluated. There may also be significant organizational or project pressure to

keep the design within budget. Additionally there may be behavioral pressures that can be
exacerbated by an organization’s culture or performance metrics. This can manifest itself in
many ways. Pending your organization’s estimating guidance and requirements, and given
the approximate nature of estimates, particularly if applying risk-based estimating, allow-
ances, and contingencies, there is some room for interpretation of the numbers. For in-
stance, two estimators will calculate very different estimates if one is inclined to be
conservative with their numbers, and the other more aggressive. This is sometimes exacer-
bated in that most truly don’t really understand the money flow anyway.
This can lend itself to the extremely undesirable result of letting a project and not having
the budget to award it. The project perspective may then encourage overestimating the
costs to ensure there is enough money to award. However, this can cause complications for
the program and portfolio, including that these surplus monies could be used to fund other
projects. As such, PMs and discipline leaders should strive to generate realistic estimates.
If these estimates exceed the budget, it is far better to realize you may be short on money
early on so necessary adjustments or tough decisions can be made.
Ideally, project change management workflows and procedures should be well defined
at the organizational level. This consistency of process can bring clarity and predictability
to submissions and approvals of budget changes, and do so in such a way as to make the
appropriate adjustments to scope and schedule. Ideally, your organization may have a
change management form that documents significant changes (as defined by established
thresholds) and their resulting impacts to the triple constraint. Mature organizations often
have this form go through a defined approval process so that leadership, key stakeholders,
and team members are aware of the changes and ramifications thereof.
3.4.5 Formatting Estimates

Many organizations find substantial benefit in standardizing the format of their estimates.
This can be a deceptively challenging task when one considers the range of estimates
throughout the life of a project, and the various internal and external entities that are pre-
paring estimates for any organization. Much of the discussion within an organization when
determining a standardized format will likely concentrate on the desired level of granularity.
On one end of the spectrum, you need four numbers for federal authorization: preliminary
engineering (PE) phase estimate, right-of-way (RW) phase estimate, construction (CN) phase
estimate, and total project cost estimate. At the other end of the spectrum is the engineer’s
estimate with cost item details. This task can be complicated by different stakeholders’ prior-
ities. Early estimators may be most concerned with risk categories, and ways to consistently
account for base costs, allowances, contingencies, and inflation. Meanwhile many construction
estimators have trouble relating to any estimate that does not contain full quantities.
If an organization chooses to pursue standardized estimate formats, they will hopefully
settle on something that works well for them. One way to balance the level of detail conun-
drum is to subdivide each phase into discipline-specific costs, which can often facilitate a
more workable cross-walk of costs throughout the lifecycle of project estimates. This is espe-
cially true should your organization or state’s cost items be divided in a similar manner.
Granted, the crosswalk may not be 100% accurate (e.g., curbing for traffic control may end
up in MOT or safety as opposed to roadway costs, etc.), but it can be a great place to start. It
is worth acknowledging that there are likely exceptions to every rule (e.g., special provisions
may need to be individually addressed and subdivided into the discipline summaries).
While this effort can be a challenge to create and implement, there are real benefits. The
biggest is arguably the consistency it can bring to estimates, particularly as it relates to base,
allowances, contingencies, and inflation. Without a standard format, it can be difficult to
ascertain exactly where the allowances, contingencies, and inflation are being included, what
exactly they are to be covering, and whether multiple layers of contingencies or inflation are
included. A standardized format can be especially valuable when conducting estimate valida-
tion as it relates to funding applications. In addition to bringing estimate transparency and
order, it can also serve as a valuable checklist that can become an important component of
the basis of estimate (estimate supporting documentation). Ideally, this consistent estimate
data can be captured and leveraged for progressive data analytics that would empower more
precise and accurate estimates while enabling more efficient worklfows.
3.4.6 Who Owns the Contingency

Who owns the contingency? This simple question is difficult for most organizations to
answer. More accurately, it is a question most organizations would struggle to answer con-
sistently. This may be especially true at different levels and in different areas. The executive
leader may think they do. The programming folks may think they do. The accountants
likewise. Districts or other subsections may consider the extra time and money at their dis-
cretion. The PM may think they own it. Even task owners or consultants may think they
own any contingencies on their efforts.
The reality of who owns the contingency has far-reaching implications. Problems are
inevitable if this is not well defined. Many more mature organizations take a project-cen-
tric approach. Under this paradigm, the project contingencies are owned by the organiza-
tion. Project surpluses are returned to the organization for reprioritization and reallocation.
If contingencies are owned, or perceived to be owned, by PMs or District, estimates can be
artificially inflated to effectively act as an additional program contingency across other pro-
jects within their purview and/or control. Lack of clarity encourages competing objectives
that can manifest themselves in actions at different level that are inherently counterpro-
ductive. Fundamentally, each project should stand by itself. While program and portfolios
can, and should, be balanced across projects, this should be done at the program or port-
folio management level, not the project management or District level. A consistent answer
to this basic question is foundational to organizational data quality and the integrity of the
project, which enables strong programs and portfolios.
3.4.7 Estimates and the Public

As PM, you are responsible for the accuracy and timeliness of project estimates. This has
direct impacts on the programming of funds and the ability for your project to efficiently
and responsibly progress. Estimates can also play a powerful role in stakeholder reaction to
the project. The media will inevitably cite the project cost when providing an update or
examination of a project. This anticipated project cost may be based on the budget, but is
often based upon the most recent estimate. When discussing project estimates with the
public, it is important to remember a few basic principles.
First, most of those gathering, reporting, or consuming information on your project likely
do not readily understand the different cost components of base, allowance, contingency,
management reserves and inflation. Furthermore, they are likely not familiar with your
organization’s estimating procedures or acceptable accuracy ranges, as expressed in
your organization’s cone of uncertainty. Attempting to explain this may quickly overes-
timate their curiosity. Most just want a single number.
Second, anchoring is real. Anchoring is a cognitive bias where one unintentionally assigns
undeserved weight to preliminary information when making future decisions or evalu-
ating future actions. An example is when one becomes attached to a specific estimate
number without considering the associated Accuracy Range or Confidence Level of the
estimate. This often surfaces later in development when the estimate is rightfully
adjusted, and suddenly the project is viewed as unexpectedly expensive or a bargain.
Imagine a reporter, or Board Member, questioning you as to why your project has risen
in cost by 30% halfway through design. Anchoring is rooted in the assumption that the
earlier estimate was more accurate than the accepted Accuracy Range at that point of
project development.
Thirdly, optimism bias is real. This is the cognitive predisposition to assume your chances
of realizing negative risks are lower than reality, coupled with the assumption that your
chances of realizing positive opportunities are greater than reality. This natural and
institutional bias can unintentionally set unrealistic expectations, both at the project and
program levels. This often occurs within organizations when discussing high-profile
projects, or recovery plan for projects that have slipped. The stars rarely all align.
3.5 Performance Metrics
“The budget evolved from a management tool into an obstacle to management.”

– Charles Edwards
3.5.1 Overview
The purpose of performance metrics should be to monitor progress, enhance efficiency,
and enable continual refinement of an Agency’s practices and procedures in order to more
closely align with an organization’s mission statement, and effectively achieve its mission
critical objectives. With regard to budgets and estimates, the purpose should be to more
precisely and accurately estimate project costs so as to enable an organization to more effi-
ciently program available funds and execute the program in a way that optimizes
value-added improvements to the community. Like many aspects of transportation project
management, this is much easier said than done.
As with all performance metrics, it is imperative to carefully and meticulously define
exactly what you are measuring. The “what” you are measuring should be consistent with
the “why” you are measuring. Once that is decided, you should then deliberately choose
the “how,” “who,” and “when,” all of which should be consistent with the “why.” It is easy
for organizations to become so involved in the details of the metric that they unknowingly
drift away from “why” they were wanting to measure it the first place.
3.5.2 What Is an Accurate Estimate?

What is an accurate estimate? This simple question can be a difficult to answer.
At its core, performance metrics compare datapoints to a baseline. Each organization
should intentionally decide what data point(s) and baseline(s) they will use in this comparison.
These decisions will inherently empower or constrain the resulting insights the performance
metrics provide. They will also shape the organization’s behavior as it relates to estimates in
expected and sometimes unanticipated ways.
Each performance metric should start with a clear purpose for the metric. Just because
something can be measured, doesn’t mean it should be measured. Does the performance
metric add value? What is the purpose of your budget performance metric? Another simple
question that can be difficult to answer.
Ideally the data point(s) and baseline(s) against which they are compared are consistent
with the metric’s purpose. Many times, they are not. Frustrations and skepticism take hold
when metrics are used to draw conclusions that reach beyond the inherent constraints of
the metric inputs and logic. This can be especially challenging with estimates.
So how does an organization determine if their estimates during project development are
accurate? It is practical to start with the end in mind. What target are you trying to hit? The
final submission detailed estimate the designer prepares that accompanies the Plans,
Specifications, and Estimate (PSE)? The sealed Engineer’s, or Evaluative, Estimate? The
low bid? The mean (average) of the submitted bids? The median (middle) of the submitted
bids? The final total construction costs after the project is complete? What you choose will
constrain the use and conclusions of the metric.
In many ways, the final total construction cost makes the most sense. It is the most holistic
measure, truly comparing apples to apples – your estimated total cost versus the actual total
cost. While this may also provide the best opportunity to produce effective lessons learned
that could ultimately improve your estimating accuracy, there are significant timing issues.
By the time the project is constructed, most people frankly don’t care anymore. Impatience
and apathy may readily ensue. The project development phase has long been done and they
are on to new challenges. The organization is likely much more focused on project close-out
at that point than determining how accurate an estimate was that may have been prepared
years before. It can seem at best an afterthought to examine and rehash the estimate history
on completed projects, often years after the estimate was prepared.
The other end of the spectrum is to create metrics that remain relevant during project
development. This means you have to use baselines that cannot extend beyond the bids.
This can be extremely effective if the purpose is to focus careful estimating during project
development. However, is it really measuring estimate accuracy? What if the plans are
lacking and there are an abundance of construction change orders? At the time of bids, you
don’t know the total project cost. Designers and estimators may shift their actions based
upon the prevailing metric. In this instance, the preliminary engineering estimates may
look through the bid lens to determine accuracy. This may cause other funding issues if
these same estimates are used to program total project costs.
Some organizations prioritize ensuring there be enough money to award the project.
In these cases, estimates should target the low bid. AASHTO defines accuracy as the
measurement of how close estimates are to the Award low bid. Typically, this is an organi-
zation’s most accurate estimate, that being the Engineer’s Estimate vs. the low bid. This is
a reasonable metric as this comparison is already used to help make the business decision
whether to Award or not. If the intent is to measure estimate compared against the industry,
then the organization should perhaps compare their estimate(s) against all submitted bids.
Some organizations want to see how they are compared to what they previously promised.
In these cases, future estimates are compared against previous estimate baselines, such as
scoping. In these instances, the baselines are often referred to as the project budget.
It should be noted that the term “budget” can often mean very different things to very differ-
ent entities within the same organization. There is tremendous benefit in gaining concur-
rence across the organization on some of these commonly used terms. Some organizations
want to emphasize balancing programmatic funds. In these cases, scoping estimates should
be compared against the final total project costs.
In most cases, the estimates should tie to real money, that being bids or total costs.
Comparing estimates only to other estimates can provide more immediate feedback, but is
inherently constrained to each estimate’s underlying assumptions. Since these are not tied
to real money, they may provide limited value to the organization in their programming of
funds, and can more easily be manipulated.
Once your organization determines the data point(s) and baseline(s) they will use in the
metric, the logic must be settled as to what is considered accurate. What delta percentage
is good enough to be considered a good or accurate estimate throughout the different stages
of project development? Some organizations may choose to utilize an accuracy range that
expresses both the high and low acceptable estimate accuracy boundaries. These change
over time, becoming more stringent as the plan develops and risks are addressed. An orga-
nization’s Cone of Uncertainty should graphically depict the Accuracy Range throughout
the project development process. Other organizations may also choose a metric with a
sliding scale of accuracy. This allows each subsequent estimate to be compared to the
previous baseline estimate. This can work quite well provided the metric ties back to reality
of bids or total cost.
3.5.3 Last Thoughts

Every now and again, an estimate is completely blown. When this occurs, it is critical for
organizations to understand why. Equally important is for the organizations not to overact
and pursue reactionary system-wide changes. It is imperative to discern if this is a project
or program issue.
Project busts should be handled at the project level. When examining a project, there are
often too many cooks in the kitchen, all looking for someone else to blame. In these
instances, it is important to discern the truth of the matter. Were the numbers arbitrarily set
for political reasons? Was there professional incompetence, oversight, errors, or omissions?
Were the right people included in the discussion, and at the right times in the process? Were
there unusual risks that were not properly identified or quantified? Were there unforeseen
market conditions or other circumstances that legitimately were outside of your control?
Whatever the reasons, you owe it to your Agency, your employees, and your citizens to
determine why there is an unforeseen disruption to the public project utilizing public
funds. As the reasons become apparent, I encourage leadership to prioritize advancing the
project, if reasonable, and then focusing on incorporating lessons learned into your organi-
zation’s best practices. Remember, the estimates may be sound, and perhaps the bids are
the outliers. This certainly doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t revisit the estimates to improve
your processes, but unless you are experiencing systemic busts, try to avoid organizational
overactions. If the bids are not in line with the estimates, then the organization must make
a business decision on how best to proceed.
Program busts should be handled at the program level. If project estimates are consis-
tently off by variances beyond industry standards, or your organization’s expectations as
defined in your Cone of Uncertainty, then the current estimating systems, environment,
tools, and procedures should be examined and refined, as needed. In these circumstances,
it can be beneficial to take a deep breath and approach the situation in a proactive, and not
reactionary frame of mind. Organizations should strive to ensure corrective measures are
consistent with the overall purpose of estimates. Any new or revised performance metrics
to track or drive these changes should also be consistent with the organization’s why, what,
who, when, and how of estimating to add value to the organization.
67
Scope
“No matter how good the team or how efficient the methodology, if we’re not solving the
right problem, the project fails.”
– Woody Williams
Scoping is a task, and a process. All project development schedules should include a scoping
task, which may be the most important task in the schedule. It represents the culmination
of the scoping process, or phase, of the project. The deliverable for this task is often an
approved Scoping Form or Report. This should be so much more than an obligatory form
or rubber-stamped approval. Successful scoping charts a course for success. Conversely,
inadequate scoping ensures complications.
At its core, Scoping establishes the project’s budget, schedule, and design content. You
cannot close scoping until all three of these are resolved. The formal approval of scoping
then grants the project approval to proceed. The established budget, scope (design content),
and schedule are reflected in the project’s Triple Constraint.
One of the foundational elements of successful project management is effective risk
management. This is as much a mindset as it is a prescribed list of activities. Great PMs are
exceptional at viewing their world through risk management-colored glasses, which grants
them an anchored budget-scope-schedule perspective to innovation and problem solving.
This is perhaps never more evident than in Scoping.
Generally speaking, Scoping should define the problem, solution, and project approach.
But Scoping extends beyond confirming and clarifying the project’s purpose and need. You
should assemble the project team and name discipline leads. Initiate the environmental
review process and determine the required permits and environmental documentation.
Identify and engage key stakeholders. Specify applicable design criteria. Perform survey
and other essential field investigations. Evaluate performance-based engineering alternative
solutions. Proactively identify design, environmental, right-of-way, utility, and construction
constraints. Determine project delivery method (e.g., Design Bid Build, Design Build, PPTA,
etc.). Determine level of public involvement (e.g., Post a Willingness, Location Public
Hearing, Design Public Hearing, Combined Public Hearing, etc.). Work with your team to
identify, evaluate, and prioritize qualitative project risks. Quantitatively convert these
qualitative risks to project impacts in terms of time (Schedule) and money (Budget). Adjust
the project Schedule and Budget accordingly. Gain confirmation on required resource

68 4 Scope
availability and concurrence from leadership on the resultant project package of Scope,
Schedule, and Budget. Some organizations require pre-scoping worksheets be completed
by each involved engineering discipline. This provides an effective way to engage key team
members, document discipline specific risks and associated schedule and budget adjust-
ments. This should all then be documented in the Scoping Form or Report that is approved
by the appropriate persons, positions, or entities. This final scoping document becomes the
basis for all future change management discussions.
On larger or more complex projects, other documents that may be generated dur-
ing this phase or incorporated into Scoping discussions include Project Charter, Project
Management Plan, Issues Log, Assumption Log, Risk Register, Risk Report, Stakeholder
Management Plan, Stakeholder Engagement Plan, Stakeholder Register, Scope Management
Plan, Requirements Management Plan, Requirements Traceability Matrix, Schedule
Management Plan, Cost Management Plan, Basis of Estimates, Quality Management Plan,
Quality Control Measurements, Risk Management Plan, Resource Management Plan,
Project Team Assignments, Resource Calendars, Project Calendars, Work Breakdown
Structure, Communications Management Plan, Performance Metrics, and Schedule and
Budget Scoping baselines. There is a point of diminishing returns on the value added in the
formal documentation of many of these efforts for smaller projects; however, these areas
should all be considered during Scoping for all projects. Most of these items should live in
the Project Management Plan.
4.1 Scoping Process
“Slow down. Calm down. Don’t worry. Don’t hurry. Trust the process.”
– Alexandra Stoddard
4.1.1 Introduction
Scoping is a process. This process starts early, typically contains two key milestone meetings,
the Project Scoping Kickoff Meeting and the Preliminary Field Inspection (30% Design Review)
Meeting, and concludes with formal scoping approval with well-defined deliverables.
Unofficially Scoping starts at project conception. A project idea is first imagined to solve
a problem or create new opportunities for improvement. These first thoughts begin to shape
the Purpose and Need. Planning resources may proceed to investigate and justify the candi-
date project with studies and projections. Often candidate projects must comply with
previous Planning studies and identified corridor improvements. Preliminary schedules
and cost estimates begin to take shape.
4.1.2 Project Initiation

Pending the organization and funding, there may be different paths for a project idea to become
reality. Be it political or operational in origination, most selected projects have a strong project
sponsor advocating on its behalf. Eventually, some approval must be granted by the governing
body or funding entity that endorses the project and commits funding for its execution.
A growing trend in the transportation industry is criteria-based project selection processes.

Applications are prepared and submitted that detail project specifics. The applications are
then objectively scored based on predetermined factors. These may include safety, conges-
tion mitigation, economic development, accessibility, land use, environmental quality, and
other local or regionally specific priorities. A Benefit/Cost (B/C) ratio is often calculated,
which can be the basis for scoring the projects for selection. The B/C can be weighted by cri-
teria factors given preestablished regional priorities. This approach strives to replace a black-
box political project selection with a transparent, data-driven strategy that is public facing.
One advantage of criteria-based project selection is the emphasis on reducing costs in
order to increase the application’s B/C which increases odds of selection. Performance-
Based Practical Design Solutions, as detailed in Chapter 10, Controlling the Project, Section
10.4, Balancing Innovation – Performance-Based Design, are pursued. From the onset, the
focus is to find innovative and cost-effective solutions that solve the problem at hand. In a
financial environment where there are more transportation needs than available funds,
public agencies should be especially vigilant in their obligation to be responsible stewards
of public funds and use them in a way that realizes a significant return on their investment,
in terms of safety and system improvement.
One disadvantage of criteria-based project selection is the need for accurate and advance
information on the application. In order to fairly evaluate the benefits and cost of each pro-
posed project, some meaningful preliminary work must be performed. While plans and
invasive field investigations are typically not completed for the application, other typical
scoping activities are advanced. The problem and proposed solution need to be well defined.
Project risks should be identified. A schedule and estimate are prepared. This information,
as well as the project approach, is often then summarized within the application.
Owners can spend significant time and money in order to prepare a strong application. If the
project is selected, much of this effort is not wasted as the project will begin already deep into
the scoping process. However, if the project is not selected, this becomes a learning experience
with a deliverable of perhaps a head start on the next cycle’s applications. Once the applications
are submitted, there is much work to do. Applications need to be reviewed for completeness.
Estimates need to be validated. The applications need to be scored. Administering the entire
process and program represents a significant effort in terms of time and money. If this is not
properly planned and allocated, the drain on resources will adversely impact other ongoing
work. Pending the size of the program, some have instituted a two-phase approach in an attempt
to more responsibly allocate limited resources for both the applicants and the reviewing enti-
tles. In this approach, a more limited application is first screened. Then those candidate projects
advancing to round two can then be further evaluated to complete the full application.
4.1.3 Consultant Procurement

If utilized, the Scoping process advances during consultant procurement. While some consul-
tant contracts are structured to be paid in terms of time and materials, most are not. Generally,
the owner begins by crafting a Request for Proposal, or Task Order, that describes the problem
to be solved. For project-specific selections, design consultants research the project to prepare
proposals that detail their ability to solve this situation by demonstrating their capabilities and
success in similar past efforts. The owner reviews the submitted proposals and short-lists a few
70 4 Scope
firms for interviews. The selected firms continue to research the project and brainstorm how
best to sell to the owner that they are best qualified to develop and deliver a successful solu-
tion. Even if the owner does not allow project-specific solutions to be presented in the inter-
views, the firms will likely still discuss their approach to solution development and highlight
major challenges of this project that they are uniquely prepared to overcome. The owner then
chooses the top ranked firm, and they begin to negotiate the consultant contract. For task
orders, the owner-operator leverages an existing on-call contract. For both project-specific
selections and task orders, this agreement details the consultant’s project scope, design stan-
dards, project assumptions, success criteria, deliverables, anticipated public involvement, the
development schedule, and the consultants’ cost. In order for the consultant to accurately
prepare a cost estimate for their services, they thoroughly identify and evaluate project risks.
Involved disciplines detail their anticipated work. A workflow is refined. Potential solutions
are vetted. This entire process rests on the fundamentals of the Scoping process: clarify the
Purpose and Need, identify risks, refine the solution, and delineate time and budget con-
straints. For many owners, the consultant contact is the basis for the Scoping Form or Report.
4.1.4 Project Scoping Kickoff Meeting

A Project Scoping Kickoff Meeting is typically the first interdisciplinary team meeting. This
is the first meeting that integrates the consultant’s and owner’s teams after the consultant
contract is executed. If a design consultant is hired, their first official meeting once under
contract should be with the PM. Goals for this first meeting should include clarifying
working relationship expectations. This allows both parties to discuss and decide the
day-to-day operations and logistics of communications, invoice processing, deliverable
delivery, and so forth. It should be run by the Owner PM, and should be scheduled almost
immediately after contract execution. The first meeting where the consultants would meet
the rest of the Owner team will likely be the Project Scoping Kickoff Meeting.
The PM has much to do prior to this meeting. Reviewing all project documentation. Bringing
the consultants, if present, up to speed. Identifying functional leaders, key stakeholders, and
critical team members. Initiating scoping discussions with discipline leads. Initiating field
data collection (e.g., surveying, traffic data, geotechnical evaluations, subsurface utility inves-
tigations, wetland flagging, etc.). Visiting the site. Confirming project limits. Ensuring envi-
ronmental has begun preliminary reviews. Evaluating delivery methods with leadership. And
confirming project funding and schedule expectations. The PM should then schedule the
Project Scoping Kickoff Meeting, which all essential team members should attend.
The PM should run the Project Scoping Kickoff Meeting. This can be challenging since it
can include a large number of attendees, not all of whom know each other. Make an
agenda, and stick to the scheduled topic timeframes. Provide an overview that focuses on
the WHY of the project. Detail the desired outcomes of this meeting. Have everyone intro-
duce themselves and describe their role. Discuss risks, and review the framework by which
the scoping process will be executed. Be clear with next steps, and clearly delineate who
needs to provide what to whom by when.
4.1.5 After the Kickoff Meeting

Following the Project Scoping Kickoff Meeting, work begins in earnest. Each discipline
should forge ahead to evaluate the identified risks and develop 30% design plans. This is an
exciting time in the project development. Data is coming in and being evaluated. Strategic
design decisions are being made, even as different disciplines are chasing down answers to
their own critical questions. The PM needs to ensure everyone is providing what others
need when they need it, in order for the project to progress. The PM should work closely
with the lead designer to ensure the right people know the right information at the right
times so wise decisions can be made. You can think of each discipline as being its own train
on its own track. The PM needs to ensure the trains are all making concurrent progress
such that they all arrive at the 30% Design station at the same time. This is complicated by
the fact that some of these trains rely on input from other trains along the way in order to
chart their course of action. For instance, the hydraulic report can be critical to the roadway
approaches and bridge design. Or environmental permit constraints may impact limits of
construction which may directly impact RW and construction costs. Or chasing an ade-
quate outfall may require additional field survey, RW, and environmental impacts.
Successful PMs understand the significance of information during this early and critical
phase of project development. Like a pebble thrown into a still lake, the PM should grasp
the ripple effects of information and decisions. When they read the preliminary geotechnical
report that details extensive unsuitable materials, they need to ensure the road designer is
aware and the appropriate mitigation strategies are included in the Scoping cost and
schedule estimates. When a homeowner mentions their septic drain field is actually much
closer to the roadway than the records indicate, they need to ensure it is accurately located
and alert the utility engineers to determine if it will be adversely impacted and need to be
replaced. When the Subsurface Utility Survey shows a major natural gas line traversing the
project, they need to ensure the road designer can provide adequate cover and can work
with the hydraulics engineer so the enclosed storm sewer system can work around the
existing utility. In these instances, there is no substitute for experience. The more projects
you develop and construct, the more you will be able to quickly discern the intended and
unintended impacts of information at this early stage of development. Experience brings a
practiced perspective to triage urgencies, assign priorities, and bring the right people in the
loop at the right time. Exceptional PMs will not know all the answers, but they do know
what questions to ask.
4.1.6 Citizens Information Meeting

There are times when it is advantageous to schedule a Citizens Information Meeting (CIM)
between the Project Scoping Kickoff Meeting and the Preliminary Field Inspection (30%
Plan Design) Meeting. Reasons may include the complexity of, or the community’s famil-
iarity and acceptance of, the proposed solution. Or the number or influence of impacted
stakeholders. Or the density of the project corridor. Or the political sensitivities of the
project. Hosting a CIM at this stage is a calculated risk. Given the lack of information that
can be presented, there may very well be more questions than answers. It adds tasks that
will delay the project schedule and may mobilize stakeholders in a direction that is contrary
to the project’s purpose and need. However, if all goes well, it can build a foundation of
open, honest, and credible communication that can accelerate stakeholder cooperation. The
decision as to whether to host a CIM at this point should be carefully evaluated. While stake-
holder outreach should be underway at project inception, in most cases public meetings are
best held after completion of Scoping.
72 4 Scope
4.1.7 30% Design Review Meeting

The 30% Design Review Meeting may also be called the Preliminary Field Inspection (PFI)
Meeting or 30% Staff Review meeting. This is one of the foundational project milestone
meetings. From the PM’s perspective, the project is being concurrently developed, each
discipline running its own train down its own track. While there are certainly touchpoints
of coordination, it is at the milestone meetings that all the concurrent tracks converge to
produce milestone design plans. The first one is at 30% Design. It is imperative the PM
frame the proper team expectations regarding this plan submission. They are 30% plans.
This means 70% of the plans are not yet known. The intention of the 30% plan is to confirm
a unified direction moving forward. The altitude is high, and with each plan submission we
descend further into the weeds of details.
30% plans should answer the fundamental questions that enables a more complete
picture of qualitative risks. A rough line and grade (horizontal and vertical alignment of
the roadway) should be established. An adequate outfall should be demonstrated, along
with sufficient calculations to demonstrate a workable stormwater management solu-
tion. Existing wells and septic drainfields should be located such that adverse impacts
can be evaluated and necessary waterline or sanitary sewer extensions are understood.
Planned utility improvements should be identified. Adjacent projects and planned devel-
opments that will impact site, traffic flow, or the project’s purpose and need should be
evaluated. The level of public involvement should be decided. Preliminary rights-of-way
and limits of construction should be delineated. The Maintenance of Transportation
(MOT) plan should be developed such that it answers the big picture questions, such as
will we need to close the road, is a detour necessary, what temporary pavement may be
needed to secure temporary travel lanes, etc. The Sequence of Construction (SOC) plans
should be developed such that it answers the big picture questions, such as can this solu-
tion be built, can the necessary construction equipment access the site, etc. Environmental
preliminary reviews should have confirmed the needed permits and environmental doc-
ument type.
The PFI (30% Plan Review Meeting) should be run by the PM. Prior to the meeting, the
30% plans and supporting documents should be submitted and circulated to reviewing
entities with enough time for a meaningful review. Ideally comments would be assem-
bled and circulated before this meeting. This allows for more productive discussions at
the meeting. The PM should take special care to keep the meeting discussion focused,
and at the right altitude. This is PFI (30% Design Plan Review Meeting). Comments
should be at this level. Stormwater and other utility details will not be known. For
example, while there should be enough data to demonstrate an outfall will daylight and
the stormwater strategy is viable, the design will not yet be done. Critical elements of the
PMP should also be updated, along with other project documents such as the Assumption
Log and Risk Register.
Prior to the meeting, assign a scribe to take notes. It can be a large invite list, and the event
may spawn many sidebar conversations. The PM cannot effectively run the meeting and take
notes at the same time. Following the meeting, promptly distribute minutes that includes
contact information for all attendees. As with all meetings and most communications, be
sure you acknowledge others’ contributions, and say Thank You!
4.1.8 Completing Scoping

Scoping is not complete until the time, money, and content (problem and solution) are final-
ized. This takes the form of Budget, Scope, and Schedule. This can only be completed once
risks have been quantitatively identified and then qualitatively converted to time and money.
Closing Scoping involves four key steps, as shown in Figure 4.1. All of these are impor-
tant, and until all four are done, Scoping is not complete.
Finalize Scoping document with Budget, Scope, and Schedule
Formal approval of Scoping Document
Implement Scoping Schedule Baseline
Implement Scoping Budget Baseline
Figure 4.1 Closing scoping.
All of the details determined and the decisions made must be documented in the final
Scoping documentation. Many transportation system owners have standardized Scoping
Forms that simplify this effort. If no existing and accepted forms are available, a Scoping
Report should be prepared in its place. This document should contain all critical project
information, such as project numbers, length, termini, and the like. A detailed listing of
project risks should be included, typically by discipline. Delivery method should be speci-
fied, along with the public involvement requirements. A Scoping Schedule should be final-
ized. A Scoping Estimate should also be finalized, along with appropriate funding details.
Applicable supporting documentation, such as all discipline-specific Scoping summaries,
should be included or attached to the final Scoping document. This Scoping document is
an essential project document. The PM should bring this to every subsequent milestone
meeting, and use it as a guide to ensure the project is progressing as intended. If the project
is deviating from this document, the PM should initiate Change Management procedures.
The Scoping Form or Report is not official until it is approved by the appropriate
authority. This approval may be required by different levels and different organizations.
For instance, a locality may approve its Scoping Report, which is then submitted to the
state DOT for various approvals. Often the cost or complexity of the project dictates at what
level approval is required. This should inherently convey the importance of the Scoping
process in setting up the project for development success. The final Scoping document is
approved when the final signature is secured.
The third and fourth steps of closing scoping are to implement the Scoping Schedule and
Scoping Estimate. This will often involve adjusting schedules in whatever scheduling software
or tools are being used. Similar adjustments will need to be made with the Estimates. More
mature organizations may leverage these Scoping Schedules and Estimates in performance
metrics to gauge future progress. This Schedule and Estimate are also key management princi-
ples to help the PM effectively manage the project and future expectations.
74 4 Scope
Closing scoping will transition the project from the Scoping Phase into the Preliminary
Design Phase of project development. Scoping clarifies the project path of the journey for-
ward. At this point the PM has the Budget, Scope, and Schedule triple constraint clearly
defined. Time to get to work!
4.2 Schedule and Budget Baselines
“In God we trust, all others must bring data.”

– W. Edward Deming
Scoping positions your feet securely under you for the remainder of the project. During this
process you qualitatively identify risks, and then quantitatively convert them to time and
money impacts. When you formally close scoping, you establish the triple constraint of
budget, scope, and schedule.
The scope portion of this triple constraint is the confident understanding of the problem,
solution, applicable design criteria, and deliverable requirements. The schedule and budget
are reflected in the Scoping Schedule and Budget baselines. These are often the baselines
by which your actual task completion dates and future estimates are measured against to
evaluate performance through the remainder of project development. As such, focused
care should be given to their formation.
Organizational guidance should be used in determining how to weigh risks and their
impacts. It is not reasonable or realistic to assume 100% of your schedule or budget risks
will be realized. Similarly, it is not reasonable or realistic to assume 0% of your schedule or
budget risks will be realized. There are established mathematical models to assist in deter-
mining reasonable ways to normalize risk which are described in Chapter 6, Managing
Risk. Regardless of the method employed, the organization’s culture and risk tolerance play
an important role in determining how the identified risks are incorporated in the Scoping
Schedule and Budget baselines. Pending the project specifics, there may also be external
factors (e.g., political pressures, funding requirements, special events, etc.) that drive the
scoping schedule or budget baseline. A PM’s greatest challenge can be juggling these non-
technical constraints that conflict with the technical realities. In these circumstances,
managing expectations is key to success. This topic is discussed in detail in Chapter 10,
Controlling the Project, Section 10.1, Managing Expectations.
Whether by an organizational schedule template, past experience, or a project-specific
effort, the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) should be established during Scoping. Many
transportation organizations have established schedule guidance. This can range from
previous project knowledge to formal schedule templates by project type. During scoping,
the PM should carefully examine the schedule and WBS, which may result in adding or
deleting tasks. More likely, you will adjust the established task durations to account for risks,
opportunities, and resources. This is not an opportunity to arbitrarily extend the schedule to
create a generous buffer. That is neither right, nor especially clever. Rather the scoping
schedule baseline is an opportunity to right-size the schedule to the specifics of the project.
Remember the big picture of project schedules is to balance driving project development
with current realities, while ensuring the right amount of the right type of money is in the
4.3 Roles and Responsibilities 75
right place at the right time. This requires schedules to be honest, credible, and achievable.
Arbitrarily extending the schedule out of ignorance, incompetence, or undefined uncer-
tainties, as opposed to evaluated risks, often cause funding issues later on that will unneces-
sarily delay the project.
Condensing or extending project schedules from the initial template should be justified with
an associated risk. At scoping you should revisit your project’s assumption log. All assump-
tions have an associated risk. When a risk is identified, it is typically qualitative in nature.
Those with experience and expertise will more accurately convert these risks to quantitative
schedule adjustments. All assumptions and decisions should be appropriately documented in
project documents. The PM should then adjust the schedule accordingly before it is set as the
Scoping Baseline Schedule.
Although both are established at formal scoping acceptance, the Schedule Baseline
should be finalized before the Budget Baseline. This is because the base cost estimate
(expressed in today’s dollars) will need to be adjusted for contingencies and inflation, both
of which are dependent upon when the various project development and delivery activities
occur. Contingencies, management reserves, and inflation should be applied to the project
per organizational guidance. More details can be found in Chapter 3, Budgets and Estimates.
4.3 Roles and Responsibilities
“Sometimes a player’s greatest challenge is coming to grips with his role on the team.”
– Scottie Pippen
It is said the most efficient form of government is a benevolent dictator. Conversely, the
most oppressive form of government can be a tyrannical dictator. The difference is deter-
mined by the respect for, or abuse of, absolute power. To temper this risk, democratic
republics, democracies, and most other western forms of government have established a
clear distinction between the separation of powers. These checks and balances strive to
limit abuse of power and ensure public good is pursued.
This same principle holds true in the planning, management, and execution of public
transportation projects. There are separate and defined tasks and roles. Often these require
vastly different skill sets and are performed by different people, in different divisions, in
different organizations, all working together for the public good.
In the example above, efficiency can increase and delivery can be expedited if roles are
consolidated under a benevolent dictator. Conversely, efficiencies can quickly go off the rails
and abuse can run rampant if roles are consolidated under a tyrannical dictator. An experi-
enced and talented PM can sometimes act as a benevolent dictator, streamlining operations
and forwarding progress in a way that benefits all. A PM may also knowingly or unknow-
ingly assume the tyrannical dictator role if they are inexperienced, incompetent, or have
more nefarious motivations. Given public projects are using public funds that are to be
expended for public good, it is typical a system of checks and balances are established to
encourage responsible behavior and limit the opportunities for abuse.
There are defined roles within a project. Pending the size and complexity of the project,
and your organization’s requirements and practices, not all of these roles may be recognized
76 4 Scope
or assigned. Likewise, some of these roles may be filled by the same person, especially on
smaller projects or in smaller organizations. It is also possible there are redundant positions
at different levels (e.g., federal, state, local, and consultant levels). Regardless, the function
of each role may need to be done. And it is important each role perform that function, but
stay in their lane to do so. Typical transportation project-related roles include:
● Project Sponsor – the individual whose support and approval are required for a project to
start and continue, and is ultimately responsible for enabling project success
● Project Manager (PM) – the individual assigned by the organization to lead the team in
developing and delivering the project within the established budget, scope, and schedule
● Project Champion – an informal role of one who makes the project success a personal
responsibility by pushing the team, liaising with stakeholders on behalf of the project,
and supporting the PM
● Functional Manager – one of authority over organizations, divisions, or disciplines with
which the PM will work to facilitate successful project development and delivery
● Project Team Leader – one who supports the PM in leading an aspect of the project team
in accomplishing a task or set of tasks
● Team Member – one who contributes by working to complete a project-related task, in
full or in part
● Stakeholder – any individual, group, or organization who may affect, be affected by, or
perceive to be affected by the development or delivery of the project
● Planning and Investment Manager – the individual who ensures appropriate funding is
properly obligated, allocated, and positioned so the project can advance according to the
established schedule
● Project Development Engineer – upper management individual responsible to execute
development and delivery of the project in accordance with approved program
● Agency Liaison/Project Ambassador – one who represents the project or organization to
other organizations, external agencies, the media, and stakeholders
● Senior Leadership – influential division or department directors
● Executive Leadership – individuals at the highest level of leadership within an organization,
typically the top person in every major silo or hierarchical pyramid within the organization
● Project Management Office (PMO) – central body that establishes, administers, and
maintains organization’s project methodologies, procedures, and tools
● Subject Matter Expert (SME)/Technical Leader – individual whose expertise, typically
discipline dependent, is critical to project advancement
● Governing Board(s) – authoritative state or local board that oversees projects, approves
funds, awards contracts, and bears the ultimate financial responsibility for the project
and program
There may be other individuals and organizations that impact your project. This can
especially be true on the funding side where FHWA, Metropolitan Planning Organizations
(MPOs), regional taxing authorities, and others may play a role. Many organizations strive
to intentionally separate time and money roles on a project, ensuring different individuals
fill the authoritative financial (Project Investment Manager) and project development
(Project Development Engineer) roles. This approach ensures no one person has complete
control of the project’s financial resources. For instance, if the project schedule or budget
changes, another individual must be involved in the allocation/obligation of additional

funds and financial adjustments within the organization’s multi-year improvement plan.
It is common that the PM may wear many of these hats at one time or another in the life
of a project. Particularly on smaller projects or in smaller organizations, the most common
role combination may be that of PM and lead roadway designer. In this circumstance, you
need to remember these are two very different roles. When wearing one hat, remain true to
that role. Same with the other. These dual roles can be challenging, and require a disciplined
approach to maintain balance both in time management and project objectives.
Inherently the PM is responsible to facilitate and coordinate most project-related rela-
tionships and communications. As such, the PM is responsible to document the Project
Team, Management Team, and key stakeholders in the Project Management Plan. This
should be updated if or when project roles and responsibilities change throughout the life
of the project.
4.4 Scope Management
“Management is, above all, a practice where art, science, and craft meet.”
– Henry Mintzberg
Project Management Institute’s (PMI’s) Project Management Book of Knowledge (PMBOK)

carefully lays out their six scope management processes that walk you from initial planning
to scope determination to management and control during project development. While these
processes are all directly applicable, the transportation project workflow necessitates some
adjustment from PMI’s traditional definitions. Figure 4.2 shows the six project management
processes, a description of its purpose, and the desired outcomes, or deliverables, of each.
Proper Scope Management begins with establishing a Scope Management Plan. The
purpose of this is to capture how the scope will be defined, approved, managed, and con-
trolled throughout the life of the project. In many transportation organizations this
approach is already documented and dictated in formal policies, tools, and practices that
are outlined in established procedures. Additionally, many transportation organizations
have established, detailed criteria of acceptable deliverables throughout project development
and delivery. This established guidance should be leveraged whenever possible. There is no
need to reinvent the wheel, or risk missing or violating key elements of organizational pro-
tocols. If a Scope Management Plan is being prepared, this section will often refer to
established organizational standards and expectations. The notable exceptions are unique
or especially complex projects or procurements that dictate new or unusual design consul-
tant relationships or acceptance of risk. Large design-build projects are an example where
the project will likely have a project-specific contract that dictates the terms of agreement
in a way that may supersede other organizational practices and preferences.
In order to effectively manage anything, you must understand the objectives. Collecting
requirements can be a daunting effort. Similar to other industries, the problem you are try-
ing to solve needs to be defined. A solution approach should be determined and vetted to
determine if it is reasonable before proceeding with a detailed design. Success criteria
should be carefully determined. Many transportation projects then move beyond normal
78 4 Scope
Scoping Steps Description Outputs
Create Scope Management Scope

Plan Plan that details how scope Management
Scope will be defined, developed, Plan
Management monitored, and controlled
Define problem project will Purpose

Collect solve, capture stakeholder and
Requirements requirements, define project Need
objectives and success criteria
Develop a detailed descripton

of project approach, solution, Project
Define roles/responsibilities, and Scope
Scope deliverables
Adjust templates to finalize Schedule

WBS, establish Schedule and Budget
Create
Baseline, adjust estimate to Baselines
Baselines
schedule for Budget Baseline
Assemble scoping document

Approved
Validate and secure formal scoping
Scoping
Scope approval, and criteria for
Document
acceptance of deliverables
How will Scope, and

Change
interdependencies of triple
Control Management
constraint, be monitored and
Scope Protocol
controlled throughout project
Figure 4.2 Scope management.
product specifications and begin stakeholder engagement. This effort can be critical to
refining success criteria and managing expectations through the project. This process gen-
erates the Purpose and Need, which is critical to advance the project. This Purpose and
Need can bear legal significance should the project require a public hearing in order to
exercise eminent domain for acquisitions. A public need is required. The basis of this is the
project’s Purpose and Need.
After requirements are collected, the scope is defined. The scope details the project’s
description, project approach, solution, roles and responsibilities, and deliverables. In
short, it captures all that must be accomplished in order for the project to be deemed a suc-
cess. This is a technical document. While it will not include all design features or specifica-
tions, it will detail the minimum deliverables. For instance, the scope may not include the
detailed pavement section or storm drainage design, but it may specify a Class II roadway
with curb and gutter and an enclosed storm drainage system. The scope is the baseline of
what is to be delivered. As PM, you need to understand it. You should frequently refer to it,
and highlight it at major milestone team meetings. The scope is the basis by which the
project is defined. Know it, and fiercely defend it.
Once the Scope is defined, you need to create the schedule and budget baselines. This
effort is incredibly important. Remember one of the fundamental goals of transportation
projects is to accurately schedule and execute the work so the right amount of the right type
of money is at the right place at the right time for the project to efficiently advance.
Transportation professionals often use the same word with different meanings. Scope
can refer to the process of collecting and examining project details to determine the selected
solution. Scope can also refer to the document that describes the project details and success
criteria. Scope may also be a specific project task in the WBS. If your project schedule
includes a scoping task, it is not complete unless and until you have the full triple con-
straint complement of budget, scope, and schedule that may become the established base-
line for the remainder of the project development. The complete scoping document, that
includes the budget, scope, and schedule, should be reviewed and formally approved, per
your organizational protocols. This formal approval is your organization’s promise to the
public regarding this project. It establishes the baselined triple constraint that is the basis
by which all future change management considerations will be measured and evaluated.
Controlling the Scope is the only scope management process that is not in the project
planning stage. Controlling the scope occurs continually throughout the life of the project.
Success requires an observant and vigilant PM who is fiercely protective of the project’s triple
constraint while faithfully following your organization’s change management procedures. If
your organization does not have change management procedures in place, you should create
them for your projects and document them in the Project Management Plan. While change
may be inevitable, successful change management requires consistency and discipline.
Change management is not only the foundational principle of controlling the budget, scope,
and schedule, it is the quiet secret ingredient to almost every successful project. This is dis-
cussed in detail in Chapter 10, Controlling the Project, Section 10.3, Change Management.
4.4.1 Scope Threats

There are countless examples of scope threats that may endanger or hinder project advance-
ment. As PM, you need to be particularly aware and wary of scope threats. Your job as PM
is to develop and deliver the project within the established triple constraint of budget,
scope, and schedule. If the scope needs to be changed, great. But do it correctly. Follow
established change management procedures to evaluate the impact of the change and
obtain formal approval. This isn’t being absurdly bureaucratic; it is being realistic and
responsible. Your job is to defend the triple constraint.
Scope threats are project risks. As such, they should be logged and addressed according
to the project’s risk management plans, tools, and procedures. Many scope threats fall into
the following categories of Triple Constraint, Scope Creep, and Gold Plating.
4.4.2 Triple Constraint

With lengthy development durations, swaying electoral priorities, budgetary challenges,
stakeholder involvement, adjacent developments, and a myriad of seemingly unrelated
80 4 Scope
and unlimited factors, the one constant experienced PMs know very well in complex trans-
portation projects is most often change. Chapter 1, Project Management 101, Section 10.2,
Triple Constraint, details the unique relationship in project management between budget,
scope, and schedule. These three constraints are inherently and interdependently
connected. One cannot change without impacting the other two. It is rare that any trans-
portation project will not face some stress on one of these constraints that will necessitate
adjustment of the other two.
Be it via a well-intentioned, carefully-orchestrated deliberate action, or incompetence,
the results may look much the same. If your budget is cut, you may need to accelerate your
schedule or trim scope. If your schedule lags, you may need to increase your budget or
reduce scope. If your scope expands, you may need to increase your budget and/or schedule.
As PM, you need to be fiercely protective of your triple constraint. Only a fool adjusts
scope without considering and adjusting their budget and schedule. This line can be remark-
ably difficult to maintain in the midst of political and community pressures to expand scope.
These requests often begin with noble intensions to practice responsive customer service
that seeks to optimize stakeholder satisfaction. But actions have consequences.
It can be difficult to stand up in a public meeting and explain to a group of well-meaning
citizens that their requested sidewalk extension that would connect a now existing gap
cannot be accommodated because it is outside of the project scope, budget, and schedule.
That task can become more daunting when the elected leader conveys you will reexamine
that issue. The night may get even more difficult if an elected leader commits to installing
it, when you know it is outside of the project boundaries and will require you to collect
additional survey, modify all of your environmental permits, adjust drainage, acquire more
rights-of way, move additional expensive underground utilities, and so forth.
Charles R. Swindoll said, “Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% how you react.”
Regardless of the motivation of the changed condition or constraint, how you react is cru-
cial. As PM, you must remain firm in practicing applicable change management proce-
dures. Maybe adding that sidewalk is a great idea? And if the budget and schedule can
accommodate that scope change, terrific. If they can’t, agreeing to the scope expansion in
hopes it will all somehow work out later is an irresponsible response that most often leads
to disaster.
4.4.3 Scope Creep

Scope creep is often one of the most common challenges a transportation PM faces. As pro-
jects advance, additional stakeholders emerge, conditions change, and elections bring new
leaders and priorities. Scope creep is especially dangerous when it occurs in gradual, minor,
incremental changes that often are directly or implicitly accepted without a formal change
management evaluation or approval. Although it may seem like you or your organization
are being nimble in positively responding to stakeholder needs and desires, scope creep is
always a real risk to your project success. Scope creep represents unapproved expansions in
scope while not correspondingly adjusting the project’s budget and schedule. Even if the
resulting budget and schedule impacts are not immediately evident, they will inevitably
appear, usually with a vengeance. Unlike fine wines, triple constraint issues do not improve
with time.
Good, bad, and crazy project ideas can and will come from most any and all sources. Some
of these are brilliant and innovate; others test the definitions of reasonableness and common
sense. As PM, you should be the primary gatekeeper of the scope. Ideas should come through
you. Your charge is not to express your preference, but rather to determine if the idea war-
rants further attention. If it does, then you should proceed with applicable change management
procedures, as established and accepted by your organization. This includes evaluating the
resulting impact to budget, scope, and schedule, along with other critical nontechnical con-
siderations or success criteria. Unless you unilaterally control the budget, scope, and schedule,
then you are not formally approving or rejecting the change. Your job is to ensure the poten-
tial change is properly evaluated, and if approved, appropriate adjustments are made to the
budget, scope, and schedule to position the project for success.
4.4.4 Gold-Plating
Whereas Scope Creep involves new ideas to add to the project scope, Gold-Plating is mod-
ifying or improving upon existing scope components. This may seem less dangerous, but
Gold-Plating can represent an enormous risk to your project if left unchecked. Imagine a
project that is to construct a new four lane bridge over a state highway. The project scope
clearly defines the structure’s required dimensions, design criteria, and applicable stan-
dards. After public hearing, as the project advances to final design, an active community
group decides the bridge should accommodate progressive bike and pedestrian accommo-
dations. Local businesses submit a lengthy petition requesting the bridge be more aesthet-
ically pleasing with some distinctive architectural features that retain and emphasize the
unique character of the corridor. Soon the elected leader summons you into their office to
explain their vision that this bridge will be the signature gateway to their community. You
calmly explain that the project budget and schedule are based upon the scoped bridge.
They reply, that hasn’t changed, we still want that bridge, just with a couple additional fea-
tures and improvements that will significantly boost stakeholder satisfaction.
The scope establishes the minimum and maximum of what should be delivered. Adding
features or improvements to existing scope components that exceed standards or success
criteria, as defined in the approved scope, represent real risks to the project budget and
schedule. A community that just before advertisement desires more expensive street lights
or decorative street signs and posts is requesting Gold-Plating. If managed correctly, your
project estimate should not be able to absorb the costs of gold-plating existing scope com-
ponents. And even if the budget can absorb the cost increase, as public transportation pro-
fessionals, we are called to be responsible stewards of public funds. As such, changes such
as these should be processed and formally approved using applicable change management
procedures.
83
Schedule
“A schedule defends from chaos and whim. It is a net for catching days. It is a scaffold-
ing on which a worker can stand and labor with both hands at sections of time.”
– Annie Dillard
When a friend or family member has a baby, the two most common questions are: is it a
boy or a girl, and what is its name. These are natural, expected, and eminently reasonable.
Similarly, when discussing a transportation project, the two most basic questions are: how
much will it cost and when will it be completed.
A well-crafted schedule creates and maintains order amidst chaos. The schedule is an
essential component of the triple constraint. Not only does it shape expectations for
development and delivery, but it is the fundamental framework by which resources are
allocated, funding is programmed, cash flow is planned, and inflation impacts are incorpo-
rated into cost estimates.
5.1 Critical Path Method (CPM)

“How does a project get to be a year late? One day at a time.”
– Frederick Brooks
While there are a variety of scheduling methodologies, the majority of transportation pro-
jects and programs are best run using the Critical Path Method (CPM). The CPM is a
proven mathematically-based scheduling algorithm developed in the 1950s. It is a pow-
erful approach that enables PMs to proactively manage their projects and promotes on-
time and on-budget delivery. CPM scheduling analysis can quickly assess your current
progress, where tasks can be run in parallel, the shortest time when a project can be
complete, when and where resources will be stretched thin, and the most important tasks
upon which you should focus to keep your project moving forward. The CPM is built upon
three core foundational elements: tasks, task durations, and task interdependencies. Once
the foundation is established, the model can then be enhanced by tailoring it to project
specifics or organizational preferences.

84 5 Schedule
5.1.1 Tasks
The first step is to define the list of all tasks required to complete the project. A Task is a
discrete and defined process that can be assigned resource(s) and has associated costs.
Each task, or activity, should be an action that pushes the project forward. These should
not be Cover Your Ass (CYA) events or checks. Tasks should be a verb plus a noun (e.g.,
execute contract, deliver plans, secure Rights-of-Way, etc.). Tasks will then be ordered and
connected in the schedule network with constraints and dependencies.
If starting from nothing, these would be logically arranged within a Work Breakdown
Structure (WBS), which is a comprehensive hierarchical model of the deliverables that
comprise the project scope. The WBS is the holistic project picture that is composed of
smaller components. Effort within the WBS is defined by Work Packages, which are the
lowest-level of deliverables where cost and duration can be estimated and managed. Most
transportation organizations have the project activities already well defined in their Project
Development Plan. More mature organizations may have project templates where these
tasks are already selected and tailored for you based upon project specifics.
5.1.2 Task Durations

The Task Duration is the time it takes to complete a task. This is the delta, or difference,
between the start and finish dates.
Most transportation organizations will have established standards, or accepted rules of
thumb, for task durations, or span lengths for series of tasks. Predominantly these are
based on historic precedents. This means past performances for similar tasks in similar
projects are used as the basis for time estimates. Some organizations may have parametric
scheduling tools where project durations are based upon project specific criteria. Others
may do a three-point estimation, which applies a weighted average to the optimistic, pessi-
mistic, and most likely time projections. Still others may do a full bottoms-up time estimate
for each task. However, you determine your preliminary schedule, it is imperative that you
tailor it to your own project specifics.
The typical duration unit for transportation projects is days. This may be Calendar Days,
or the preferred Working Days. Using Working Days will require your organization to cre-
ate a custom calendar that only includes days your organization is working, removing all
weekends and holidays. While more effort up front, this approach is more accurate as the
number of actual workdays in each month can vary widely. Each organization should
intentionally define this duration unit, and strive to be consistent across all systems.
The duration units may be hours if an organization is using the scheduling tool to fully
resource load each task. This means the organization is using the scheduling tool to also
track time, resources, effort, and money attached to each task. Some larger design-build
projects, or mega-projects, may do this. They can have a team of scheduling experts to cre-
ate and manage an extremely detailed project-specific scheduling model that tracks time,
cost, and effort. Practically, most transportation organizations separate their scheduling,
financial, and time tracking functionalities into different systems. Additionally, most
transportation projects do not benefit from this extreme level of detail. However, all trans-
portation projects benefit from a CPM schedule. Pending the size and complexity of the
project, the schedule could have ten or hundreds of tasks. Determining the expected
schedule level of granularity is an enterprise-wide decision each Agency must make.
Eventually you will practically reach the point of diminishing returns, where adding addi-
tional tasks and resources actually reduces productivity. Experience will help you find this
sweet spot where your tasks capture the essence of your project development, and enable
you to drive productivity.
More mature organizations may include other events on their schedules that are not
tasks. A Milestone is a specific schedule event. These may serve as triggers to involve
others or decision anchors within the project development process. Milestones typically
have zero durations, no resources, and no work. While they do not impact the project
schedule, they represent significant project progress points worth tracking or celebrating.
Some milestones may represent a project Gate, which is a process through which a
project must successfully pass to move to the next authorized phase of work. A Summary
task, or Parent task, is a created task that visually represents the combined information
of a set of related subtasks. Summary tasks are for reference use only, and are typically
displayed in BOLD print in the project outline. In general, avoid assigning resources to
Summary tasks, and do not enter dates or change constraints on summary tasks. Let the
scheduling engine automatically roll up this information, including the duration, from
the subtasks.
5.1.3 Task Interdependencies

Once all tasks have been identified and durations determined, they then need to be sequen-
tially positioned to represent the intended workflow. All tasks need to be somehow
connected to at least one other task.
Task interdependencies are captured in
the following four types of relationships Finish to Start (FS)
between tasks. These dependencies link Predecessor Start of Successor dependent
upon completion of
two tasks and determine when the Predecessor
Successor task may start. A Predecessor
Successor
task comes immediately before another
task and determines the start or finish date Predecessor
of the following activity based upon the Lag
schedule logic. A Successor task comes Successor
immediately after another task, and Figure 5.1 Finish to Start relationship.
depends upon the task immediately pre-
ceding it. Start to Start (SS)
Figure 5.1 shows the Finish to Start (FS) Predecessor Start of Successor dependent
upon start of Predecessor
relationships, where the Successor task
cannot start until a Predecessor task has Successor
finished. FS is the most common, and
preferred, relationship. Predecessor
Figure 5.2 shows the Start to Start (SS) Lag
relationship, where the Successor task Successor
cannot start until the Predecessor activity Figure 5.2 Start to Start relationship.
86 5 Schedule
Start to Finish (FS) has started. SS relationships often have associ-

Finish of Successor
dependent upon start Predecessor ated leads or lags.
of Predecessor
Figure 5.3 shows the Start to Finish (SF) rela-
Successor tionship, where the Successor task cannot
Predecessor
finish until the Predecessor task has started.
Lag
This is the least commonly used task
Successor relationship.
Figure 5.4 shows the Finish to Finish (FF)
Figure 5.3 Start to Finish relationship.
relationship, where the Successor task cannot
finish until the Predecessor task has finished. FF
relationships often have associated leads or lags.
Finish to Finish (FF) Incorrect relationships can cause inconsis-
Finish of Successor Predecessor tencies in the CPM schedule. Two of the most
dependent upon finish of
Predecessor
common are a Loop and Open End Task. A
Predecessor Successor Loop is a logic error where a Successor task
Lag attempts to start prior to a Predecessor task. An
Open End Task is any project task without a
Successor predecessor or a successor task. When present,
both of these must be fixed in order for the
Figure 5.4 Finish to Finish relationship.
scheduling engine to properly run the algorithm.
5.1.4 Leads and Lags

Leads and lags are ways to offset the schedule logic in order to further customize the
schedule beyond relationship dependencies. Lags are delays in the successor tasks and can
be applied to all relationship types. Leads are accelerations of the successor tasks and can
be used only on a Finish-to-Start dependency relationship.
Many scheduling software tools define these both as lags. Lags have a positive time unit
and extend the dependency. Leads would then have a negative time unit and advance the
dependency. Lags are often inserted into schedules to accommodate internal process con-
straints. There are no resources associated with leads and lags.
5.1.5 Common Task Constraints

Each task may be further tailored with constraints. A Constraint is a limitation placed on
the project that must be accommodated during development and delivery. There are eight
types of common schedule constraints. The following six types are “hard constraints,”
meaning they have a specific date that restricts the task:
● Start No Earlier Than constrains a task by requiring it to start after a specified date.
● Start No Later Than constrains a task by requiring it to start before a specified date.
● Finish No Earlier Than constrains a task by requiring it to finish after a specified date.
● Finish No Later Than constrains a task by requiring it to finish before a specified date.
● Must Start On constrains a task by requiring it to start on a specified date.
● Must Finish On constrains a task by requiring it to finish on a specified date.
The following two types are “soft constraints,” meaning they do not have a specific date
restriction associated with the task:
● As Late As Possible dictates the successor task starts as late as possible. This constraint
intentionally consumes all available float. This is typically used in backward scheduling
where you begin with the final deadline and work backward to the project start.
● As Soon As Possible dictates the successor task starts as soon as possible based on rela-
tionship dependencies. This is typically used on forward scheduling where you plan the
tasks based upon an early milestone. Most public transportation projects should be
scheduled using this constraint as it introduces flexibility by intentionally preserving
float while it minimizes the risk of schedule slippage.
5.1.6 Float
Float, or Slack, represents schedule flexibility. This is the amount of time a task can be
delayed without causing project delays. Technically slack is associated with inactivity,
meaning an activity can start later than originally planned; and float is associated with
activity, meaning an activity can take longer than originally planned. Practically, most use
these terms interchangeably.
There are different types of float, and it is important to understand which type is being
discussed. Free Float is the time a task can be delayed without impacting the early start of
successive tasks. This is the time a task can be delayed with no downstream schedule conse-
quences. Total Float is the time a task can be delayed without impacting the project comple-
tion date. The Total Float is shared across the series of tasks. Project Float is the time a project
can be delayed without impacting an externally imposed project deadline set by executive
leadership. Independent Float is the time a task can be delayed if all predecessor tasks are as
late as possible and all successor tasks are as early as possible. Interfering Float is the time a
task can be delayed without delaying the project’s planned completion date. Tasks on the
critical path, by definition, have no float.
Negative float, or slack, indicates there is not enough time scheduled for the completion.
It represents the amount of time beyond the project completion date a task requires. The
most common cause for negative slack is when task constraint dates are introduced that
cannot be met given task durations or schedule logic. When negative float, or slack, is pre-
sent, the schedule must be adjusted to eliminate it. Critical path tasks with negative slack
are called Hypercritical.
5.1.7 Critical Path Basics

The Critical Path is the sequence of project tasks that most quickly finishes the project. This
means the chain of tasks that has zero float. As such, any delay to a critical path task will
delay the project completion.
Any task with zero float is a Critical Task. The Critical Path is the sequence of critical
tasks, which is the shortest time possible to complete the project. Any delay of any critical
task will impact the critical path and delay the project.
88 5 Schedule
Near-critical path is a series of activities with very small amounts of total float. A near-
critical path may become a critical path if its float is exhausted. Near-critical tasks are those
activities with very small float. These should be watched closely as near-critical tasks can
quickly become critical tasks, which may have far-reaching project implications.
5.1.8 Network Path

The project schedule should be consistent with, and not conflict with, your organization’s
Project Development Process (PDP). The PDP are the rules by which you play the transpor-
tation game. It is imperative the schedule accurately reflects this established workflow. If it
does not, then you are playing a losing hand, trying to fit a round peg into a square hole.
The Network Diagram is a visual representation of how the project tasks are ordered and
related. This workflow is a powerful project management tool that can capture available
flexibility and enable streamlining the sequences of critical or parallel tasks. In order for
the project to be successful, these tasks must be in the same order as the PDP so that the
dominoes can fall in the needed sequence.
A Network Path in a series of sequential tasks within the network diagram. These can be
useful when considering a specific engineering discipline or other logically related tasks.
Path Convergence is when a network path has multiple predecessors. Path Divergence is
when a network path has multiple successors.
5.1.9 Three Sets of Dates

To begin to grasp the power within the CPM, it is important that you understand there are
three sets of start and finish dates for each task: Planned, Current, and Actual. Understanding
the purpose of each is essential to successful schedule management.
● Planned dates are the dates a task is planned to occur. These are the baselines, by which
performance should be measured against in applicable performance metrics.
● Current dates are the current schedule of when tasks should occur. These are the most
up-to-date estimates of when a task will start and finish. They use the last actual dates and
then dynamically adjust the remaining schedule based upon established schedule logic.
● Actual dates are the dates the task actually happened.
5.1.10 Forward and Backward Pass

The Critical Path Method uses an algorithm to determine the Critical Path. Most all CPM
scheduling is now done by specialized software. But there is value in quickly reviewing
how one would go about calculating these values by hand.
To begin, let us assume you have determined your project has seven tasks that can be
arranged in the following workflow due to their task dependencies, as depicted in Figure
5.5. Let us also assume you have already determined each task duration in days.
For this exercise, each task is represented by a six-sectioned box that is partitioned with
the following assignments, as shown in Figure 5.6.
The Forward Pass starts at the beginning of the project and calculates each task’s early
start and early finish dates. Early Start (ES) is the earliest date a task can start given the
schedule’s logic and constraints. Early Finish (EF) is the earliest date a task can logically
finish given the schedule’s logic and constraints.
Numbers will be placed in each box. For transportation projects, the units for all six
boxes are typically in days. Refer to Figure 5.7 as you read the description below.
One potentially confusing element is that you count each workday. This means ES and
LS are the beginning of the workday, while EF and LF are the end of the workday. For
example, the ES for Task A is Day 1 and the task duration (D) is 2 days. To calculate the EF,
Task A Task B Task C
Task D Task E Task G
Task F
Figure 5.5 CPM example workflow.
Duration (D)
Early Start (ES) Early Finish (EF)
Late Start (LS) Late Finish (LF)
Float (F)
Figure 5.6 CPM task detail box.

1 2 2 3 7 9 10 5 14

1 6 6 7 3 9 15 1 15
Task F
1 4 4
Figure 5.7 CPM example forward pass.

90 5 Schedule
you add the D to the ES (EF = ES + D). So, the EF for Task A is Day 2. This is because the
task begins (ES) at the start of Day 1, then add a duration of two full workdays, which is all
of Day 1 and all of Day 2. The EF is the end of Day 2. This thinking cascades to subsequent
tasks, so the ES of Task B (the immediate downstream task) would be start of Day 3.
Similarly, the EF for Task B is end of Day 9, so the ES for Task C is the start of Day 10.
This workflow has three separate parallel paths that converge at Task G. Since Task A, D,
and F have no start constraints, the ES of each is Day 1. They could all start at the beginning
of Day 1. You calculate the EF of each task in the manner described above until you
complete all concurrent paths that converge to Task G. When done, you know the EF for
the Task A track is 14, the EF for the Task D track is 9, and the EF for the Task F track is 4.
The workflow logic dictates Task G cannot start until all the previous tasks are complete.
As such, the latest EF is end of Day 14, which means the earliest ES for Task G is start of
Day 15. With a duration of 1 day, this means the EF of Task G is end of Day 15.
These forward pass calculations provide you with valuable information that is summa-
rized in the Figure 5.7. Perhaps most important, is that it is required to enable you to
complete the backward pass that determines float.
The Backward Pass, as shown in Figure 5.8, starts at the end of the project and calculates
each task’s late start, late finish, and float. Late Start (LS) is the latest date a task can start
without delaying the rest of the project. Late Finish (LF) is the latest date a task can finish
without delaying the rest of the project. The LF often equals the EF; however, there are times
when the LF may be an external constraint. Examples may be, needing to complete the road
improvement before the start of the college football season to support the increased traffic
flow, needing to complete the improvement to enable a scheduled special event, or needing
to complete the improvement before election day. Float is the delta between LS and ES.
In our example, the EF of Task G is the end of Day 15. This is also the latest Task G can
finish, so the LF of Task G is the end of Day 15, as shown in Figure 5.8. The LS is the LF – D,
which is End of Day 15 minus one workday, so LS is the start of Day 15. Float is then cal-
culated by subtracting ES from LS. For Task G, F = 0 days since ES = LS.
For all immediately preceding tasks, the LF is the day prior to the following LS. So, if the
latest Task G can start is beginning of Day 15, then the latest Tasks, C, E, and F can finish

1 2 2 3 7 9 10 5 14
1 0 2 3 0 9 10 0 14

1 6 6 7 3 9 15 1 15
6 5 11 12 5 14 15 0 15
Task F
1 4 4
11 10 14
Figure 5.8 CPM example backward pass.

is end of Day 14. Subtract the duration of each of these tasks to determine the respective LS.
Remember working days, so Task C, for instance, has a LF of end of Day 14, with a LS of
start of Day 10 to accommodate the Duration of five working days. Repeat these backward
pass steps for each task in each parallel path.
For Task E, you can see the LS is start of Day 12 while the ES is start of Day 7. Subtracting
these two values gives you a float of 5 days. Similarly, Task F has a Float of 10 days.
Once the forward and backward pass have been completed for all tasks, you can begin to
harness the power of CPM. All tasks with F = 0 are critical path tasks, as shown in Figure 5.9.
None of these can be delayed without directly delaying the project finish. As such, these
deserve your prime attention. The critical path of these critical tasks must keep moving for-
ward in order to achieve project success.
Critical Path (F=0)

1 2 2 3 7 9 10 5 14
1 0 2 3 0 9 10 0 14

1 6 6 7 3 9 15 1 15
6 5 11 12 5 14 15 0 15
Task F
1 4 4
11 10 14
Figure 5.9 CPM example critical path.
Understanding the significance of the LS and F may provide insight into optimizing
resource allocations. In this example, Task F may start anytime between Day 1 and Day 10
and still not be critical, but on day 11 task F becomes a critical path task. The resource for
Task F may have other work for other projects that are more urgent. Grasping the collective
intelligence and insights of tasks across project lines provides Program and Portfolio
Managers with powerful insights that can dramatically increase efficiencies and optimize
productivity.
As PM, you should regularly update and evaluate the schedule. Actual dates should be
promptly entered. This allows the schedule engine to churn and update the downstream
tasks based upon the established project logic. This is essential in order to determine if any
near-critical tasks have become critical.
5.1.11 Gantt Chart

Most scheduling software applications are able to graphically display the schedule in a
Gantt chart. These can be extremely useful in visualizing the workflow, highlighting the
critical path, and managing the schedule. A Gantt chart is a bar chart where tasks are listed
on the vertical axis and project time is the horizontal axis. Task durations are displayed as
92 5 Schedule
horizontal bars that are tied to start and finish dates on the horizontal axis, and connected
with applicable relationships.
Pending the size of the project, the Gantt chart can become quite large. You may need a
plotter to print it. But it is worth it to print it and display it. This encourages the schedule
to become a concrete reality that all can see, subconsciously accelerating team buy-in. The
schedule is no longer the PM’s schedule, but the project schedule. Everyone should have
ownership and be vested in its success. An updated Gantt chart can be a powerful visual
anchor for the team that clearly shows where you are and what needs to happen when, to
move forward. This simple act can build team trust and encourage collaboration as trans-
parent expectations inherently encourage individual and collective accountability.
Figure 5.10 shows the Gantt chart for the provided example. Some CPM software may be
able to be customized to show additional information such as task owner, percent complete,
or other project data.
Start Stop Duration Days

Task Predecessor Successor
(Day) (Day) (Days) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
A 1 2 2 B
B 3 9 7 A C
C 10 14 5 B G
D 1 6 6 E
E 7 9 3 D G
F 1 4 4 G
G 15 15 1
Figure 5.10 CPM example Gantt chart.
5.2 Schedule Management Plan
“The bad news is time flies. The good news is you’re the pilot.”
– Michael Altshuler
A Schedule Management Plan describes how the project schedule will be managed during
the project. The plan provides guidance on the organizational policies and procedures for
planning, developing, managing, executing, monitoring, and controlling the project schedule.
Some typical sections may include: roles and responsibilities, update frequency, base-
lines, schedule change management, calendar definitions, performance metrics, control
thresholds, tools, and reports. Like all other aspects of the Project Management Plan, this
should be tailored to the size and complexity of the project, while adhering to your organi-
zational expectations.
While larger design-build and mega-projects may have very detailed Schedule Management
Plans, most transportation organization projects may not. Scheduling processes, procedures,
and expectations are best set at the organizational program or portfolio level. Generally
speaking, each project schedule should be treated similarly to every other project schedule
5.2 Schedule Management Plan 93
within the same organization. This consistency across projects builds credibility while
increasing efficiencies and productivity.
Your transportation organization may already have extensive guidance on how to develop,
manage, monitor, and control your schedule. This can be especially true if your organiza-
tion utilizes an enterprise-wide scheduling CPM software tool for all projects. However, just
because the practices, definitions, and expectations may be so established that it is taken for
granted, it doesn’t mean they are not important. These are your rules of engagement. As
PM, it is your job to know them and work within them. Even if documented ad nauseam in
your organizational guidance and culture, there are four key schedule aspects that every PM
should know and emphasize: Templates, Baselines, Monitoring, and Change Management.
5.2.1 Schedule Templates

As PM, you need to understand how your project schedule was formed. What tasks were
included? What tasks were left out? How were task durations determined? How were
task interdependencies and relationships defined? What are the assumptions, risks, and
constraints?
At the program or portfolio level, many transportation organizations have already deter-
mined this for you. Many have already done the work of creating the WBS, identifying key
tasks, establishing reasonable durations, and mapping the task relationships to create the
project workflow. Whether it be detailed in guidance documents, expressed in other tools,
or take the form of preselected project templates, many PMs never have to worry about
this aspect as it is already decided for them. However, even if this is the case, the PM
should still understand the schedule tasks, durations, and relationships. They are the
details of the schedule ship in which you will set sail. They, along with the CPM sched-
uling software rules and restrictions, will provide insights on how you can best control the
schedule throughout the project.
5.2.2 Schedule Baseline

Chapter 10, Controlling the Project, Section 10.7, Performance Metrics, details how the best
performance metrics balance reflecting reality and driving productivity and innovation. Be
it an individual or an organization, everyone likes to look good. Everyone wants to win.
Pending your organization, you may have various degrees of performance metrics. In almost
all of these cases, there is a baseline against which progress is measured to determine the
level of success.
One of the most basic of project performance metrics is schedule performance. Was the
project developed and delivered by when you said it would be? This comparison inherently
relies on setting a schedule baseline. This baseline is a snapshot in time that is locked and
used as the measuring stick moving forward. Some organizations have multiple baselines
throughout the life of the project. There is likely a preliminary baseline which is established
when the project is created. Most mature organizations allow the baseline to be adjusted at
time of scoping. This is intentional. At Scoping, you should have the project problem and
solution defined. You should have risks qualitatively identified, and then quantitatively
converted to potential time and money impacts. As PM, it is imperative that you
94 5 Schedule
understand your organization’s performance metrics, including when and how they
capture your schedule baseline(s). Be deliberate and strategic in positioning your project
for success.
5.2.3 Schedule Monitoring

As PM, you are responsible for the schedule. Your perceived success or failure in this
responsibility may be directly tied to your organization’s schedule expectations. Meaning,
you need to know how often the schedule is to be updated. You should know who needs
schedule status updates and when.
It can also be helpful to understand how the schedule data is used by others. For instance,
pushing project Award back one month due to right-of-way acquisition issues may not matter
to anyone, but it may become a huge deal if that month moves the Construction phase from
one fiscal year to the next. That same month may impact anticipated workloads or billable
hour goals of those administering and supporting the construction. Or that month may cause
tremendous turbulence if a prominent politician promised the project would be awarded
before the election, which is in two weeks. Situational awareness can be a PM’s secret weapon.
5.2.4 Change Management

Schedules change. However, as Scott Adams keenly observed in his Dilbert comic strip,
perhaps the eighth revision of the original schedule would be more appropriately called a
calendar. While schedules should be periodically evaluated and perhaps adjusted, the fast-
est way to lose schedule credibility is to change your schedule baselines as a matter of
convenience or in an attempt to hide incompetence. This is a seemingly expedient solution
that fools no one.
Chapter 10, Controlling the Project, Section 10.3 Change Management discusses in detail
the importance of practicing established and consistent change management protocol.
This is essential to controlling the project’s triple constraint. The PM is directly responsible
to maintain the schedule, which includes practicing proper change management when
needed. These procedures and expectations should be documented or referenced in the
Schedule Management Plan.
5.3 Scheduling Issues
“Either you run the day, or the day runs you.”

– Jim Rohn
5.3.1 One Schedule

It is important that each project have one schedule. Some PMs or organizations mistakenly
think multiple schedules are advantageous. Perhaps they keep best- and worst-case sce-
narios, schedules they show the boss or leadership, others they share with the public, or
artificially accelerated schedules to instill urgency to team members. Resist this urge.
Regardless of the reasons, keeping multiple schedules for different audiences creates con-
fusion, reduces accountability, and invites criticism of individual or organizational
credibility. This practice is an insecure time sink that creates more problems than it solves.
Nothing good comes from multiple schedules.
The PM controls the schedule. The team members all should have access to it, as should
leadership and key internal and external stakeholders. The specifics of the schedule that
are public facing is a decision that should be made by the organization. However, public
transportation projects are completed for public good using public funds. Most all project
documents, including the schedule, are available for public consumption and scrutiny,
even if only by a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. Closely guarding the schedule
to protect the PM or project, or for most all other reasons, is hugely counterproductive. The
goal is to develop and deliver the transportation project for the public good.
The schedule is the organization’s commitment to the public and team members. As such,
every project should have just one schedule. The schedule should be transparent and avail-
able to all. This increases accountability and ensures consistency of message and purpose,
while reducing the opportunities for conflict and misunderstandings. Having one schedule
builds individual and organizational credibility and trust, and is foundational to the PM
effectively managing expectations. From a program perspective, the one project schedule
should be used to ensure proper funds are available at the correct times, manage resources
and workloads, and improve project and program development efficiencies. And most
importantly, it is the best way to develop and deliver the project on-time and on-budget.
5.3.2 Who Owns the Schedule?

Who owns the schedule? The PM manages the schedule. The PM is responsible for the
schedule. Consultants and team members work to the schedule. But who owns the
schedule? This is a tremendously important question, the answer to which has far reaching
consequences.
Who owns the float? If a critical task finishes one week early, who owns that week? Does
the task resource wait a week to say they are finished so they can work on other tasks? Does
the task Functional Manager leverage that week so they can redistribute their section
workload to better meet their team goals? Does the next task owner own that float and
delay their start by a week? Does the PM keep that float for an additional buffer in case
subsequent tasks fall behind? Does the Program Manager shift the float to later in the
schedule to coincide with the PM’s upcoming vacation?
What happens if a critical path task is a week late? Do all subsequent task owners maintain
their planned task durations? If there a schedule contingency, or buffer, built into the schedule
or certain tasks? Who owns the extra time? Who can decide when and how to use it?
Who owns the float? If the answer is not clearly defined and communicated from the
organization’s leadership, then by default the answer is everyone and no one. Everyone
thinks they own the float, but no one actually does. This environment inherently encour-
ages “game-playing.” Task owners will artificially inflate their needed durations. PMs will
hide time in tasks so they have their own buffers. And so on, perhaps at every level. The
results are predictably inaccurate data and fictitious schedules. This is not upholding the
public trust to be good stewards of public funds. Additionally, it is horribly inefficient.
96 5 Schedule
In a project-centric environment, the organization owns the schedule. The organization

owns the float. Similarly, the organization owns the budget and all contingencies. While
Public servants, and those acting on behalf of the transportation organizations to advance
the project, may be responsible for the schedules, they do not own it. As such, if a task
owner finishes one week early, they are obligated to give that week back to the project. The
overall schedule should move ahead one week, maintaining all downstream scheduled
task durations and relationships. This is accomplished if all schedules have task relation-
ships with “As Soon As Possible” constraints.
5.3.3 Control Thresholds

Control thresholds are established metrics or deviations that are monitored to trigger
management action. These limits are important tools for a PM. They should be carefully
selected and closely watched. Generally, there are two types of thresholds: predictive and
corrective. Predictive thresholds are those that indicate the project is trending to bust.
Corrective thresholds are those whose violations prompt immediate response.
Schedule thresholds are largely dependent upon your organizational culture and
expectations. Some examples of common corrective thresholds may be any delay to the
critical path, or a set percentage bust in critical path tasks. Meaningful predictive thresh-
olds are typically harder to define. Some examples of common predictive thresholds may
be project scoping, near-critical path tasks, or tasks that leverage critically constrained
resources.
5.3.4 Fast-Tracking and Crashing

If you are behind in your schedule, there are generally two ways to compress a schedule
without reducing scope. Fast-Tracking compresses the schedule by advancing succes-
sive tasks and running them in parallel. The concurrent execution of sequential tasks
can be effective, but it will introduce new project risks as the Work Breakdown Structure
logic planned from them to be sequenced. By definition, you need to compress critical
path tasks. To control the associate risk with fast-tracking, the rule of thumb is to
advance sequential tasks up to 33%, meaning you would begin the downstream tasks
when the prior is 66% complete. Pushing beyond this 33% trigger may significantly
increase project risk. Crashing compresses the schedule by adding resources to critical
tasks. Accelerating the schedule will increase costs. When engaging in Fast-Tracking or
Crashing, it is imperative to proceed very cautiously. You are tinkering with critical
tasks. This can introduce significant schedule, budget, scope, resource, and quality
risks to the project if things don’t go well. With both, you will need to revisit the
schedule as the downstream critical path and task floats will change. Pursuing these
two strategies assumes the critical path tasks cannot be further pruned without sacri-
ficing scope.
When considering adjusting your schedule, consider the kinds of task relationships.
Generally speaking, there are two kinds of logic linking tasks. Hard logic are relationships
that cannot be adjusted. Examples may be contractual obligations or physical constraints.
These are also known as mandatory logic or hard dependencies. Soft logic are relationships
that are linked by preference, reason, or industry standards. These are also known as
discretionary logic or preferred dependencies. When adjusting or resequencing tasks in
your schedule, focus on those with soft logic.
5.3.5 CPM Scheduling Software

Most PMs will never calculate CPM by hand. More mature transportation organizations
have some type of CPM scheduling software that they use to plan and manage their pro-
jects. There are many choices in the marketplace. Each may have their unique strengths
and costs. Some are geared more to the novice user, while others require higher level of
expertise to be proficient. Some are stand-alone applications, where others allow custom-
ization and integration with other organizational systems and data sources.
The choice of software should be an organizational decision. The choice should accommo-
date the full spectrum of their operations. Larger, more complex projects are nearly impos-
sible to manage without specialized software. There are also tremendous program and
portfolio management benefits as the data can be rolled up from individual projects for anal-
ysis and optimization. Additionally, a standard software with accompanying guidance and
protocol introduces consistency and conformance with the organization’s project management
expectations. This can be essential for transportation organizations that experience staff turn-
over, lack adequate training, or have newer, less experienced, or less competent PMs.
As PM, learn the foundation and nuances of your organization’s scheduling software.
This is your job. Discover how to squeeze every bit of information from the CPM that it can
provide. Take advantage of the instant analysis of float and critical path. Leverage the Gantt
chart and other tools. Proactively manage your schedule.
5.3.6 Planning Fallacy and Managing Expectations

Transportation projects have a long history of being delivered late and over-budget. This
begs the question, compared to what? Who sets the initial expectations against which the
project is judged? And why hasn’t our industry learned our lesson through the years?
Chapter 12, Real-World Challenges, Section 12.7, Planning Fallacy, details how overly
optimistic preliminary project schedule and budget estimates unfairly saddle a project with
unrealistic expectations. Once you understand the Planning Fallacy (the what) and the
motivations behind such assertions (the why), you will be better positioned to effectively
manage your project.
Some transportation organizations involve their PMs early in the project planning pro-
cess. In these cases, this knowledge can be used to help positively influence and shape
initial expectations. In other organizations, the PM won’t be assigned the project until after
it is funded and active. In these instances, managing the CPM schedule and following
proper change management procedures are critical to successfully developing and deliv-
ering the project within challenging constraints. Failure to actively manage the schedule
and project changes will quickly exacerbate the already challenging situation created by
overly optimistic preliminary schedule and budget estimates.
98 5 Schedule
5.3.7 Some Additional Thoughts

The simple example earlier in this chapter demonstrates the basics of CPM. Most projects
have more than seven tasks. While some stripped-down schedules may have ten or less
tasks, others will have hundreds. Larger Design-Build projects may have thousands.
Exceptional PMs leverage the many strengths and insights of CPM schedules to proactively
and strategically manage their project schedule. CPM can be equally effective on both small
and large projects, allowing a systematic approach to most all aspects of project management.
The workflow is mapped. Critical tasks become evident. Task dependencies become visible.
Float is calculated. This essential information enables the PM to control the project by opti-
mizing time, cost, and resource efficiencies. It should guide the PM directly to those critical
tasks that deserve your special attention.
The CPM allows you to easily compare planned vs. actual progress. This provides oppor-
tunities to predict, plan for, and respond to, tasks that run long. The impact of missed task
deadlines or project milestones can range from commonplace or catastrophic. How can
you tell the difference? CPM allows the PM to identify and leverage parallel paths. It also
allows the PM to analyze the downstream impacts of these schedule busts, and determine
if the late tasks change the critical path or critical tasks. This knowledge is essential to
adjusting the schedule and resources to be able to successfully recover.
The PM is responsible for the project schedule. You can’t be nimble, innovative, and pro-
active if you are flying blind. Knowledge plus action equals power. CPM is a powerful tool
that can empower the PM to strategically manage the schedule. Embrace it. As PM, you
need to actively and intentionally manage your schedule, or it will manage you.
99
Managing Risk
“If you don’t invest in risk management, it doesn’t matter what business you’re in, it’s a
risky business.”
– Gary Cohn
6.1 Why Risk Management Matters
“You cannot manage risk, or for that matter, build a risk management capability
without first understanding the ‘business value’ of risk management.”
– Pearl Zhu
Risk Management is more than a functional component of transportation project management;

it is foundational to all we do. Risk Management is at the heart of Project Management.
There are many reasons why transportation projects are delivered late or over budget,
but perhaps the biggest is the way in which many transportation organizations and PMs
identify, monitor, and respond to risks. Upon reflection, this may be surprising as engi-
neers should excel at managing risk.
At our core, engineers solve problems. We delineate the problem, define success, identify
constraints, and then use logic, math, science, mechanics, and reason to solve it. Engineers
think. One fundamental tenet of an engineer’s approach is to identify and mitigate uncer-
tainties. Most everyone knows there is a 50% chance a flipped coin will land on heads, but
give an engineer enough details of the coin, the force, and other situational attributes, and
they can calculate with much greater confidence if the coin will land on heads or tails. Be
it significant figures, safety factors, manufacturing tolerances, or estimating assumptions;
they all represent efforts to identify, quantify, and manage risk.
Any experienced engineer that prepares a schedule or cost estimate includes a list of
assumptions. This is standard practice, and a great first step. But what you do with these
assumptions matters even more. Each assumption is inherently partnered with an associated
risk. And as the project progresses, risks evolve and develop.

100 6 Managing Risk
Risk management is a foundational responsibility of every PM. In order for a PM to sat-

isfy their primary objective, to execute the project within the established scope, schedule,
and budget, they must understand, appreciate, and practice effective risk management.
The reality is, you and your organization already have an established risk tolerance and
are practicing a risk management strategy. By deliberate intention or blissful ignorance,
you and your organization fall somewhere on the spectrum shown in Figure 6.1:
Organizational Risk Tolerance
Low High
Balanced
Risk Risk
Risk Risk Management Risk

Averse Seeking
Less More More Less

Efficient Efficient Efficient Efficient
Figure 6.1 Organizational risk tolerance.
Some are so afraid of making a decision, or making the wrong decision, that they drift
toward paralysis of analysis and become overly risk averse. Others are naïve, in denial, or just
provide risk management lip service and allow risks to evolve on their own, hoping it will all
eventually work out. Ironically, this can put them with those who actively seek risk. On
transportation projects, being overly Risk Averse or Risk Seeking will put you in a defensive,
reactive position with risk that ultimately jeopardizes your budget, scope, and schedule.
Ideally, you and your organization should fall in the balanced portion of this spectrum.
Here you are actively managing risks throughout the project in a manner that allows you
to be aggressive and proactive in risk responses, coupled with established change
management procedures. This combination is foundational to your project’s success.
Risk Management is more than a set of documents and processes. It is a mindset. For
some, this conscious decision requires a massive paradigm shift. Risks are real and present,
if you acknowledge them or not. Your identification, analysis, and response to risks directly
impact your projects’ and programs’ level of success. Establishing and practicing an
integrated and meaningful risk management strategy may be the single most important
thing you can do to increase your on-time and on-budget performance.
An effective organizational Risk Management strategy should be scalable. While every
transportation project should have a formal risk management plan, it may be tailored to
the size, cost, priority, or complexity of the project. Mature organizations understand this
and often establish thresholds for varying levels of risk documentation. You should ensure
the juice is worth the squeeze. While many risk management tools may not be deemed
appropriate on smaller projects, the mindset should remain. If you are not actively thinking
about identifying and responding to risks with your team, you will soon be actively scram-
bling to respond to changes that jeopardize your project’s budget, scope, and schedule.
Unmanaged risks can directly lead to increased costs, unanticipated schedule delays, poor
performance, lower quality, and damage to your and your organization’s reputation. You
may not be able to control all the risks, but you do control how you prepare and react.
Every PM should go through the Risk Management Project Workflow illustrated in
Figure 6.2 on every project, through the life of the project.
6.2 Risk Management Plan 101
Risk
Management Risk Management
Planning Workflow
Risk
Identification
Risk
Risk Analysis
Monitoring
Risk
Response
Figure 6.2 Risk management workflow.
6.2 Risk Management Plan
“If you fail to plan, you are planning to fail.”

– Benjamin Franklin
Transportation projects can extend in duration for years, often cycling through multiple
PMs and critical team members. In these circumstances, the organization’s risk attitude is
crucial. The Risk Management Plan is essential to maintaining continuity and uniformity
in risk management activities, and positioning the PM and project team to successfully
develop and deliver the project on-time and on-budget.
The Risk Management Plan describes how the project team will identify, evaluate,
respond, and monitor risk throughout the project. This formal document is often based
upon an organizational template. It details the framework, processes, tools, and expecta-
tions as to how risk will be managed. Information contained therein should reflect organi-
zational risk attitudes, and comply with applicable processes and procedures.
Risk Management Plans typically include:
● Definitions of Risk Probability and Impact
● Assumptions
● Risk Strategy or Approach
● Methodologies
● Roles and Responsibilities
● Risk Identification
● Risk Assessment and Analysis
● Risk Response
● Risk Monitoring and Controlling
Risk Management tools and details that are included or referenced within the Risk
Management Plan typically are:
● Risk Breakdown Structure
● Probability Impact Matrix
102 6 Managing Risk
● Accuracy Estimates
● Risk Register
● Assumption Log
● Schedule detailing frequency and timing of risk management activities
● Risk reporting format
The Risk Management Plan should be developed during early planning phases of the
project and finalized before scoping is complete. The result should be incorporated into
the Project Management Plan. It should be noted that like other aspects of the PMP, an
organization may have all of this already documented within their existing policies and
procedures.
The PM ultimately bears all responsibilities for the Risk Management Plan. They shall
guide its planning, and formally approve it. The PM shall regularly review and update
this plan. The PM must document all risk and risk responses, per the plan. The PM must
communicate applicable risk information to their superiors and to the project team,
secure decisions and concurrence on risk responses, and ensure each risk response is
appropriately and effectively implemented. The PM should ensure there is appropriate
budget and time for risk identification, analysis, response, and monitoring activities. The
PM also plays a vital role of promoting a balanced Risk Management mindset within the
project team that promotes optimization of resources, time, and money. One way to
accomplish this is to make Risk Management a standing agenda item at all regular team
meetings.
6.3 Risk Identification
“PMs are the most creative pros in the world; we have to figure out everything that could
go wrong, before it does.”
– Fredrik Haren
A Risk is any uncertain event, activity, or condition that can impact the project in a negative
or positive way. Negative risks are threats. Positive risks are opportunities. Residual risk is
risk that remains after a risk response strategy has been implemented. A Secondary risk is
a risk created by your response to another risk. These risks represent the intended and unin-
tended consequences of your efforts to actively manage other risks. Often secondary risks
are less serious than primary risks, but not always. Both residual and secondary risks can be
negative or positive. Risk identification is the ongoing process of identifying and examining
risks and their effects on project objectives.
Effective Risk Identification begins with establishing and ensuring mutual concurrence
on project fundamentals. The purpose and need. The project context. The project’s Scope,
Budget, and Schedule. The project’s success criteria. If these are not defined, understood,
and accepted, you will not be able to effectively identify and manage risks.
This Progressive Elaboration is when projects incrementally develop in small steps. This is
particularly common in the planning phase of a project, as expectations and specifics con-
tinue to be gathered and clarified. In these instances, risk identification should be continually
revisited and refined.
Many organizations have predetermined checklists of risk categories to consider. These

are often associated with Scoping forms, estimate preparation, schedule assumptions, or
risk management specific procedures. Some standard industry strategies to employ during
risk identification include the following acronyms:
● PESTLE (Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal, and Environmental)
● TECOP (Technical, Environmental, Commercial, Operational, and Political)
● VUCA (Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, and Ambiguity)
Risks can also be multidimensional and cumulative in nature. They can interact with each
other and amplify in consequence. Sometimes, you need to bundle them to reasonably
assess their impact. On public sector projects, risks can frequently interact in unpredictable
ways that create turbulence in the critical path, which can dramatically slow the project.
Risk Identification should begin early in the project planning process. The PM should
meet with the entire project team and key stakeholders to brainstorm potential project risks.
Each team member brings a unique perspective and bears the responsibility to identify risks
within their own areas of expertise. During brainstorming, all risks should be logged without
judgment. The identified risks will then be assessed and analyzed. Organizational and avail-
able industry lessons-learned logs can also be leveraged. The PM is ultimately responsible to
initiate and maintain the project’s risk register.
This effort should include reviewing project assumptions and constraints. An Assumption
is a presumed or necessary condition that will enable successful or predicted completion of
the task, objective, or project. Every assumption has an associated risk. Every risk has an
associated assumption. Assumption = Risk. Risk = Assumption. Many PMs fail to acknowl-
edge this fundamental truth. The PM should regularly cross-check project assumptions
with the risk register, and vice versa.
Larger and more complex projects may warrant more formal risk identification mea-
sures. A Risk Workshop is a formal, multiday event that facilitates collaboration among
selected team members, Subject Matter Experts (SMEs), and stakeholders to discuss and
identify project risks. Think of a formal Value Engineering (VE) proceeding, but focused on
risk. An invite list is carefully selected, a formal agenda is followed, meetings are held, and
it culminates with submission of a final report. On very large projects, the total duration
from start to finish may be many months. All projects will benefit from an organized risk
identification process. Organizational guidance should determine the appropriate granu-
larity of this effort based upon established project thresholds.
To be effective at focusing on risks and identifying potential problems that aren’t yet
there requires a creative imagination and a healthy dose of skepticism. If you are, by choice
or nature, an optimist; this can be a tedious and disheartening task. Others thrive on dis-
cussing what may go wrong and what impending calamities are waiting just around the
next corner. Pessimists, in addition to the steady stream of problems that regularly assaults
PMs, can make it easy to develop a defeatist or apathetic attitude. Exceptional PMs do not
tolerate or accept complaining. They are achievers who thrive on overcoming obstacles and
solving problems. Risk management is not choosing to focus on reactive negativity, but
rather proactively advancing and positioning the project for success.
Perhaps the most critical milestone in transportation project development is Scoping.
When scoping is complete, the problem should be defined and the solution decided. The
104 6 Managing Risk
technical requirements, budget, and schedule should be set for the remainder of the
project. Should any changes occur to the triple constraint thereafter, applicable change
management procedures should be followed. The foundation of Scoping is to advance and
refine the design so you can identify, analyze, and quantify project risks. By close of
scoping, you should have completed a prioritized Risk Register, determined risk responses,
and adjusted your project’s time (schedule) and money (budget) to accommodate identi-
fied risks. This positions your project for success. After scoping, the PM transitions into
Risk Monitoring and then repeats the Risk Management Project Workflow presented in
Figure 6.2.
6.3.1 Knowledge Quadrant

The Knowledge Quadrant defines information and risks by separating them into
four distinct categories that balance knowledge and awareness, as shown in Figure
6.3. PMs can use this approach to more efficiently brainstorm ideas and risks, pro-
cess information as it emerges and evolves, and quickly determine how best to move
forward.
Known-Knowns (KK) represent our knowledge. These are things we are aware of and
understand. Some examples include the consultant Scope of Services, project scope, orga-
nizational policies/procedures/processes, design standards, past experience, lessons
learned, and skilled expertise. If not handled correctly, some KKs may become risks. KKs
should be addressed in Project Planning.
Unknown-Knowns (UK) are answers to questions we don’t realize we already know.
These are things we understand, but of which we are not aware. UKs should be explored
and leveraged by networking intentional knowledge management and sharing. In larger
organizations, UKs should also be addressed with focused data mining efforts. The PM is
responsible to facilitate team knowledge sharing across discipline lines. For example,
there may be no need for designers to struggle with constructability SMEs to reaccess
equipment access to minimize disturbance for a stream restoration project if there can
easily be surplus wetland disturbance under the permit due to design changes elsewhere
on the plan.
Known-Unknowns (KU) are identified risks. These are things we are aware of, but
don’t understand. Some examples may include assumptions, unstable requirements,
knowledge gaps, uncertainties, risk confidence levels, changing requirements, and inex-
perienced staff. KUs should be identi-
fied and actively managed and
Knowledge Quadrant monitored via Risk Management. Adam
Known-Knowns Known-Unknowns Grant said, “If knowledge is power, know-
(KK) (KU) ing what we don’t know is wisdom.”
Things we know Things we know
Unknown-Unknowns (UU) are
we know we don't know
emergent risks, meaning they can only
Unknown-Knowns Unknown-Unknowns be recognized after they have occurred.
(UK) (UU) These are things we are not aware of, and
Things we don't know Things we don't know
we know we don't know don’t understand. These are things that
Figure 6.3 Knowledge quadrant. jump up and bite you. Independent of
the consequences, UUs can produce two undesirable results. Their unexpected nature can
cause stress and confusion while simultaneously lowering others’ confidence in your ability
to lead. Whether reasonable or not, it is often assumed the PM should have anticipated the
risk. Should an issue emerge from the UU quadrant, it should be promptly addressed with
developed project team initiative, creativity, and resilience. UUs can be accommodated for in
Design Margins, Schedule Float, Contingencies, and Management Reserves.
6.3.2 Uncertainty and Risk

Many PMs mistakenly equate uncertainty and risk, which can cause unnecessary confu-
sion. Uncertainty is not assuredly knowing the result of, or recognizing the existence of,
multiple possible outcomes. Risks can positively (opportunities) or negatively (threats)
impact your project. Some uncertain outcomes may be risks, some may not. You can have
uncertainty without risk; but you cannot have risk without uncertainty. Uncertainty is not
an unknown risk. Just because you don’t know what will happen, does not automatically
mean it is a risk.
Risks can be identified, monitored, and managed. Uncertainty is not controllable, and
cannot be managed. Risks can be measured and quantified, while uncertainties cannot.
Uncertainties should be considered and monitored to identify if and when they warrant
being elevated to a risk.
6.3.3 Risk Register

Throughout the project, as risks are identified, they should be logged on the Risk
Register. This should be a living document that is regularly reviewed and updated. The
PM is responsible for the creation and maintenance of this document that should be
consistently shared and reviewed with the project team. Pending the size and com-
plexity of the project, this is typically monthly or quarterly, and at each project phase
gate.
A Risk Register, or Risk Log, is a PM tool to log and track project risks, the potential
impact and likelihood of occurrence, and the risk response strategy. This document will
enable the PM to better determine and manage risks and project contingencies, assist with
effectively communicating and managing team and stakeholder expectations, and better
position your project for success. On larger or more complex projects, a risk database may
be employed.
Risk Registers are typically formatted as a spreadsheet, with an identified risk on each
row filling columns with important risk specifics. Figure 6.4 provides some guidance on
specifics that could be captured for each identified risk.
A Risk Breakdown Structure can be a helpful visual tool to capture and organize risks. It
can take many different formats given the project specifics. Most commonly it may look
like an organizational chart or a spreadsheet with nested columns or rows. Regardless of
this format, the intention is the same, to arrange the risk in hierarchical categories. This
can bring clarity and focus when many risks are identified, and better enable proactive
responses by increasing organization.
106 6 Managing Risk
Suggested Columns Description
Risk ID Unique ID (number) for each risk – this is for internal tracking purposes
Name Name to which risk will be referred
Date Date risk was identified
Type Is this a negative (threat) or positive (opportunity) risk?
Description Detailed, clear, and thorough description of risk and what it means
Triple Constraint Will this risk potentially impact Scope, Budget, and/or Schedule?
Trigger The risk trigger should be described and documented
Responses Document planned or implemented risk responses
Comments Document the iterative process of risk management as the risks evolve
Risk Owner Who is responsible to monitor risk and implement risk response?
Status Is risk being monitored, in risk response, or closed?
Probability The probability of occurrence
Impact The project impact if the risk is realized
Risk Score The numeric product of Probability and Impact from the Risk Matrix
Risk Exposure Schedule risk exposure
Earned Value Budget risk exposure
Management (EMV)
Figure 6.4 Common risk register fields.
6.4 Risk Analysis
“Never test the depth of water with both feet.”

– Warren Buffet
Risk Identification must be completed before the PM and team can advance to Risk
Analysis. Risk Analysis is the evaluation and prioritization of identified risks. This is a
two-step process. The risks must be qualitatively assessed, and then quantitatively evalu-
ated. Qualitative Risk Assessment is a project management technique that subjectively
analyzes the probability and impact of a risk occurrence. The risks are categorized on a
probability and impact matrix, and those deemed significant may undergo a quantitative
risk analysis. Quantitative Risk Analysis is the mathematical analysis of the probability
and impact of a risk occurrence. This analysis should be conducted after qualitative anal-
ysis so it can assess risks that have been identified as significant.
6.4.1 Qualitative Risk Assessment

The purpose of Qualitative Risk Assessment is to prioritize the identified risks so you can
strategically move forward. This subjective evaluation should be made of each risk identi-
fied on the Risk Register. Most qualitative risk evaluations utilize a Risk Matrix that is
detailed in applicable organizational procedures, such as the one in Figure 6.5.
6.4 Risk Analysis 107
A Risk Matrix, or Probability and Impact Risk Assessment Matrix

Matrix, is a visual framework for categorizing
risks based on the probability and impact of High
3 6 9
occurrence. Risk matrices may have increased (3)
granularity, but they should not be less than a
Impact of Occurrence
3 × 3 grid. The probability and impact ratings Medium
2 4 6
should be logged on the Risk Register, and (2)
updated as needed. If not already defined by
your organization, below are general guide- Low
1 2 3
lines for delineated categories: (1)
Probability of Occurrence Low Medium High

● High = Risk is likely to happen regardless of (1) (2) (3)
your actions.
Probability of Occurrence
● Medium = You can direct or influence the
Figure 6.5 Risk assessment matrix.
likelihood of realizing the risk.
● Low = Risk is likely not to happen regardless
of your actions.
● High = Catastrophic
● Medium = Critical
● Low = Marginal
Risk Score is the numeric product of the probability multiplied by the impact. This can pro-
vide clarity on prioritizing the urgency of the risk, and may also dictate organizational
reporting requirements. This should be documented in the Risk Register that was initiated
during Risk Identification. Risks should then be quantitatively analyzed.
There is a species of swans in Australia that happen to be black in color. For those who
did not know this, the idea of a black swan seemed impossible, until it wasn’t. A Black
Swan event is a realized risk with a low probability and high impact. Nassim Nicholas
Taleb described this phenomenon in detail in his book entitled, The Black Swan: The Impact
of the Highly Improbable. These outlier results are beyond normal expectations. While rare,
these Black Swan events are challenging to risk management. These can be difficult to
anticipate, but require prompt attention when realized.
6.4.2 Quantitative Risk Analysis

A prediction is a best guess. A forecast is a prediction with an associated probability, or
confidence level. Quantitative Risk Analysis allows you to integrate schedule and budget
forecasts into your project management. This is especially critical during the Scoping pro-
cess so that you correctly establish your Scoping schedule and budget baselines. The Risk
Exposure is calculated by multiplying the risk probability of occurrence by its potential
impact to budget or schedule. Adding Risk Exposures allows you to better plan and man-
age your project. The resulting schedule impact must be carefully evaluated as risks can
108 6 Managing Risk
impact the critical path in very different ways. The Expected Monetary Value (EMV)
describes the project’s financial Risk Exposure. The result, which should be in today’s
dollars, will be a positive number for negative risks (threats) and a negative number for
positive risks (opportunities). See the example table in Figure 6.6.
This approach becomes more reliable when more risks are included. EMV calculations
are also inherently dependent upon the accuracy and associated assumptions of the proba-
bility of occurrence and estimate for financial impact. Accordingly, this approach works
best when you are risk neutral, being neither risk averse nor risk seeking.
Most people make a decision and then search for data to rationalize it. For business-
minded audiences, it is advantageous to present the risks in financial terms. Precise data
can be very convincing, but be cautious of its accuracy. There are other risks imbedded in
these numbers. How confident are you of its likelihood? How certain are you of the finan-
cial impact? While potentially convincing, EVM calculations can be difficult to defend.
Pending the complexity of the project or specifics of certain risk(s), you may choose to utilize
Probabilistic Analysis tools within your quantitative analysis. The most common of these are
three-point estimates and the PERT (Program Evaluation and Review Technique) estimate.
These both rely on estimate ranges. For each risk you prepare three different numbers:
● Pessimistic estimate (P) – this is the maximum estimate of impact
● Optimistic estimate (O) – this is the minimum estimate of impact
● Most likely (M) – this is the most likely estimate of impact
The Three-Point estimate adds P + M + O and divides by three. The PERT estimate is a
weighted average using these same three estimates. You add P + O + (4 times M), all
divided by six. These simple probabilistic estimates can be effective ways to increase accu-
racy of your EMV calculations. For more advanced requirements, a Monte Carlo statistical
simulation can be used that analyzes all possible outcomes to create an even more accurate
probabilistic estimate.
The cycle of risk identification, risk analysis, risk response, and risk monitoring should
be repeated throughout the project. The PM is responsible to drive this process and docu-
ment all relevant information on the Risk Register.
While you need to be vigilant, also be cognizant that it is easy to reach the point of
diminishing returns; meaning beyond a certain point, efforts to accurately capture all pos-
sible aspects of a specific risk may not be worth your time. Organizational guidance on Risk
Exposure can provide clarity on prioritization thresholds.
Risk Name Risk Type Probability Impact EMV
Risk A Threat 75% × $40,000 = $30,000

Risk B Threat 50% × $10,000 = $5,000
Risk C Opportunity 30% × ($50,000) = ($15,000)
Risk D Threat 10% × $200,000 = $20,000
Total EMV $40,000
Figure 6.6 Quantitative risk analysis example.

6.5 Risk Responses
“Risk is like fire: If controlled it will help you; if uncontrolled it will rise up and destroy you.”
– Theodore Roosevelt
If you don’t proactively manage risks, you are deciding to allow risks to manage you. Think of
the PM as being the coach of a football team preparing for a game. You scout the other team
and evaluate their strengths, weaknesses, and tendencies. You make your offensive and
defensive game plans and contingency plans, and think about possible game scenarios. If you
don’t prepare, it is impossible to be proactive. You will spend the limited and valuable game
time trying to figure out how to respond in real time, and likely fall further and further behind.
You want to be the coach that controls the game. You want to win. Successful coaches are
remarkable risk managers. They are constantly planning, identifying, analyzing, responding,
and monitoring risks. They make assumptions, make decisions, and strive to be structured yet
agile as they evolve to stay ahead of changing conditions in a dynamic environment.
You will either respond to risks proactively or reactively. The choice is yours. Incompetence,
busyness, naiveté, laziness, or procrastination are not valid reasons to ignore risks. Successful
PMs choose to be proactive, which positions them to better control their project. PMs who
feel constantly behind and surprised by events that seem to overtake and overwhelm them
are almost all passive risk managers. Being reactive severely limits the number and effective-
ness of your available responses, and eliminates virtually all possibilities of exploiting
positive risks (opportunities).
Risk Response Planning is conducted after risk analyses to determine the best response
for each identified and prioritized risk. While the PM is ultimately responsible to manage
all risks in order to successfully develop and deliver the project, the chosen risk responses
should be consistent with the organization’s risk tolerance and appetite. Risk Tolerance is
the level of uncertainty an organization is willing to accept for each specific risk. This can
be quantified in an acceptable variance in performance measures. Risk Appetite is the total
amount and types of risk an organization is willing to accept in order to pursue its objec-
tives. These represent the level of risk you are comfortable assuming. It doesn’t mean you
like it, but you can tolerate it. Most organizations have historic precedents of risk tolerance
that reflect their culture and objectives. Your personal risk tolerance may be different than
that of your organization, but be cautious of straying too far from accepted thresholds
without appropriate concurrence. There may be no faster way to run to the far end of the
limb by yourself than mishandling risks.
The PM is responsible to ensure the Risk Register is maintained, and its contents available
to the team. This includes ensuring each assigned Risk Owner is updated on risks for which
they are responsible, including full knowledge of their risk triggers. Should a trigger be passed,
the PM is responsible to ensure the identified risk response is implemented by the Risk Owner.
6.5.1 Negative Risks (Threats)

Once a negative risk is identified and analysis has prioritized it for action, a risk response
should then be identified and implemented should the associated risk trigger be passed.
110 6 Managing Risk
For any negative risk (threat), there are four

Avoid possible responses as shown in Figure 6.7:
Avoid, Transfer, Mitigate, and Accept.
Transfer Avoiding the risk is changing the project so
that the issue is no longer a risk. You exercise
change controls or modify parameters so as to
Mitigate
remove the risk from the equation. Examples
Negative Risk may include avoiding a RW risk by modifying
(Threat)
Accept the design so you no longer need to access the
Responses
property, or finding an innovative stream-
Figure 6.7 Negative risk (threat) responses. bank reinforcement solution that will allow
installation within the spatial constraints on a
stream restoration. Risks that are identified early can often be avoided by clarifying require-
ments and operational parameters. Avoiding risks can involve two different actions. First,
you can take action to eliminate the risk trigger, or cause of the risk. Second, you can admin-
ister or execute the project in a way that avoids the risk but still satisfies the project’s objec-
tives. Not all risks can be avoided. In some circumstances, avoidance may jeopardize the
project’s budget or schedule. However, generally, avoidance should be the first considered
risk response strategy.
Transferring the risk means shifting the risk to a third party who is better positioned to
mitigate or withstand it. This does not eliminate the risk, but rather transfers ownership
and management of the risk to another. Risk transference is especially common with finan-
cial risk exposure. Organizations’ procurement, risk management, and legal departments
do this all the time. In public sector transportation projects, the system owner/operator is
well positioned to strategically structure contracts, task orders, and change orders so your
organization bears appropriate and reasonable risks, while transferring the potential
liability of specific risks to a third party. While there is often a risk premium for this trans-
ference, it can still be a cost-effective way to manage certain risks.
Mitigating the risk means taking action to decrease the probability or impact of the
threat, should it be realized. Risk mitigation can have intended and unintended conse-
quences. In chess, you must think a few moves ahead or your initial move to mitigate a
threat may put you in an even more precarious position. Identifying, assessing, and
managing secondary risks should be a part of the initial risk management consideration. In
risks, an ounce of prevention is often worth a pound of cure. Proactive, preventative
responses can be dual-focused: first, reducing the probability of the risk trigger, the cause
of the risk; second, reducing the budget or schedule impact, should the risk be realized.
Accepting the risk means taking no intentional actions to avoid, transfer, or mitigate the
risk. Organizations and PMs that do not practice proactive and effective risk management
often accept most all risks by design or default. Generally, this is not a good approach.
However, there may be good reasons to accept a risk. There may be instances where no other
response strategies are practical or cost effective. Acceptance may also be appropriate where
the impacts are minimal, the probability of occurrence is low, or the risk is completely uncon-
trolled. If the probability of occurrence is high, you may include the risk as a project assump-
tion. When you accept a risk, you have a choice. You can Passively Accept the risk, meaning
you take no action other than documenting and providing awareness of the decision. Or you
can Actively Accept the risk, meaning you take action to prepare for the consequences. This
often takes the form of budget or schedule risk-specific contingencies.
Exceptional PMs understand when to escalate risks. Risk Escalation is elevating the risk to
a higher authority for management of that risk. Highly sensitive or political risks may need to
be escalated to gain concurrence or direction on how best to handle that risk. Elevating a risk
can also be an effective way to manage project expectations while securing concurrence on
leadership’s preferred risk response. Especially with escalated risks, the PM must be diligent
in monitoring the risks and implementing appropriate project change management measures
if needed.
Implementing risk responses can often be difficult and unpopular, but it is the necessary
and right thing to do. It may be beneficial to remind yourself and others that the purpose of
risk responses is not to cast blame, or find an acceptable scapegoat should a negative risk
be realized, but rather to proactively manage risk in such a way that the project may con-
tinue to advance within its established con-
straints of budget, scope, and schedule.
Risk Responses - Threats
The selected risk response should be
based upon the specifics associated with
each risk. Figure 6.8 can be used as a guide
High
Avoid
gat e
as to when the four risk responses may be M it i at s
hre
most appropriate, based upon the qualitative All T o ssib le

risk analysis. re P
Wh e
Medium
Transfer
6.5.2 Positive Risks (Opportunities) Mitigate
Winston Churchill said, “The pessimist sees

Accept
Low
difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist

sees the opportunity in every difficulty.”
Positive risks are present on most projects. Low Medium High
However, opportunities are rarely realized Probability of Occurrence
if left to their own devices. They must be
Figure 6.8 Negative (threat) risk response
proactively identified and then actively pur- guidance.
sued. For any positive risk, there are four
possible responses as shown in Figure 6.9:
Exploit, Share, Enhance, and Accept.
Exploiting the risk is taking action to Exploit
ensure the positive risk occurs. This is the
opposite of avoidance. Exploiting is deliber-
Share
ately modifying the project or approach so
the opportunity is realized. Similar to
Avoidance for negative risks, Exploitation is Enhance
the most aggressive of the positive risk Positive Risk
response strategies. This response is typically (Opportunity)
Accept
reserved for those positive risks with high Responses
probabilities of occurrence and anticipated Figure 6.9 Positive risk (opportunity)
impacts, or benefits. responses.
112 6 Managing Risk
Sharing the risk means partnering with a third party who is better positioned to realize
the opportunity. You need to find those who are best able to capture the benefits for the
project. This may be accomplished by pushing the risk trigger, increasing the probability
of occurrence, and increasing the positive impact to the project. As Transference often dis-
tributes the negative risk liability, so Sharing often distributes the realized benefits.
Examples may include shared cost savings in design innovations or construction means
and methods.
Enhancing the risk is to take intentional action to increase the probability of occurrence
and or the impact of the risk. Resulting modifications in design or approach may increase
the likelihood of capturing identified benefits, or increase the scale of the beneficial
impacts. One common tactic is to focus on facilitating the risk triggers that enable the risk
to be realized. If an organization can enhance the probability of occurrence to 100%, then
they have exploited the positive risk.
Accepting the risk means you taking no intentional actions to exploit, share, or enhance
the risk. If you do nothing, by default you are accepting all positive risks, even if they are
not identified. You may get lucky every now and again; but generally, accepted positive
risks are rarely realized. In a proactive risk management approach, only insignificant
positive risks should be accepted. These should be documented and tracked, but the bot-
tom line is the juice isn’t worth the squeeze to commit resources to actively pursue realiza-
tion of this opportunity.
Positive risks can also be escalated in an effort to best manage them. This is especially
true when key individuals’ input, involvement, or influence may enhance the risk to the
point where you could exploit it. Realizing opportunities can do more than providing
positive benefits to the project’s budget, scope, and schedule; it can boost team morale, gen-
erate and increase community goodwill, and strengthen the reputation and credibility of
the PM and organization.
While each positive risk response should be based upon the analysis, Figure 6.10 can be
used as a guide as to which of the four response strategies to select for each risk.
Risk Responses - Opportunities

6.5.3 Change Control
Successful risk response implementation to a
High
Enhance l
e Al negative or positive risk is almost always accom-
an c
En h u n it ies
or t le plished through change control. This is because

Op p Po ssib
e re most risk response strategies directly or indi-
Medium
W h
Share rectly impact the project’s budget, scope, or
Exploit schedule. Change management and risk
management are both the responsibility of the
PM.
Low
Accept
Mitigating risks can create intended and
Low Medium High unintended consequences. Identifying, assess-
Probability of Occurrence ing, and managing secondary risks should be a
part of the initial risk mitigation consideration.
Figure 6.10 Positive (opportunity) risk
response guidance. Regardless of your risk response, some residual
risk may remain.
6.5.4 Contingency Plans

Contingency Plans are similar to Risk Responses in that they strive to reduce the threat
impacts and increase opportunity benefits. The difference is in the timing. Risk Responses are
planned and implemented while the risk is not yet realized. Contingency Plans are planned
while the threats and opportunities are still risks, but implemented only after the event has
occurred. A contingency plan outlines the intentional steps to be taken after the risk is real-
ized. Risk responses focus on prevention of loss, while contingency plans focus on surviving
the impacts once they are occurring.
Contingency plans should be created for significant, identified risks. As with any good
plan, it should answer the basic questions. Who will be involved? What will they do? When
should they do it? Where will this happen? How will the plan be executed? Monitoring and
reporting expectations should also be included. The plans should be brainstormed and vet-
ted with critical team members. As with many aspects of project management, engineering
judgment should be exercised to appropriately tailor and scale the effort to the significance
of the risk.
Common contingency plan challenges seem to center on the fact that it may never be
needed. As such, contingency planning is often viewed as a lower priority than other urgent
matters of the day. Team members may question the necessity of the effort, or become
unreasonably attached to their preferred approach. Similarly, securing leadership or stake-
holder buy-in on hypothetical realities can present its own challenges while unintention-
ally influencing project expectations. Regardless, contingency plans are an integral part to
any successful risk management program. Everyone needs a Plan B.
6.6 Monitoring Risks
“There is no doubt that Formula 1 has the best risk management of any sport and any
industry in the world.”
– Jackie Stewart
Risks on a public transportation project often develop over time, are challenging to iden-
tify, are difficult to quantify, and are even more difficult to control. Public Sector projects
frequently present very high levels of largely undefined, unique, and occasionally unprec-
edented risks. They are a high-stakes game characterized by significant and irreversible
commitments that aim to satisfy a wide range of success criterion that are initially set and
then tend to evolve from a diverse group of stakeholders. To further complicate matters,
public sector project solutions may not be selected from an optimized list of alternatives.
More commonly, project boundaries and critical design features are often dictated and are
not easily changed. The sanitary sewer extension will start at point A and end at point B at
predetermined elevations, following the natural creek line between the two drainage
basins. The roadway improvement will begin at this intersection and end at that intersec-
tion complying with applicable design speed geometry in-between. The bridge replacement
will begin at this bank and end at that bank and tie into existing approach grades. Because
114 6 Managing Risk
these designs are not selected or scoped to intentionally minimize risk resolution, the PM
must play the hand he is dealt. He must actively seek to proactively identify and evaluate
potential risks, diligently prioritize each based upon their likelihood of occurrence and
possible impact to the project, and successfully manage and respond to these risks until the
project reaches completion.
Following Risk Identification, Analysis, and Response, the fourth essential process in the
Risk Management Project Workflow is Risk Monitoring. This is a continuous effort that is
ongoing until project completion. Risk Planning is essential, but the reality is that risks will
change and evolve. It is not uncommon for a PM to find themselves steering the project
ship through a very different sea than that upon which they set sail. Throughout the dura-
tion of a public transportation project, risks will continue to be added and dropped from
the risk register. Risk monitoring is an essential component that empowers the PM to be
positioned to proactively respond to threats while seizing opportunities. The knowledge it
produces grants team flexibility and enables innovation.
The Project Management Institute’s (PMI) Project Management Body of Knowledge
(PMBOK) defines Monitoring Risks as, “The process of monitoring the implementation of
agreed-upon risk response plans, tracking identified risks, identifying and analyzing new
risks, and evaluating risk process effectiveness throughout the project.” Inputs for this process
are primarily the risk register, change management documentation, and utilized risk
management metrics.
At least at every major design milestone (30%, 50%, 60%, 90%, and 100% design meet-
ings), the Risk Register should be updated, and both Qualitative and Quantitative Risk
Analysis should be conducted. Risk Monitoring should be a rolling process throughout the
life of the project. However, Risk monitoring is a task that often gets buried under the pro-
verbial piles of urgent papers. Some of these simple steps may make it more manageable to
achieve. Be fanatical about collecting status information on risks. Be equally fanatical that
it only be the status you need, not extraneous information. Document all essential
information. As Clifford Stoll said, “If you didn’t write it down, it didn’t happen.” Monitor
the status and trends as a procedural matter of routine. Make the effort meaningful by
promptly and intentionally acting on gained insights.
Think of risk monitoring as exercising. A haphazard and undisciplined approach will
yield marginal results, at best; whereas, a commitment to an intentional workout plan will
produce meaningful results. Similarly, all risks may not need to be monitored with the
same frequency, or with the same intensity. Significant or volatile threats and opportu-
nities may warrant special attention.
6.6.1 Risk Triggers

Perhaps just as important as identifying potential risks, is carefully and accurately identi-
fying the risk triggers. A Risk Trigger is an indicator that a risk has occurred, or is about to
occur. These triggers are symptoms of an impending threat or opportunity, serve as precur-
sors to preempt its occurrence or minimize its impact, and are critical to a timely response
that can most effectively mitigate or enhance the risk. Risk Triggers should be carefully
chosen to accurately reflect when a risk crosses the right risk threshold. The Risk Threshold
is the level at which the likelihood or impact of a risk becomes significant enough that th
PM or Risk Manager deems a risk response necessary.
Risk triggers are tricky business. While some are obvious and straightforward, many are less
so. Some risks may have multiple triggers that are in very different forms. Typically, the more
advance warning the trigger provides, the less reliable it is. For instance, you may be able to
identify a worrisome trend, but the longer the trendline of your projection, the more assump-
tions you must make to substantiate your conclusion.
It is important that you strive to identify triggers that accurately warn of the associated
risk. If you are having difficulty identifying the trigger, speak to those most likely to
cause the risk or feel its impact. Ask them how they would know if the problem occurred;
then work backward. Many soft, or qualitative, triggers can be effective at warning of a
problem without clearly identifying the core issues. For instance, you may receive fore-
warning that a Home Owners Association is planning to attend an upcoming public
hearing in mass to protest a roadway expansion due to traffic concerns. While stake-
holder discontent may be a risk, that doesn’t truly prepare you for the possible breadth of
core issues that may arise. Many hard, or quantitative, triggers can provide precise data,
but often not soon enough to take corrective actions to avoid the issue. For instance, a
PM might be reviewing the monthly consultant bill and notice one work activity has
spent 80% of its budget while only 40% of the work is complete. It is better to discover this
situation before the entire budget line item is spent, but it may be too late to take correc-
tive actions that will not end up impacting other aspects of the project. Some triggers are
secondary in nature, meaning you observe the secondary risk trigger after the original
risk is realized.
Many useful triggers are not able to be predicted and are completely unexpected. For
example, you might overhear a conversation in the elevator that a contractor on one of your
jobs just won a big project with a short fuse that will demand most of their resources once
underway. Or you are at your child’s PTA meeting and overhear some grumblings from
other parents whose neighborhoods are adjacent to an ongoing construction project. In
both of these examples, you can proactively act on this knowledge before the consequences
of that risk continue to escalate. As PM, you never know from where you will pick up use-
ful bits of information. Consequently, it is important to keep your ear to the ground and be
ever vigilant and observant.
It is imperative that you associate a Risk Owner with each risk on the Risk Register. The
Risk Register should also list the Risk Trigger. The Risk Owner should be carefully chosen
as they are the ones best positioned to monitor the risk trigger and implement any risk
response. If the PM is not the risk owner, they are responsible to ensure the Risk Owner is
aware of the risk trigger and monitor updates.
The goal of triggers is to keep your finger on the pulse of the correct spheres of influence
so you have advance warning and can more effectively respond to risks if they are partially
or fully realized. Experience teaches the best triggers are personal warnings that are offi-
cially, or unofficially, provided by those with whom you have an established relationship
based on trust and mutual respect. An afternoon of clever analysis of all the project metrics
cannot replace a single phone call from a colleague in a permitting organization giving you
a heads up that you may be receiving a letter later that week that says thus and so. Likewise,
a casual conversation in the hall from a coworker telling you this issue is going to be a
problem is worth more than any weekly progress report. It is invaluable that you actively
establish a network of such connections within your own organization, within your con-
sultants, and within the many federal, state, and local entities with which you must interact
116 6 Managing Risk
to build your project. This takes time and deliberate effort, but is an investment that can
pay back immeasurable benefits. As with everything you do, be ethical, be honest, be smart,
and maintain appropriate confidentiality and discretion.
6.6.2 Monitoring and Controlling Risks

Risk Monitoring includes the two distinct PM efforts of Monitoring and Controlling the
risks. Monitoring is the data collection. Controlling is doing something with the data that is
collected. Accomplishing these two initiatives encompasses a number of separate and
important tasks. New risks should be identified and processed through risk identification,
analysis, and response. Existing risks should be tracked. This includes updating the status of
the risk and the qualitative and quantitative evaluations. Risk triggers should be examined
to determine if any established thresholds have been breached. Risk metrics should be eval-
uated, and appropriate communication should be made both upward, downward, laterally,
and externally with all who need to know, as defined in the project’s communication plan.
Pending the length and complexity of the project, risk audits may be appropriate. A Risk
Audit is a dedicated effort to evaluate the Risk Management process. This can be a separate
meeting or incorporated into monthly status meetings. The purpose is to ensure the risk
management processes are being followed as per the risk management plan. The emphasis
is not to evaluate individual risks or responses (e.g., the product of the process), but rather
to evaluate if the process is working and adding value to the project. If not, then appro-
priate adjustments should be made.
6.6.3 Risk Metrics

Like all performance measures, risk metrics should answer a fundamental organizational
question, and their results should add value to the project, program, or portfolio by providing
insight that increases efficiency and productivity. They should not be burdensome to staff,
and should strive to reflect, rather than influence, behavior. Ideally, information from a
metric should lead to improved performance, not just improved metrics.
Organizations may track a wide variety of risk metrics, some of which are summarized
in Figure 6.11. These can be analyzed in combination to provide additional insights and
trendlines for projects, programs, and portfolios.
The analysis results should be used to evaluate the health of the project, program, or
portfolio. Trend lines can be identified. Lessons learned should be updated and shared
throughout the organization. At the very least, Risk Monitoring should allow you to answer
the simple question…is the project better positioned now than before to be developed and
delivered within the established budget, scope, and schedule.
Results can be distributed in a report format and documented in the Project Management
Plan. More advanced organizations may have a risk dashboard they maintain to summa-
rize key risk performance metrics.
A Risk Burndown Chart is another extremely useful tool to help PMs monitor and manage
risks. This shows trendlines of risks over time. Each risk is a separate line on a graph where
the y-axis is time (typically weeks, sprints, months, or quarters), and the x-axis is either the
risk exposure (probability of occurrence times anticipated impact in units of time or money)
Risk Metric Key Question Answered
Number of Identified Threats How many threats were identified?

Number of Threats realized How thorough, accurate, and effective is risk
analysis and response?
Negative Schedule Impacts What are the negative schedule impacts to the
project from identified threats?
Negative Budget Impacts What are the negative budget impacts to the
project from the identified threats?
Predicted risk severity compared to realized impact How accurate were the estimated risk impacts
to the project compared to what was realized?
Number of risks that occurred more than once How effective are your risk responses?
Number of unidentified and unanticipated risks How many risks did the risk management
plan and framework fail to identify?
Speed and effectiveness of risk responses How nimble and responsive is your project
team?
Number of closed threats that were never realized Are we correctly analyzing and prioritizing
the right risks?
Number of Identified Opportunities How many opportunities were identified?
Number of Opportunities realized How thorough, accurate, and effective is risk
analysis and response?
Positive Schedule Impacts What are the positive schedule impacts to the
project from identified opportunities?
Positive Budget Impacts What are the positive budget impacts to the
project from identified opportunities?
Number of closed opportunities that were never How effective was the team in analyzing and
realized prioritizing opportunities?
Risk Management Cost (combining threats, What is your ROI for risk management
opportunities, and Admin costs) activities?
Figure 6.11 Risk metrics and questions they answer.
or probability of occurrence (in units of percentage). This tool can be especially effective in
communicating with the team. A Risk Burndown Chart, as shown in Figure 6.12, can be a
powerful visual to focus responses and mobilize momentum toward solutions. This can also
provide a historic record of the effectiveness of the team’s risk response. As threats are iden-
tified and risk responses are implemented, the risk exposure and probability of occurrence
should diminish over time.
6.6.4 Risk Communication

Effective risk communication is critical to maintaining team efficiency and productivity
while guiding the project to success within the established budget, scope, and schedule.
This is true for team members, stakeholders, and leadership. It reduces confusion and
brings clarity to project expectations.
118 6 Managing Risk
Risk Burndown Chart Less confident or secure

Risk PMs are often reluctant to
Exposure
Risk 1 pass potentially bad news up
(P * I)
the chain of command for a
OR Risk 2 number of reasons. Perhaps
they don’t want leadership
Probability to feel compelled to act and
of Risk 3
unintentionally make things
Occurrence
worse. Or perhaps they don’t
want to damage the impres-
Time sion that all is under control,
Figure 6.12 Risk burndown chart. gain the reputation of one
who cries wolf, or reinforce
the impression that they cannot handle the responsibility. Perhaps they feel overworked or
overwhelmed already and don’t want to invite additional questions and requests for status
reports from leadership. Perhaps they don’t know how to manage the risk and are choosing
denial, desperately hoping it goes away. Some may even have a hero-complex and con-
sciously or subconsciously want the risk to be realized so they can save the day.
While these may be understandable or defendable, at least in the PM’s own mind, it is
their responsibility to keep leadership informed of project progress, which includes risks.
Remember that perhaps the greatest risk to a PM is for leadership to be blindsided by a
complication that could have been avoided. Exceptional PMs have already spent time cul-
tivating trusted working relationships with leadership that are based upon consistent
performance and reliable counsels, so that notifying them of potential risks does not ini-
tiate an inquisition. There are benefits to notifying leadership of risks in a timely manner.
If the risk is realized, leadership may need to know, and the sooner the better. Regardless
of the resulting impacts, foreknowledge can help protect them, and you, from the fallout.
Leadership also may approach the issue from a wider perspective, and perhaps offer insight
on how to better manage the risk. Exceptional PMs understand that more than knowing all
the right answers, knowing the right questions to ask makes them valuable. And most
importantly, it’s the right thing to do. Part of your job is to present good, and bad, news.
Delaying the inevitable almost always makes it worse.
Having said this, wise PMs understand how to exercise judgment and discretion in what
risk information is shared, with whom, and when. Pending your organization’s culture and
expectations, risks that have a high anticipated impact on the project should be discussed
with leadership. As with many aspects of project management, there is no substitute for
wisdom and experience.
119
Managing Resources
“The strength of the team is each individual member. The strength of each member is
the team.”
– Phil Jackson
7.1 Developing and Managing a Team
“It is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit.”
– Harry S. Truman
Roughly translated, the second law of thermodynamics states that a system left to its own
devices will naturally devolve into increasing states of disorder. This Entropy is self-evident
in public transportation project teams.
Culture matters. The culture, tone, and productivity of a team is the PM’s responsibility.
Yes, the corporate culture is incredibly important, but a PM can directly impact the team’s
culture. Harmonious, high functioning teams do not happen by chance. They take time,
but this is a critical and powerful investment. The PM must be intentional to this end, stra-
tegically fostering trust, acceptance, and commitment to shared common values and goals.
Developing and managing a team are two very different functions. Developing a team
means establishing and improving the competencies, team interactions, and overall team
environment to enhance project performance. This is concentrating on the beehive, not the
bees. Managing a team means focusing on the individuals. This involves providing
feedback, resolving issues, and managing team changes to optimize individual team mem-
ber’s performance. Two very different foci that require two very different skill sets.
Successful team development requires intentional planning and consistent fol-
low-through. First, the PM must accept that they run the team. While there are likely no
project schedule milestones related to team culture, it is the undercurrent that can carry
your objectives toward shore or pull you back out to sea in spite of your best efforts to the
contrary. Push decisions to the lowest possible level. Be alert and aware of the pace and
pulse of progress and relationships. Emphasize collaborative decision making. Be humble.
Actively listen. Be kind. Praise in public; criticize in private. Lead with empathy. Truly care
about your people. Become vested in them as individuals and their individual success,

120 7 Managing Resources
which will be a part of, and extend beyond, this project. Develop a safe, supportive space
that builds trust, empowers innovation, and energizes greatness. The culture is the frame-
work and momentum that positions your team for success.
William Wrigley, Jr., said, “When two people in business always agree, one of them is
unnecessary.” Conflict is inevitable. In a vibrant team, the absence of conflict is a danger
sign. As Mark Sanborn said, “In teamwork, silence isn’t golden, it’s deadly.” When conflict
occurs, it is critical that you manage conflict in constructive manner, meaning people
arguing about the problem, as opposed to a destructive manner, meaning people arguing
about people. Team members should resolve their own conflict, with the PM stepping in
only when necessary. The team’s culture you develop can establish a structure that pro-
motes healthy debate and constructive conflict resolution.
Differences of opinion can challenge assumptions and spark innovation, provided the
conflict does not turn contentious. There are five basic strategies of conflict resolution.
Withdrawing or Avoiding is retreating from conflict. While cooling off may have some tem-
porary benefit, eventually you still need to find a solution. Smoothing or Accommodating
emphasizes areas of agreement while ignoring the true problem. This is another lose-lose
situation. Forcing or Directing pushes one’s viewpoint at the expense of others.
Compromising and Reconciling is where both parties give something up. While all of these
may be appropriate given a specific situation, the preferred method is Collaborative prob-
lem-solving, which examines alternatives and involves cooperative give and take.
True leadership extends beyond positional power that is based on one’s formal position
within the organization or team. Pending your organizational structure, some or all of the
team members may not report directly to the PM. Especially in these circumstances, it is
imperative you develop other forms of power. Expert power is based upon your skill or
knowledge. Referent power relies on respect or admiration others may have for you based
on your personality, actions, and decisions. Informational power controls the gathering or
flow of information. Persuasive power is the ability to convince others to embrace a
preferred decision or course of action. Personal power is sourced form one’s charisma.
Ingratiating power relies on the application of flattery. Reward power is the ability to give
praise or bonuses. Coercive power is the ability to discipline. Pressure-based power is the
ability to limit another’s freedom, options, or movement. Find the combination that fits
your style and then refine it.
Assume positive intent. This is good practice for most all personal and professional rela-
tionships, but it also holds true for teams. Assume positive intent. This can be a challenge
when personalities clash or messages may seem overtly confrontational, but it is a benefit
to the entire team when the leader consistently and predictably assumes positive intent in
both the message and the messenger. Sometimes, this trust can be compromised and you
may desire to adjust your approach for specific situations or individuals. And be aware that
while many may have their own angle or agenda, that is not inherently inconsistent with
assuming positive intent.
For anyone who played team sports, you know you don’t have to like all of your team-
mates to win. It can help, but it is not required to achieve success. By contrast, each team
member needs to feel included and committed to each other and the common goal. The
“you mess with one, you’ve got us all” mentality is extremely powerful and effective. It can
be a challenge to find this delicate balance of collective and individual accountability, but
when you do it is a powerful force for progress.
Some teams create team charters. This is a document that is created by the entire team,
and is signed off by each team member. It contains the ground rules, describing team
values, agreements, and operational guidelines. It may also include collective expectations
for communications, meetings, decision making, conflict resolution, and anything else
important to the group members. Even if not formalized, this exercise can be a powerful
team-building experience, particularly when a new group is forming or you are onboarding
new members. One short exercise is to give everyone a pad of sticky notes and then write
down answers to a few questions targeting values, priorities, past times, hobbies, expecta-
tions, shared objectives, and goals. Share your answers, and then group the notes on a wall
to show commonalities. This is an effective way to accelerate relationships and quickly
begin to lay a strong foundation of trust. It may be the most valuable hour or two of your
entire project.
Teams can be like children in that they usually live up or down to expectations. Few
things will encourage a team more than the expectation of success. Make team building a
priority. Explain why it is important, invest in your people, and have fun. Be it on-site or
off-site, during work hours or on the weekend, doing something meaningful or something
silly, in your comfort zone or something completely new. Use your imagination and be all
in. Team building activities are vital to getting to truly know each other and building trust-
ing relationships. Additionally, they can create powerful opportunities to set the ground
rules of behavior and performance expectations. These should address how the team mem-
bers work with each other, how the team will handle obstacles, and how the team will meet
deadlines. Some examples may include a commitment to promptly return communica-
tions, to being honest and listening to fresh ideas, to the quality and timeliness of project
deliverables. A team with defined boundaries will be happier and more productive. Once
expectations are clarified, then the stage is set for goals.
Set SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timely) individual and team
goals. Goals can give each employee a united purpose and a cohesive mission. Achieving
realistic goals can create a sense of unity and trust and this can be self-motivating, where
unrealistic goals will generate apathy and erode morale. Clear goals should be paired with
motivation that is consistent with the team culture. The results can be cumulative and
astounding. Some of us who played sports were fortunate enough to have a coach that cre-
ated a cohesive team with personalized motivations that pushed us to achieve more as an
individual and a team than we ever thought possible. Those life lessons endure and are
directly transferable to the business world.
Mature teams invest in their team and team members’ development. One way to accom-
plish this, while insulating against SME loss, is cross-training. Another method, often con-
ducted concurrently, is mentoring. An experienced coach or advisor can provide needed
support and guidance and perspective to team members at all levels, including the PM.
Know when to lead and when to take a step back. Delegation is the action of trust. No
one wants to work for a micromanager. Tell your team what needs to be done, and then
grant them the respect and freedom to best determine how to accomplish the task. When
delegating, define the Who, What, When, and Why, while providing some freedom in the
How. Remember you want to control the outcome, not necessarily the process. Experience
will help you discern when to be a dominant leader driving progress with lasered focus
toward the goals, and when to give the team the creative space to innovate and lead them-
selves. Successful PMs find a way to do both within the team’s established cultural fabric.
Recognize team and individual successes. Everyone likes to be appreciated. And there is
something to appreciate in each of your team members. Highlight conquered challenges,
collaborative innovations, supportive actions, and specialized skill sets.
Successfully managing a team requires tact, interpersonal skills, emotional intelligence,
and courage. This is not a spectator sport. The ability to identify, assess, and manage your
own and others’ personal emotions is critical. There are many effective ways to lead and
inspire your team, you need to find the style that fits you and your unique skill set.
7.1.1 Theory of Constraints

The Theory of Constraints is a management methodology that asserts any system is inher-
ently limited by a small number of constraints. In his book, The Goal, Eliyahu M. Goldratt
described the Theory of Constraints using the analogy of boy scout troop on a hike. The
goal was for the troop to hike together to their destination. While there may be many
factors that impact their speed, their progress was limited by the speed of the slowest scout,
“Herbie.” If the troop wanted to get to the camp site sooner, they should put Herbie at the
front to set the pace while they lighten his load so he can walk faster.
A PM must run the project within the established triple constraint of budget, scope, and
schedule. However, they must also work the realities of their teams and resources.
Therefore, in order to increase efficiency and productivity, the system (or team) should be
analyzed, constraints should be identified, and everything should be subservient to the
purpose of exploiting that constraint toward the point where it is no longer the limiting
factor for progress. On teams, the constraint is often a critical Subject Matter Expert (SME)
that is pulled in many directions. At any time during your project the PM should know,
who is your Herbie.
7.1.2 Tuckman Ladder

Projects have a clear beginning and end. So do project teams. It is advantageous to plan
how to define, staff, manage, and eventually release team members. Mature teams will go
through the following five development stages, also known as the Tuckman Ladder, as
shown in Figure 7.1.
7.1.2.1 Forming – Learning about Each Other

Forming is the first stage of team development, when the team comes together. While there
may be clarity on purpose, most are approaching the team in an independent manner.
There can be apprehension and uncertainty about roles, responsibilities, and processes.
This can cause team members to feel anxious. Most will look to the PM for guidance and
direction. Team members are getting to know each other and figuring out how to function
at a team. Whether reserved or eager, most will be well-mannered, tentative, and compliant.
Forming Storming Norming Performing Adjourning
Figure 7.1 Tuckman ladder.

Interactions may be cordial, with conversations concentrating on work and safe topics. The
PM should take the lead while providing clear expectations, consistent guidance, and
prompt responses.
7.1.2.2 Storming – Challenging Each Other

Storming is the second development phase, where the purpose is clear but relationships are
blurry. Team members may still be uncertain in trying to express their individuality by
positioning on how best to accomplish goals. Concerns can arise about the team hierarchy.
This phase can be characterized by uncertainty and conflict, which can promote deeper
understanding of each other’s expectations. Teams are starting to sort themselves out and
build trust. The team can work through the resistance, lack of participation, competition,
power struggles, and high emotions to provide increased clarity of purpose and lead the
group toward establishing norms. Members start to open up and communicate feelings,
but still view themselves and a collection of individuals and not yet a team. This phase
should be passed through as soon as possible. Successful PMs focus on encouragement and
coaching, while managing relationships and task-oriented issues.
7.1.2.3 Norming – Working with Each Other

Team efficiency increases as you enter the Norming, the third development phase. Team
relationships are well understood, and there is a shared commitment to goals. Ground rules
are established and accepted. Roles and responsibilities are clearly defined and understood.
Conflict is being replaced with reconciliation and an open exchange of ideas. Members are
engaged and supportive of each other. The team is developing an identity, and real cohe-
sion and confidence. Social relationships may develop among the team as interactions and
trust deepens. Differences are now discussed and negotiated constructively. Successful PMs
facilitate, providing meaningful feedback and recognition, while closely monitoring the
energy of the team.
7.1.2.4 Performing – Working as One

Team efficiency skyrockets during the Performing development phase. Now the team is
fully committed and running like a well-oiled machine. Members have embraced the team
interdependence and are effectively producing as a team. Healthy, balanced communica-
tions, and relationships based on trust and respect are the bedrock of substantial progress,
even when stressful situations arise. Cooperation and collaboration enable the team to
focus on performance as there is a clear vision and purpose. The team naturally becomes
more efficient and flexible as it collectively focuses on achieving the results. During this
phase, the PM may step back a bit and delegate as the team may need minimal oversight.
Celebrate successes, encourage group decision-making and problem-solving, and keep
your pulse on the team dynamics.
7.1.2.5 Adjourning – Celebrating Together and Individually Transitioning

By definition, all projects will come to an end, thus Adjourning the project team.
Productivity naturally declines as individuals begin to prepare for their next assignments.
Sadness and other emotions can permeate especially close teams, which can also reduce
efficiencies. Successful PMs recognize this change, and strive to acknowledge team and
individual efforts and achievements. Meanwhile, the PM needs to ensure the project
.
finishes, and finishes strong. Always take time to celebrate with your team. Experienced
PMs understand the public transportation world can be small; there may be a good chance
you will work with these team members again on future projects, so treat them well from
the beginning to the end.
7.1.2.6 Tuckman Ladder Challenge

Teams can accelerate or regress to different stages throughout their life. Some experts say
that adding new team members brings the team back to the Norming phase. One challenge
in public transportation projects is the extended project duration. As such, you as PM can
be frequently onboarding new team members due to staff turnover or other resourcing
realities. Intentionally integrating them into the team’s culture is important for the produc-
tivity and efficiency of the entire team.
7.1.3 Motivators
Employees are as loyal to an organization as their options allow. Fredrick Herzberg
established his Hygiene Theory of motivation that asserts one’s work environment does not
cause satisfaction, but if missing, can cause dissatisfaction. Thus, one’s compensation, bene-
fits, and work conditions are only preventative in measure. In 1943, Abraham Maslow pro-
posed a hierarchy of human motivations that now bears his name, as shown in Figure 7.2.
He asserted that people can only ascend to higher levels after achieving security in all
previous levels. Knowing where your team members are on Maslow’s Hierarchy can pro-
duce insight as to their engagement and commitment to your team.
For any individual or team to reach its full potential, culture matters. When a team envi-
ronment is one that is inclusive, promotes safety, makes its members feel valued and
respected, recognizes contributions, and challenges our creativity, the team does more
than just survives, it thrives. It is the PM’s responsibility to develop and manage the team
in ways that makes this happen.
Maslow's Hierarchy Employee Engagement

Career
Self Actualization Development Highly Engaged
challenge, opportunity, learning, creativity Opportunities I have it good and I know it
Esteem Modern Engaged

importance, recognition, respect Recognition I make things happen
Love / Belonging Almost Engaged

nd I'm proud to work here, but may leave
social, love, family, team na
atio
p ens fits
Safety Co
m
Ben
e Not Engaged
economic and physical security I'm here for the money
Survival Disengaged
food, water, sleep I can't wait to get out of here
Figure 7.2 Maslow’s hierarchy.

7.1.4 Some Additional Thoughts

True leadership is a long-term commitment. Great PMs focus on positive and productive,
long-term relationships, not transactional exchanges with team members or stakeholders.
Like exercising or a nutritious diet or investing, evaluating progress on a day-to-day frequency
is too small of a window to notice and appreciate enduring trends. Whereas, disciplined
behavior pays off over time. Consistently leading with integrity, empathy, and respect will
build trust and earn a reputation that will empower your team to accomplish amazing results.
As Johann Wolfgang von Goethe said, “You can easily judge the character of a man by how he
treats those who can do nothing for him.” Most outstanding leaders consistently live their life
in a way that makes others want to follow them, and feel good for doing so.
A quick reality check; if your team is coming in early, leaving late, working through
lunch, and sending work emails after hours or on the weekend, there are two possible rea-
sons. Perhaps you have an unusually passionate, dedicated, and committed team that lives,
eats, and breathes your project? More likely you are burning them out. While perhaps
necessary for certain pushes at critical times, this is not a sustainable reality.
In his book Leaders Eat Last, Simon Sinek describes how the group expects the leader to
mitigate all threats, even at the expense of their own well-being. Understanding this
fundamental expectation can help you transition from an authority to a leader. Successful
PMs are effective buffers, strategically filtering expectations and frustrations from execu-
tive leadership down to their team, and tactically advancing team challenges and successes
up the chain of command. This approach will foster a supportive team culture in which
you can quickly build trust. Take care of your team, and they will take care of you!
7.2 Personality Assessments
“Diversity: the art of thinking independently together.”

– Malcolm Forbes
Many are promoted to PMs because they are exceptional engineers. These can be very dif-
ferent roles, requiring very different skill sets. This may be most evident in how one assem-
bles and leads a team.
Successful transitions from engineer to PM are rarely by accident. Some typical engi-
neering traits are easily transferrable. Focus and follow-through. Accurately defining the
problem, risks, and constraints. Creative problem solving. Attention to detail. Others can
be far more challenging. Delegating. Managing stakeholder expectations. Managing
change. Resolving conflict. Making decisions amidst ambiguity. Operating in an unpredict-
able environment where influence management is key to success. Most of these soft skills
center on relationship building and effective communication.
Many engineers make the mistake of assuming everyone thinks like they do, or dis-
counting those that differ in opinion, approach, or priority. Exceptional PMs know that
this is a recipe for disaster. When broadening one’s focus from a task or engineering disci-
pline to an entire project, it is beneficial to have the maturity to recognize there can be
strength in diversity of thought. Sometimes an outlier of thought or personality can be a
magical force multiplier, while other times they can almost instantaneously subterfuge
momentum and catapult the best laid plans to ruin before you even realize what is happen-
ing. Successful PMs have the wisdom to identify and embrace the former, and quickly jet-
tison the latter. Successful projects have PMs that invest in the team and foster an
environment that builds and maintains healthy relationships. When you hire an engineer,
you are not buying a widget, or other interchangeable commodity. You are renting access
to their minds, hoping to benefit from their thoughts, creativity, and problem-solving
skills. In the best of cases, underlying all of this is a foundation of trust, agreement of eth-
ical principles, and complimentary personalities.
The reality is we don’t often have the opportunity to hand-pick our team. More typically,
we must play the hand we are dealt. Perhaps we are able to choose some key team mem-
bers, but others will almost assuredly be assigned. A few may be superstars. Some may be
cooperative. Some may be functional. Some may be distracted and unfocused. Others may
be openly disruptive and a daily challenge. An effective PM identifies, and then leverages,
the strengths of the team members to remain focused on the project objectives. Navigating
personnel issues and fostering positive and productive team dynamics are not skills typi-
cally taught in engineering education. Nor are most engineers particularly good at it.
Fortunately, there are well-established tools that provide incredibly useful insights into
the psychological undercurrents and motivations of ourselves and others that can increase
one’s emotional intelligence. Understanding some of these foundational principles will
enable you to be a better leader and facilitator in how you connect with others to build and
maintain high performing teams. As Charles Maurice said, “I am more afraid of an army of
one hundred sheep led by a lion than an army of one hundred lions led by a sheep.”
There are a number of outstanding available personality resources. Each approaches the
topic with a slightly different perspective and purpose. Any can provide unique insights
into yourself and others. If combined, you can capture a more complete picture of your
team and yourself that will enable you to more effectively work, communicate, and lead in
a way that builds trust and increases productivity. Five of the most common and trusted
personality assessments for business are:
1) Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) looks at how you process information and make
decisions.
2) DISC (Dominance, Influence, Steadiness, and Compliance) examines your preference
in communication and behavior.
3) Strength Deployment Inventory (SDI) evaluates the motives of what drives behavior
when things are going well and when in conflict.
4) Enneagram determines your core motivations.
5) Clifton Strengths identifies what you naturally do well.
7.2.1 Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator Handbook was first published in 1944, and has been a
staple of personality testing ever since. The MBTI personality inventory catalogs differing
psychological preferences in how one perceives the world and make decisions. This
personal inventory asks of series of introspective questions designed to focus on answering
the four fundamental questions in Figure 7.3:
Where do you get your energy? How do you handle information?
Introvert Extrovert Sensing iNtuition

Time with self Interaction with Observing and Reasoning and
and thoughts others Experience Understanding
How do you make decisions? How do you assess situations?
Thinking Feeling Judging Perceiving

Logic, Objective Context, Subjective Planned and Flexible and
Analysis evaluation Organized Spontaneous
Figure 7.3 MBTI overview.
The underlined letters in your answer to the each of these questions combine to form
your four-character personality type. There are sixteen uniquely identified personalities.
Results detail a host of insights and cascading work implications. In a time of change,
MBTI can suggest what people will likely do to manage the change. MBTI shows how team
members approach similar tasks and situations, as well as how we go about getting what
we want. The results show what information we value, and our differing approaches to
creativity, problem-solving, and decision making. Figure 7.4 is a summary of the sixteen
personality types:
Type Description Characteristics
ISTJ The Inspector Serious, Quiet, Diligent, Dependable, Realistic, Responsible,

(Responsible Steadfast, Methodical, Logical, Thorough, Practical, Pragmatic,
Executors) Seeks order and organization, Values tradition and loyalty
ISFJ The Protector Quiet, Friendly, Responsible, Conscientious, Careful, Considerate,
(Dedicated Compassionate, Steadfast, Thorough, Accurate, Loyal, Committed
Stewards) to obligations, Seeks order and harmony, Remembers details
INFJ The Counselor Insightful, Future-oriented, Conscientious, Creative, Nurturing,
(Insightful Emotional intelligence, Seeks meaning and connections, Wants to
Motivators) understand what motivates others, Committed to values
INTJ The Mastermind Logical, Analytical, Problem-solver, Independent, Ambitious,
(Visionary Driven, Original thinker, Visionary, Quickly identifies patterns,
Strategists) High standards of competence and performance, Can be skeptical
ISTP The Craftsman Artisans, Methodical, Organized, Efficient, Tolerant, Candid, Silent
(Nimble observer, Flexible, Analyzes cause and effect, Quick with solutions,
Pragmatics) Processes information without emotion, Logically organizes facts
ISFP The Composer Passionate, Quiet, Empathetic, Compassionate, Friendly, Flexible,
(Practical Kind, Spontaneous, Sensitive, Open-minded, Loyal to values and
Custodians) people, Prefers to work alone, Avoids conflict, Enjoys the moment
(Continued)
Type Description Characteristics
INFP The Healer Idealistic, Curious, Imaginative, Driven to understand others and
(Inspired help them reach potential, Loyal to values and their people, Seeks
Crusaders) harmony of life and values, Sees possibilities for better future
INTP The Architect Rational, Contemplative, Quiet, Contained, Adaptive, Problem-
(Expansive solver, Analytical, Focused, Logical innovator, Drawn to ideas over
Analyzers) social interaction, Seeks logical explanations, Identifies patterns
ESTP The Dynamo Bold, Tactical, Energetic, Outgoing, Enthusiastic, Pragmatic,
(Dynamic Thrill-seeker, Risk-taker, Problem-solver, Spontaneous, Flexible,
Mavericks) Results focused, Tolerant, Theories bore them, Enjoys the moment
ESFP The Performer Outgoing, Spontaneous, Adaptive, Passionate, Collaborative,
(Enthusiastic Friendly, Accepting, Spirited, Common-sensed, Loves people and
Improvisers) life, Entertainer who enjoys the stage, Makes work fun
ENFP The Champion Charismatic, Enthusiastic, Imaginative, Spontaneous, Flexible,
(Impassioned Improviser, Kind, Supportive, People-focused creator, Loves
Catalysts) helping others explore creative talents and reaching potential
ENTP The Visionary Clever, Entrepreneurial, Quick, Stimulating, Alert, Outspoken,
(Innovative Resourceful, Emotional intelligence, Ambitious, Bored by routines,
Explorers) Embraces intellectual challenges
ESTJ The Supervisor Decisive, Efficient, Practical, Realistic, Systematic organizer, Hard
(Efficient Drivers) worker, Dependable, Focused on achieving results, Likes logical
standards, Finds solutions, Eager to lead groups
ESFJ The Provider Outgoing, Loyal, Follow-through, Cooperative, Conscientious,
(Committed Kind, Pragmatic, Devoted, Responsible, Seeks harmony in their
Builders) environment, Enjoys deep relationships, Notices others’ needs
ENFJ The Teacher Goal-oriented, Empathetic, Facilitator, Responsive, Sociable, Kind,
(Engaging Caring, Responsible, Charismatic organizer, Inspiring leadership,
Mobilizers) Highly attuned to others’ emotions, needs, and motivations
ENTJ The Commander Candid, Decisive, Strategic leader, Organizational problem-solver,
(Strategic Well-informed, Planner, Goal-setter, Shares knowledge, Skilled at
Directors) coordinating people and activities, Sees underlying relationships
Figure 7.4 MBTI type description.
A high-level understanding of your own MTBI personality type, as well as your coworkers,
will grant you valuable insight in how to best to relate and communicate to others on your
team as you will better understand how they think and what they value.
7.2.2 DISC (Dominance, Influence, Steadiness, and Compliance)

DISC is a behavior assessment focused on our preferred behaviors to others and everyday
tasks we do. DISC can be especially applicable to work environments. The assessment
relies on four distinct areas: Dominant, Influential, Steady, and Compliant. These four
areas describe how we prefer to work, and interact with others. Figure 7.5 visually depicts
the DISC approach, and Figure 7.6 provides more detailed descriptions of each focus area.
•Dominace •Influential
•Direct •Inspirational
•Decisive •Interactive
•Doer •interesting
D I
C S
•Compliant •Steady
•Cautious •Stable
•Careful •Sincere
•Conscientious •Supportive
Figure 7.5 DISC overview.
Dominant (D) Influential (I) Steady (S) Compliant (C)
Focus Tasks People People Tasks

Personality Outgoing Outgoing Reserved Reserved
Preferred pace Faster Faster Slower Slower
Motivated by Winning, Success, Having fun Teamwork Playing by the
Competition rules
Desires/Values Productivity, Recognition, Sincerity, Accuracy,
Challenges Relationships Loyalty Quality
Strive to shape Overcoming Influencing and Cooperating with Working
their opposition to persuading others others within contentiously
environment by achieve results existing system within system
Measures/Values Results Recognition, Compatibility, Precision,
contributions by Friends Relationships Accuracy,
Activity
Gets security Control Spontaneity Relationships Preparation
from
To be more Challenging Freedom to Reassurance of Opportunity for
effective needs assignments express self self-worth careful planning
Wants to be The boss Admired Liked Right
Wants you to be To the point Interesting Pleasant Precise
Under stress Domineering, Impulsive, Slow, Sensitive Calculating,
can be Demanding Irritating Condescending
Bugged by Inefficiency Routine, Boredom Impatience, Mistakes,
Insensitivity Surprises
Probably should Relax and pace Listen and be Not take things Not overly rely
self more realistic personally on data and
details
Fears Loss of control Loss of Prestige Confrontation Embarrassment
Figure 7.6 DISC descriptions. (Continued)

Dominant (D) Influential (I) Steady (S) Compliant (C)
Communication Direct and Direct and open Indirect and open Indirect and
tendency guarded guarded
Keys to Focused brevity, Share experiences, Be polite, Express Focus on facts
communicating Avoid repeating Encourage dialog, interest in them, and details,
with this type self and making Don’t interrupt Clarify Minimize
generalizations expectations emotions, Be
patient
Prioritizes Accepting Taking action, Giving support, Ensuring
challenge, Taking Collaboration, Collaboration, accuracy,
action, Achieving Expressing Maintaining Maintaining
results enthusiasm stability stability
Challenges/May Lack of concern Being impulsive Indecision, Delegation,
be limited by for others, Disorganization, Multitasking, Compromising,
Insensitivity, Lack of follow- Working in Social events,
Impatience, through, Staying ambiguity, Overly Quick decisions
Skepticism, focused, Speaking accommodating, Being critical,
Getting into the directly, Avoiding change Overanalyzing,
details Researching facts Isolating self
Figure 7.6 (Cont’d)
When you take the assessment, your results (profile) are reported as a dot within the
DISC circle, along with a highlighted area of your zoned preferences. The more intensely
you align with a specific personality type, the further your dot is from the center of the
circle. The highlighted area can overlay one or more other quadrants. Most have a domi-
nant type that leans toward an adjacent quadrant with whom they share characteristics.
The twelve DISC identified personality subtypes are:
● DC: The Challenger
● D: The Winner
● DI: The Seeker
● ID: The Risk Taker
● I: The Enthusiast
● IS: The Buddy
● SI: The Collaborator
● S: The Peacekeeper
● SC: The Technician
● CS: The Bedrock
● C: The Analyst
● CD: The Perfectionist
Your results profile may also include advice on how best to communicate and work with
other personality types. As PM, you can plot the dots of everyone on your team on the same
DISC circle to ascertain the makeup of your team. This can quickly provide insights on
your team strengths and challenges, which can be extremely helpful in determining how
best to communicate in ways that builds trust, and motivate your team toward
productivity.
7.2.3 Strength Deployment Inventory (SDI)

SDI evaluates one’s motivations that drive behavior by balancing one’s concern for people,
performance, and process. Uniquely, SDI evaluates individuals at two points; first when things
are going well and then in situations of conflict. Comparing these two states provides insight
into the degree and nature by which your and others’ reactions change during challenging
times. SDI focuses on why we do what we do within seven motivational value systems.
Your SDI profile is graphically reported on a color-coded, inverted triangle, as shown in
Figure 7.7. There are three colors with associated scales ranging from 1 to 100. The blue
scale focuses on our concern for people, and our nature to actively seek opportunities to
help others. The red scale focuses on our concern for performance, and our nature to
actively seek opportunities to achieve results. The green scale focuses on our concern for
process, and our nature to actively seek logical orderliness and self-reliance. The assessment
provides two results. A dot is placed at the intersection of the three scores which represents
your Motivational Value System (MVS), how you are when things are going well. A vector,
or arrow, is sourced at the dot and ends at the point of the Conflict Scenario (CS), how you
are when things are not going well.
Results can have significant work implications. In times of change, SDI focuses on values
and what matters most to us. SDI shows what people need during change to fully engage.
SDI shows our motivations, what makes a task satisfying, and what role we prefer to play.
SDI shows what we want. This knowledge can be invaluable in knowing, understanding,
and managing team members’ actions during calm and stressful situations. Figure 7.8 pro-
vides some more detailed insights.
It has been said our greatest weakness is our greatest strength taken to extreme. The SDI
analysis also provides insight into one’s characteristic strengths, which if overdone can
become significant negatives. When someone is struggling to succeed with their strengths,
they can push harder and cross a contextual line in terms of intensity, frequency, or dura-
tion. Knowledge of your own, and your
team members’, natural tendencies can
be invaluable when guiding successful Focus on Focus on
responses and driving effective results, People Performance
especially in stressful situation. Although
perhaps well-intentioned, these can trigger
conflict in a team which can adversely
impact harmony, efficiency, and produc-
tivity. Recognition of this tendency can Focus on
start conversations to return the extreme Process
to a strength for the individual and the
team. SDI identifies seven strengths for
each unique section of the triangle. Figure
7.9 lists these strengths, and the unwanted
Figure 7.7 SDI overview.
results if taken to extreme.
Preferred Work
Focus Area Value System Description Characteristics Environment
People Motivated by Seeking ways to bring Open, Friendly, Loyal,

Altruistic/Nurturing protection, growth, help to others, Trying Trusting, Supportive,
and welfare of to make life easier for Respectful, Socially
others, Strong others, Avoids being a sensitive, Being
desire to help burden, Defending accepted and
others who can others’ rights appreciated
genuinely benefit
People/Performance Motivated by Actively seeking to Enthusiastic, Open,

Assertive/Nurturing growth and help others, Friendly, Sincere,
development of Generating Trusting, Respectful,
others, Strong enthusiasm and Compassionate,
desire to direct, support in Growth opportunities,
persuade, or lead overcoming obstacles, Mentoring
others for the Challenging others to
benefit of others be their best
Performance Motivated by Alert to opportunities, Competitive, Creative,
Assertive/Directing accomplishing Strives for immediate Innovative, Fast-paced,
tasks and achieving action, Accepts Challenging,
results, Strong challenges, Stimulating, Potential
desire to set goals, Persuasive, to advance, Material
take action, and Competitive, rewards available
claim earned Risk-taker,
rewards Responsible
Performance/Process Motivated by smart Seeks efficiency, Complex challenges
Judicious/Competing assertiveness and Assesses risks, requiring expertise,
fairness in Decisive and Recognition for
competition, Strong proactive when facts achievement, Develops
desire to assess are known, winning strategies,
risks and develop Challenges opposition Technical resources
opportunistic with logic and
strategy strategy
Process Motivated by Seeks clarity, Organized, Clear,
Analytic/Independent meaningful order accuracy and Precise, Appreciation
and thorough correctness, Cautious for utility, efficiency,
thinking, Strong and thorough, Keeps and reliability, Time to
desire to pursue emotions under develop ideas, Logical
independent control, Plans ahead decision-making
interests, To be and follows the plan
practical and fair
(Continued)
Preferred Work
Focus Area Value System Description Characteristics Environment
Process/People Motivated by Builds effective Conscientious, Patient,

Cautious/Supportive developing processes and Congenial, Respectful,
self-sufficiency in resources to protect or Fair, Encouraging,
self and others, enhance others’ Tasks that require
Strong desire to welfare, Fighting for thoughtful analysis to
analyze the others’ principles that are fair aid those in need
needs and help
them
Hub (all three) Motivated by Considers other Cooperative, Sociable,
Flexible/Cohering adapting to others perspectives, Interactive, Playful,
or situations, Open-minded, Spontaneous, Being
Strong desire to Adaptable, Maintains heard and listening,
collaborate and balance, Brings Consensus building,
remain open to people together and Open-minded
different options makes connections
and viewpoints
Figure 7.8 SDI descriptions.
SDI Focus Area Strength When taken to extreme
Focus on People Supportive Self-Sacrificing

Altruistic/Nurturing Caring Submissive
Color: Blue
Devoted Subservient
Modest Self-Effacing
Helpful Smothering
Loyal Blind Spots
Trusting Gullible
Focus on Performance Risk-Taking Reckless
Assertive/Directive Competitive Aggressive
Color: Red
Quick-to-Act Rash
Forceful Domineering
Persuasive Abrasive
Ambitious Ruthless
Self-Confident Arrogant
Figure 7.9 SDI focus areas.

(Continued)
SDI Focus Area Strength When taken to extreme
Focus on Process Persevering Stubborn

Analytic/Automizing Fair Cold
Color: Green
Principled Unbending
Analytical Obsessed
Methodical Rigid
Reserved Distant
Cautious Suspicious
Hub Option-Oriented Indecisive
Flexible Tolerant Indifferent
Color: All three
Adaptable Compliant
Inclusive Indiscriminate
Sociable Intrusive
Open-to-Change Inconsistent
Flexible Unpredictable
Figure 7.9 (Cont’d)
9 Seeking Autonomy
Enneagram Circle
Peacemaker Resisting the Present
8 1
Challenger Instictive Reformer
(gut)
7 2
Enthusiast Helper
Feeling
6 (heart) 3
Loyalist Thinking Achiever
(head)
Seeking Security 5 Seeking Attention
4
Future Focused Investigator Past Oriented
Individualist
Figure 7.10 Enneagram overview.
7.2.4 Enneagram
Enneagram is a modern version of older, ancient wisdom traditions that differentiates
those that rely on instincts, thinking, and feeling. This personality assessment tool then
divides humanity into nine (9) different personality types that are graphically displayed
around the circumference of a circle, as shown in Figure 7.10. Figures 7.11, 7.12, and 7.13
provide some detailed insights for each of the nine personality types, divided by focus area.
The position on the circle becomes important relative to adjacent personality types. Lines
can also be drawn between the personality types that add additional understandings.
Enneagram can provide some deeper insights on individual’s mindsets, as well as commu-
nication and productivity strengths and challenges.
Instinctive Center 8. Challenger 9. Peacemaker 1. Reformer

(Gut) (The Powerful Person) (The Peaceful Person) (The Good Person)
Premise Love and respect are Love and respect are Only perfect people
gained by being strong earned by blending in are worthy of love
and just with others’ agendas and respect
Summary Protective, Leader, Mediator, Reassuring, Moral, Strict
Maverick, Intimidator, Accommodating, Perfectionist, Judge,
Self-assured, Assertive, Easy-going, Critic, Crusader,
Decisive, Direct, Willful, Preservationist, Patient, Contentious,
Confrontational Complacent, Receptive, Self-controlled,
Adaptive Principled
Focus of Attention Power and control, Others’ wants and What is right or
Protecting those that needs, Conflict, wrong, correct or
need it Wholeness, Peace of incorrect, Integrity,
mind Balance
Focus of Energy Being powerful and Avoiding conflict, Other Trying to improve
protective, Fighting, people, Separation, Loss
Self-protection
Fear/Avoidance Vulnerability, Being Conflict Corruptness,
controlled, Weakness Imbalance
General Strengths Bold, Assertive, Accepting, Calming, Honest,
Action-oriented, Strong relationships, Responsible,
Strength under pressure Steady Improvement-
oriented,
Conviction,
Serenity
General Domineering, Defines Ambivalent, Passive- Critical,
Challenges own version of truth, All aggressive, Surrenders Judgmental, Rigid,
or nothing style, Quick agenda, Lazy, Avoids Uncomfortable
tempered conflict, Disengaging with emotions,
Anger, Guilt,
Hypocrisy
Communications Protective and concerned Diplomatic and Once committed
Strengths with providing for the considerate becomes extremely
group loyal
Communications Compromise can feel Avoids conflict, Hard to Focuses on
Challenges like surrender, Low say “no,” Goes along to perfecting the
tolerance for ambiguity keep the peace flaws, “Scorched
earth” policy if
angry
Job Performance Strong leadership, Great Imaginative Consistent effort,
Strengths at overcoming obstacles Dependability,
to get it done Thrifty
Job Performance Can fall prey to “My way Distracted in priorities Perfectionism leads
Challenges or the highway” and productivity, to procrastination,
approach Ambivalence Self-imposed
pressure
Figure 7.11 Enneagram type descriptions – instinctive.

Feeling Center 2. Helper 3. Achiever 4. Individualist

(Heart) (The Loving Person) (The Effective Person) (The Original Person)
Premise Love and survival Love and recognition Others enjoy the
depend on giving to get are only for winners happiness I deserve
Summary Supportive, Advisor, Successful, Motivator, Romantic, Artist, Deep,
Nurturer, Manipulator, Producer, Chameleon, Melodramatic, Intense,
Caring, Generous, Ambitious, Focused, Creative, Emotional,
Friendly, Considerate, Shrewd, Adaptable, Temperamental,
People-pleasing Competitive, Driven Self-absorbed, Expressive
Focus of The wants and needs To feel valuable, Roles, Sees the best in what’s
Attention of others, Being Image, What brings missing, and the worst of
appreciated success and approval what’s here
Focus of Energy Giving and helping, To Achieving goals, tasks, Searching for the special,
feel loved and prestige To be uniquely
themselves
Fear / Avoidance Own needs, Being Failure, Worthlessness The Commonplace,
unloved Having no unique
identity or significance
General Helpful, Empathetic, Achievement- Creative, Empathic,
Strengths Emotionally oriented, Image Idealistic, Emotionally
intelligent, conscious, balanced
Relationship-oriented Authenticity
General Intrusive, Dependent Out of touch with own Envy, Moodiness,
Challenges on others’ approval, emotions, Intolerance Impatience with reality,
Pride, Distracted in for negativity, Always Feeling like an actor in
others’ emotions pushing to be “the your own life
best”
Communications Helpful, Caring, Socially aware, Emotionally engaged
Strengths Relationship-oriented Social skills
Communications Easily distracted, Status conscious, Need Alienation, Sense of
Challenges Losing self in others’ to produce something being different from the
need, Mind goes blank of value to prove people around you
worth
Job Performance Collaborative Energetic, Creative
Strengths leadership style Adaptable
Job Performance Conceding to others Overworked, Unrealistic, Unpleasant
Challenges can interfere with Competitive, emotions can ruin
autonomy of leading Impatient productivity
Figure 7.12 Enneagram type descriptions – feeling.
7.2.4.1 Wings
Everyone has a dominant personality type. However, most everyone also has aspects of one
or both of the adjacent personality types on the circumference of the Enneagram circle.
These “wings” compliment your dominate type in important, and sometime contradictory,
ways. Wings don’t change your core motivations, but they do influence them. Some have
one wing. Those with two wings typically have a more dominant wing.
Thinking Center 5. Investigator 6. Loyalist 7. Enthusiast

(Head) (The Wise Person) (The Loyal Person) (The Joyful Person)
Premise Love and respect are Love and protection Frustration can be
gained by practicing are gained by avoided by attending to
self-sufficiency vigilance and positive options
endurance
Summary Thinker, Innovative, Guardian, Devil’s Entertaining, Optimist,
Sage, Reductionist, advocate, Skeptic, Generalist, Adventurer,
Cerebral, Private, Pessimist, Cautious, Escapist, Spontaneous,
Curious, Detached, Anxious, Alert, Uninhibited, Visionary,
Quiet, Perceptive Responsible Versatile, Scattered
Focus of Attention What others expect Being without Positive possibilities in
support or guidance, all things, Limits and
Evaluating risks and constraints
worst-cases
Focus of Energy Becoming self- Becoming vigilant or Interesting ideas and
sufficient, Mastery, questioning, To have activities, To be
Understanding support and guidance satisfied and content
Fear/Avoidance Uselessness, Uncertainty Discomfort and Pain,
Helplessness, Being unfulfilled,
Incompetence trapped, and deprived
General Strengths Scholarly, Analytical, Strong relationships, Optimistic, Fun-loving,
Non-attachment, Attentive, Perceptive, Positive visioning
Self-Reliant Courageous
General Emotionally detached, Procrastination, Scattered, Impulsive,
Challenges Isolated, Replacing Doubt, Reactive, Avoids self-reflection,
direct experience with Indecision, Seeking Boredom masks
concepts, Greed reassurance, Fear emotional confusion
Communications Independent, Self- Enduring loyalty and Life of the party,
Strengths reliant, Brings clarity to support Enthusiastic, Fun,
confusion, Loyal friend Adventurous
Communications Detach to observe, Can Can attribute their Inwardly-focused,
Challenges become invisible, own feelings to others Sensitive to criticism,
Emotions are intrusive Dismissive of limits
Job Performance Systemic and well Strong under Strong Generalist,
Strengths thought out adversity, Asks hard Great at starting new
questions to eliminate projects
skepticism
Job Performance Useless specialization, Anxiety peaks near Scattered thinking,
Challenges Emphasizes thinking the point of success, Lacks follow-through,
rather than doing which may make you Struggles with details
a target
Figure 7.13 Enneagram type descriptions – thinking.
7.2.4.2 Lines
The Enneagram also provides insight on how we can travel, or be pulled, to different person-
ality types. Our dominant personality type is our home base. The enneagram lines indicate
other personality types with which you have special relationships, as shown in Figure 7.14.
These are other personality types you can easily

travel toward. Some consider these two lines to be
“growth” and “stress” lines. This is important as
these can influence your thinking and provide a
significant perspective shift. These lines are the
powerful building blocks of enneagram that can be
strategically targeted for growth, development, and
balance.
7.2.5 Clifton Strengths

Clifton Strengths, or StrengthFinder, is an assess-
Figure 7.14 Enneagram lines.
ment tool that provides a basic understanding of
what one naturally does well. This tool was created by Gallup to discern one’s strengths to
maximize their potential at work and in life. This well-established online survey defines
34 unique strengths that are divided into four main categories: Executing, Influencing,
Relationship Building, and Strategic Thinking. Figure 7.15 shows the 34 strengths divided
by category.
When you take this assessment, you receive your top five strengths. As you dig into the
results, it is important to keep the following three principles in mind. First, focus on what
is right. This positive assessment is informing you of your strength inventory so you can
leverage it to be a better version of yourself. Second, interpret the results as descriptive, not
prescriptive. The results should reflect those things at which you naturally excel. Don’t
stress that these results are a new directive, rather seize the power that comes with
self-awareness. Thirdly, pair your strengths to amplify their effectiveness. Your top five
Executing Influencing Relationship Building Strategic Thinking
Focus Knowing how Knowing how to The ability to build Helps teams consider
to make take charge, strong relationships what could be, the
things happen speak up, and that can hold a team ability to absorb and
make sure the together and make analyze information
team is heard the team greater than that can better
the sum of its parts inform decisions
Defined Achiever Activator Adaptability Analytical
Clifton Arranger Command Connectedness Context
Strengths Belief Communication Developer Futuristic
Consistency Competition Empathy Ideation
Deliberate Maximizer Harmony Input
Discipline Self-Assurance Includer Intellection
Focus Significance Individualization Learner
Responsibility Woo Positivity Strategic
Restorative Relator
Figure 7.15 Clifton strengths overview.

strengths are woven together in a fabric of your unique experiences and perspectives. Use
two or more seemingly contradictory or unrelated strengths to support and strengthen
each other.
Below is a quick summary of each defined Clifton Strength under the Executing
Dominant Strength:
● Achiever – tireless, hard worker who finds satisfaction in being busy and productive
● Arranger – flexible organizer who arranges resources to optimize productivity
● Belief – unwavering core values that produce a clear life purpose
● Consistency – fair-minded individuals who ensure equality by following clear rules
● Deliberate – serious and cautious decision makers who anticipate obstacles
● Discipline – embrace processes and routines to create structure order
● Focus – prioritize directions with consistent follow-through to stay on track
● Responsibility – a natural obligation to honestly and loyally keep their commitments
● Restorative – easily discern what is wrong and enjoy reaching resolution
Below is a quick summary of each defined Clifton Strength under the Influencing Dominant
Strength:
● Activator – adept at transforming thoughts or conceptual ideas into action
● Command – decisive individuals who take control with a strong presence
● Communication – effectively convey thoughts through natural conversations
● Competition – motivated to win as they naturally compare progress to others
● Maximizer – driven to achieve individual and group excellence through improvement
● Self-Assurance – confident in their values, identity, and their course of action
● Significance – seek validation through other’s eyes and admiration
● Woo – charismatic social butterflies who can quickly connect with others
Below is a quick summary of each defined Clifton Strength under the Relationship Building
Dominant Strength:
● Adaptability – those who live in the moment and accept and embrace life as it comes
● Connectedness – recognize and value links and connections between people and events
● Developer – coaches who spot and develop others’ potential
● Empathy – understanding others by fully considering their perspectives and feelings
● Harmony – avoids conflict by constantly seeking consensus and areas of agreement
● Includer – identifies and intentionally involves everyone to ensure no one is excluded
● Individualization – embraces uniqueness and appreciates strength through diversity
● Positivity – optimists with infectious enthusiasm
● Relator – values and prioritizes close and meaningful relationships
Below is a quick summary of each defined Clifton Strength under the Strategic Thinking
Dominant Strength:
● Analytical – logic-driven thinkers who search for reason and causes
● Context – understand and frame the present based upon the history and traditions
● Futuristic – visionaries who are fascinated with what can be
● Ideation – brainstormers who revel in ideas and find trends and connections
● Input – curious minds that yearn for more knowledge

● Intellection – introspective thinkers who enjoy intellectual pursuits
● Learner – loves the process of learning more knowledge than its application
● Strategic – clever problem solver who optimizes situational options
It is worth noting that the likelihood of another sharing your top five ordered strengths
is 1 in 33 million. And each of these strengths may manifest itself in different ways. One
true benefit of this assessment is to recognize that you are uniquely you. Celebrate and
embrace your strengths!
7.2.6 Personality Assessments Summary

Any one of these assessments will grant you valuable insights into yourself and your team
members. Since they all approach one’s personality, motivations, and behaviors from dif-
fering perspective, completing more than one of these will provide an even clearer picture
that will enable you to better leverage strengths, protect weaknesses, communicate effec-
tively, and foster a team environment that values contributions and drives results. These
insights can bring a common perspective to shared common goals.
There are many online or workshop opportunities to facilitate these assessments. Regardless
of the maturity of your team, this can be a fun and powerful team-building activity that will
promote productive discussions and accelerate trust. This time investment can pay surprising
dividends in helping you learn and better lead your team to drive productivity. Perhaps even
more importantly, you will know yourself better, which enables you to be more productive
and effective in your own work and in leading others.
7.3 Resource Planning
“Even the best team, without a sound plan, can’t score.”

– Woody Hayes
Leaders motivate, inspire, and create buy-in with big-picture, strategic vision. Managers
are task-oriented achievers that can dive head-first into the minutia. PMs must be able to
shift between the CEO (strategist) and COO (operations) roles on a project. This is perhaps
nowhere more evident than in resource planning.
The PM should pursue efficiency. This means intentionally planning to complete the
tasks using as few of resources as possible. However, not enough resources can impact
schedules, which can impact costs. Generally, resources should be negotiated at the
functional manager level. Finding the right fit and attitude is essential to success.
Tasks in the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) should be assigned to an individual who
bears responsibility of completion. If multiple people are responsible, then no one is
responsible. Someone needs to be responsible.
An assignment matrix can be especially effective in showing and tracking the relation-
ship between work packages and team members. An RACI chart is typically created in
initiation and identifies key roles and responsibilities for major tasks and decisions. It lists
7.3 Resource Planning 141
who is Responsible (does the work), Accountable (ensures work is done), Consults (input
required by SME), and Informs (update status). An RACI chart can also provide valuable
insight in balancing workloads.
Unfortunately, there are times when a team member just doesn’t fit and you need to
enable them to seek other opportunities where their skills may be better utilized and appre-
ciated. In public transportation projects, you don’t always have the option to readily replace
team members. But one bad apple can spoil the batch. Consequently, the PM must proac-
tively identify and address toxic behavior that undermines the team culture and jeopar-
dizes project goals. If there are performance issues with a team member, they should be
dealt with straight away. Be sure to include Human Resources and the team members
functional hierarchy in any formal discipline proceedings.
Sometimes team members become too tasked focused, acting as if under the assumption
their responsibility is of primary importance and all others should accommodate their pref-
erences or constraints. Sometimes that is the case. Typically, though, it is not. The PM
should understand the big picture and leverage the critical path to provide a perspective
and clarify expectations.
Throughout the course of administering a project, a PM may be exposed to a number of
resource terms and ideas. Resource Allocation is the assigning and scheduling of resources
for project-related activities. Ideally this is done by the PM, but may be overridden by a
program manager if resources are to be shared between multiple projects. Resource
Availability is whether a specific resource is available for use at a given time. The Resource
Breakdown Structure is a hierarchical list of resources needed for the project, classified by
type and function. A Resource Calendar shows resource availability over time.
Resource Optimization Techniques can be used by a PM to balance supplies and demands
for resources. Resource Leveling is done when resource availability is the constraint. This
involves adjusting task start or finish dates when resources have been over-allocated or
become scarce. This technique is also used when a limit is imposed on a particular resource
for some reason. This often allows schedule slippage that can adversely impact the critical
path. Resource Smoothing is done when time constraints are the priority. The objective is to
leverage tasks floats to balance resources across tasks to they are completed on time while
avoiding the peaks and troughs of resource demand. The schedule and critical path cannot
slip with smoothing, so tasks can be delayed no longer than their free or total float.
7.3.1 Resource Management Plan

Resources are people, capital, materials, and tools used to execute tasks and complete a
project. In short, they are the lifeblood of a project. The Resource Management Plan details
how resources and teams will be developed, managed, and controlled throughout the life
of the project.
Every Resource Management Plan should include an organization chart that details the
names and roles of critical personnel in the execution and completion of this project.
Additionally, each plan shall include a list of roles and responsibilities. This should be for-
matted in a logical and reasonable manner. Some examples may be delineating individual
roles/responsibilities (what they are supposed to do), authorities (what they are allowed to
do), and competencies (required skills). Some use a Responsibility Assignment Matrix (RAM)
to clarify roles and responsibilities. Other projects may warrant a full RACI Matrix to define
task owners and dependencies.
Additional resource management aspects may be added to the plan, that should be tailored
to the size, complexity, and specifics of the project. Some examples may include training
needs and personnel development plans. Team member recognition and award plans
may be included, where applicable. There may also be a host of other Team Management
issues you may wish to include. Some examples may include staff acquisition plans, staff
onboarding and transition protocols, resource and work calendars, compliance, and safety.
Remember the point of this plan is not to create work for anyone, but rather to establish an
easily referenced foundation upon which you build your resource management processes.
7.4 Managing Consultants
“I only know one way to communicate, openly and honestly.”

– Bob Gallagher
Civil Engineering consultants play a critical role in the development and delivery of public
transportation projects. From survey to subsurface utility designation to geotechnical bor-
ings to traffic studies to hydraulic evaluations to environmental permitting to road layout
to bridge design, and so much more. Most all transportation system owners and operators
rely on consultants to successfully develop and deliver their transportation program.
Forming and maintaining productive partnerships is essential.
This becomes increasingly important as owner-operators rely more heavily on consultant
expertise. There can come a point when transportation organizations stop approving consul-
tant plans, and realize they are instead accepting them. This transition can be favorable if the
owner-operator acknowledges this change, and accommodates it by appropriately adjusting
required workflows and documentations such that project risk is properly realigned with
this approach. Other organizations can stumble if they practically are accepting plans, but
still act as if they are approving plans. Each transportation organization should make a con-
scious decision if they are accepting or approving plans, project applications, scopes, sched-
ules, and estimates, and then have workflows that align with this decision.
7.4.1 Professional Service Procurement

Most consultants are procured via Professional Services. This means it is not sealed, low-
bid selection; rather fees are negotiated after a firm is selected based on their professional
qualifications. States and localities may have their own procurement standards and proce-
dures, but most include the workflow in Figure 7.16 to bring a consultant on board.
Consultant procurements for project-specific designs are relatively straightforward. The
RFP would define the problem to be solved with enough detail to solicit interest and mean-
ingful responses. Your organization’s procurement office should carefully review the RFP
to ensure all legal requirements are included, and that the RFP is reviewed by all who need
to approve it prior to release. Pending the complexity of the project, some organizations
choose to have a Pre-Proposal meeting where they provide a brief overview of the project
Figure 7.16 Professional service procurement.
and can respond to consultant questions. Submitted proposals typically include a proposed
project team organizational chart, their approach to project design, demonstrated success
in similar projects, and applicable resumes. The proposals should be scored based upon the
criteria detailed in the RFP. Remember throughout this process that you are not judging
their proposed solution, but rather their professional capabilities to successfully complete
the design should they be selected. Once a firm is selected after the short list interviews,
their contract is negotiated that details the schedule, budget, and scope of their work. For
many projects, this consultant contract is a critical component for the scoping document.
On-call Annual contracts are where the transportation organization selects a firm to pro-
vide specific services for as yet undefined needs. Task orders are then assigned to the consul-
tant under the Annual Contract for each project or effort. The task orders serve as the Scope
of Service, subject to the terms of the Annual Contract. Once Annual Contracts are established,
they are the quickest way to bring a consultant onboard. Most Annual Contracts have
legislative or organizational limits on the initial term, the number of renewals, and dollar
limits on each task order and for each contract term. These follow the same general workflow
shown above except the RFP is tailored to the needs and specifics of the annual contract.
Pending applicable state and local procurement laws and regulations, there are different
contractual methods to hire an engineering consultant under professional services
contract. The three most common are time-and-materials, fixed fee or lump sum, and
negotiated fee. Time and materials are when the owner pays the consultant based on their
actual time and expenses. This arrangement can bring a firm onboard when the scope is
not well defined. However, the realized schedule benefits should be weighed against the
budget risks as this arrangement can quickly resemble a blank check if not carefully
managed. A fixed fee, or lump sum, contract sets a firm price for the agreed services. This
arrangement can be beneficial if the budget is fixed, as it prioritizes the fee over scope and
schedule. A negotiated fee typically most values the scope. Consultant hours are assigned
to accomplish the agreed Scope of Services. The hourly rates are totaled for a not-to exceed
fee for the specified work. Consultant’s billable hourly rates should be calculated per appli-
cable federal, state, and local regulations. Direct labor rates are multiplied by approved
overhead rates that can vary widely. Agreed expenses and profit margin are then added to
the total, which may include escalating inflation rates on multiyear projects. Most project-
specific transportation designs are of this fee structure. Each of these arrangements assigns
different risks to different parties. Be intentional and choose the fee structure that works
best for you given the situation.
Design-Build and Public-Private-Partnership arrangements are entirely different. In

these, and similar arrangements, the transportation owner hires a team that collectively
designs the plans, acquire all rights-of-way, and constructs the project. These approaches
are common in larger and more complex projects where the close collaboration between
the engineer and contractor throughout design can stimulate innovation and expedite
construction. These can be extremely successful ventures, particularly when the owner is
willing to pay the premium for expedited delivery, desires a true turn-key arrangement, or
prefers to transfer significant risks on highly complex endeavors. It is important to under-
stand that in these arrangements the consultant works for the contractor. This can and
does shift the paradigm of the consultant’s prioritized responsibilities. Intentional and
cooperative communications are essential to establishing and maintaining an effective and
productive working relationship.
Despite best efforts, some relationships are strained and difficult. Both the DOT and con-
sultant PM bear responsibilities to ensure their partnership is positive and productive.
Negotiation and compromise can be essential tools. The driving consideration should be
ensuring efficient use of public funds to develop and deliver the project. However, some-
times due to personalities or other factors, it just isn’t a workable fit. In these rare cases, the
consultant bears the responsibility to find resource replacements that are acceptable to the
DOT. In rare cases, the DOT–consultant relationship should be severed. Obviously, this is
to be avoided, if possible, for a variety of reasons.
7.4.2 Roles and Responsibilities

Everyone should share the same goal of executing a successful project. However, in order
for the DOT PM and consultant PM to function as an effective team, they must understand
each may define success slightly differently. Both should strive to understand and be
respectful of the others’ unique organizational responsibilities, priorities, and constraints.
DOTs most commonly define project success by completing a project whose scope sat-
isfies the stated purpose and need, on-time and on-budget. That seems simple, but there
may also be other measures of success. Key stakeholders may need to be included in the
process and satisfied with the final design. Influential businesses may have preferences for
hours of operation and traffic flow during construction. This project may need to be coordi-
nated with other projects to satisfy larger, regional goals. And so forth. Consultants define
success by completing their project Scope of Services on-time and under-budget. But there
may also be other considerations. Profit targets are established. Staff may have billable hour
and cross-discipline development targets. Resource sharing across multiple projects to sta-
bilized workloads. Perhaps they want to submit this project to win a prestigious award.
It is helpful for the DOT and consultant PMs to openly discuss what success looks like to
each of them on each project. Find and focus on the common ground. Emphasize one goal
to be a long-term relationship between the DOT and consultant. Outside of field work
equipment, the DOT is paying for access to the consultants’ thinking, skills, and abilities. It
is in the DOT’s best interest to develop long-term relationships with smart and principled
engineers that are based on mutual trust and respect. Find conscientious firms that push
you to innovate, and challenge you to be better stewards of public funds. Have the courage
to form true partnerships over transactional commodities. In long-term relationship, you
aren’t focused on counting nickels to maximize profit on this one project. Instead, you can
collectively focus on the project goals, knowing the symbiotic, win-win, long-term relation-
ship will be positive and advantageous for both parties.
In general, the DOT PM drives the project, pays the bills, removes roadblocks, and
secures decisions, while the consultant PM guides and provides the technical solutions that
satisfy the project’s purpose and need. Of course, it is more complicated than that. Below
are some key responsibilities of both the DOT PM and consultant PM in key project areas.
7.4.3 Scope (Scope of Services)

The project scope defines the project objectives. The Consultant’s Scope of Services (SoS)
defines the consultant’s contractual requirements, project deliverables, schedule, budget,
payment terms, and project objectives. The project scope and SoS may not necessarily be
exactly the same. When procuring Professional Services, ideally the SoS should be finalized
before fees are negotiated. The SoS should be based upon information in the Request For
Proposals (RFP), additional conversations between the consultant and owner, any project
funding application, other owner project scope information, and professional judgment.
Adjustments can be made to streamline the SoS to adhere to budget constraints, if needed.
Figure 7.17 details the DOT and Consultant PM responsibilities regarding scope.
7.4.4 Budget (Cost)

The project budget includes all costs to complete the project. These include consultant
design fees, environmental evaluation and mitigation, surveying, geotechnical investiga-
tions, materials testing, right-of-way acquisition, utility relocation, construction, CEI,
administrative oversight, and any other legitimate project-related expense. The consul-
tant’s budget is that which was negotiated in the contract in order to satisfy their SoS. This
is a typically a portion of the project’s PE budget. Figure 7.18 details the DOT and Consultant
PM responsibilities regarding budget.
DOT PM Consultant PM
Develop the project Scope Fully understand the project Scope

Develop the consultant’s SoS and ensure it satisfies the Fully understand the SoS
project scope
Ensure schedule and budget properly adjusted before Satisfy all requirements in the SoS within
Scoping baselines are established the agreed schedule and budget
Officially close scoping Perform no work outside of the SoS
without prior consent
Work with Consultant PM to proactively practice Work with DOT PM to proactively
established Change Management Procedures, if needed practice established Change Management
Procedures, if needed
Figure 7.17 DOT compared to consultant PM – scope.

Complete the project within the project budget Complete project SoS within the budget specified
within the consultant contract
Promptly review consultant invoices to ensure Promptly submit accurate invoices (typically
charges are “reasonable and expected” and monthly)
reflect design progress, per payment terms in
SoS
Confirm invoice line-item percentages reflect Meet the profit target established by firm
actual work progress
Ensure prompt payment of approved invoices Proactively identify and discuss with DOT PM
any budgetary concerns or issues
Work with Consultant PM to proactively practice Work with DOT PM to proactively practice
established Change Management Procedures, if established Change Management Procedures, if
needed needed
Figure 7.18 DOT compared to consultant PM – budget.
7.4.5 Schedule
The consultant’s schedule should be specified in their contract. Ideally it would be the
same as the project schedule. PMs that attempt to juggle multiple schedules for the same
project do so at their own risk. There should be one project schedule. Having said that, the
consultant schedule may contain tasks or interim milestones not on the project schedule.
These should be consistent with, and not conflict with, the project schedule. Figure 7.19
details the DOT and Consultant PM responsibilities regarding schedule.
Meet project schedule Meet all schedule requirements in the SoS

Understand project schedule and aggressively Understand project schedule and aggressively
focus on critical path tasks to protect float focus on critical path tasks to protect float
Manage project schedule, and update it as Regularly review SoS project schedule, and
needed update it when needed
Coordinate this project schedule with other Be aware of local and project-specific issues that
related active projects in program may impact SoS project schedule
Ensure DOT reviews comply with SoS Ensure quality deliverables provided to DOT in
expectations and do not delay project SOS timelines to allow adequate DOT review
needed needed
Figure 7.19 DOT compared to consultant PM – schedule.
7.4.6 Contract
The consultant contract dictates what the consultant will do and when. Just as important,
it often dictates what the consultant won’t do. Great care should be taken in the formation
of the SoS and Consultant Agreement to ensure both parties are satisfied with the intended
deliverables, when they will be delivered, and the quality of what is provided. Once the
contract is executed, this becomes the foundational document for all future performance
and change management discussions between the owner-operator and consultant. Figure
7.20 details the DOT and Consultant PM responsibilities regarding the contract.
Fully understand contract (consultant Fully understand contract (consultant

agreement) agreement)
Ensure all contractual obligations are fulfilled Ensure all contractual obligations are fulfilled
on-time and on-budget with acceptable quality on-time and on-budget with acceptable quality
Be responsible stewards of public funds, ensure Ensure deliverables meet all contractual
expenditures and deliverables as expected expectations
Monitor project and contract to proactively Ensure advice, recommendations, actions, and
identify issues that should be addressed design are ethical and in client’s best interests
Take timely and decisive action to correct Proactively identify and promptly advise DOT
budget, scope, schedule, or quality issues PM of contractual challenges and proposed
solutions
needed needed
Figure 7.20 DOT compared to consultant PM – contract.
7.4.7 Risk
Successful PMs are exceptional at managing risk. The DOT PM is responsible to complete
the entire project. The consultant PM is responsible to complete the SoS. Most project risks
impact both the DOT and consultants as they work collaboratively to push forward.
However, it is important to realize that some situations may pose risks to one party, but not
the other. There are also times when risks may be at conflict between the two. Proactive
and open communication is critical to navigating these difficult situations. If done right,
the partnership is strengthened and you cooperatively progress toward mutual success.
Figure 7.21 details the DOT and Consultant PM responsibilities regarding risk.
Proactively identify and evaluate project and SoS Proactively identify and evaluate project and SoS
risks risks
Communicate risks to Consultant PM and Provide risk mitigation solutions to DOT PM for
determine how best to proceed consideration
Promptly decide risk response approach based Support and enact DOT chosen risk responses
upon DOT’s risk appetite and project specifics
needed needed
Figure 7.21 DOT compared to consultant PM – risks.

7.4.8 Resources
Like many other areas discussed here, there are two separate but intertwined arenas. The
DOT PM is responsible for the resources to complete the project. This includes the consul-
tant, typically the consultant PM or contract administrator. The consultant PM is respon-
sible for all consultant and subconsultant resources required or utilized to accomplish the
SoS. Figure 7.22 details the DOT and Consultant PM responsibilities regarding resources.
Ensure DOT SMEs are available to assist and Ensure proper resources conduct work to satisfy
provide guidance, as expected SoS within contract schedule and budget
Ensure reviewing resources conduct prompt Ensure key team members and SMEs participate
reviews and provide meaningful comments in project, as promised during procurement
Ensure correct resources are engaged to secure Balance delegation with coaching and team
prompt decisions so consultant may advance member development
Ensure project Civil Rights obligations are being Ensure all contractual Civil Rights obligations
met are being met
Figure 7.22 DOT compared to consultant PM – resources.
7.4.9 Quality
The DOT PM is responsible to provide a project solution that satisfies the project scope and
meets or exceeds all applicable local, state, and federal standards. The consultant PM is
responsible to satisfy the contractual SoS. The DOT PM should ensure these two quality
efforts are consistent. Figure 7.23 details the DOT and Consultant PM responsibilities
regarding quality.
Ensure consultant’s quality QC/QA processes Conduct contracted services in compliance with
comply with established plans established QA/QC standards and procedures
Ensure consultant work product and deliverables Produce deliverables that comply with
meet established quality standards established QA/QC standards and procedures
Promptly address and resolve all quality issues Promptly address and resolve all quality issues
Figure 7.23 DOT compared to consultant PM – quality.
7.4.10 Communications
Communications are critical to any successful partnership. The DOT PM and the consul-
tant PM have different communication responsibilities. The vital exception is the shared
responsibility to communicate with each other. The relationship between the two PMs is
critical to project success. Figure 7.24 details the DOT and Consultant PM responsibilities
regarding communications.
Appropriately escalate identified issues in a Promptly inform DOT PM of issues that are
timely way to secure decisions, direction, or limiting or inhibiting progress
responses so as not to delay the project
Ensure consultant PM knows and understands Provide enough technical detail to the DOT PM
all applicable DOT policies and procedures so they fully understand key technical issues
Communicate project updates to stakeholders, Support DOT PM in stakeholder engagement, as
as defined in the Stakeholder Engagement Plan requested and specified in SoS
Provide timely and accurate project updates to Provide timely and accurate project status
leadership updates to DOT PM
Coordinate all public-facing project Support DOT PM in all public-facing
communications, including media, websites, and communications, as requested and specified in
social media SoS
Coordinate all related agency interactions, Support DOT in all related agency interactions,
unless previously agreed Consultant would unless previously agreed Consultant would
direct these efforts direct these efforts
Figure 7.24 DOT compared to consultant PM – communications.
7.4.11 Tips for Managing Consultants
● Stay involved. Do not hand over the keys to the project and expect the result to satisfy all
of your objectives and expectations.
● Appreciate their expertise. They may be the SME and know more than you on certain
issues. That is why you hired them. Listen. However, as PM you should know the pulse
of your organization’s and stakeholders’ needs, expectations, and constraints. You need
to guide their expertise to ensure project objectives are being met.
● Establish communication expectations. Have consultant provide weekly status updates
that summarize what they accomplished this week, what they intend to accomplish next
week, outstanding risks and challenges, a snapshot of schedule and budget milestones,
and any decisions, directions, or actions they need to proceed.
● Meet in person. Have in-person status update meetings on a biweekly or monthly
schedule.
● Build real relationships. Get to know their key team members, the SMEs, and those
doing the grunt work. Visit their office. See their work product as it develops.
● Realize transportation development can be small world. As your career progresses, you
may work with these individuals again, be it with the same company in the same role, or
with other firms in very different capacities. In many cases, it is reasonable to expect your
paths will cross again in some way. As such, approach each project with the personal
goal to build or strengthen long-term professional relationships.
● You are hiring people. Companies may bring resources and processes and institutional
knowledge, but individuals still will design your project. Choose wisely.
● Consultants are not all created equal. Consultants are not a commodity, that being the
product is essentially equivalent regardless of who produced it. When your organization
hires them, you are renting their mind, buying their ideas and advice. Build long-term
relationships with those that do exceptional work.
● When negotiating fees, consider the big financial picture. While some consultants charge
more than others, consider the total project cost. Smart, sound, and innovative designs
will save you construction money, as well as long-term operations and maintenance
costs. Solutions designed with practical and cost-efficient MOT and SOC approaches will
save you construction dollars. A complete and thorough set of plans and specs with
minimal errors or omissions will save you construction money.
● Respect their chain of command. Just because you can go directly to their key personnel
to get answers or action, don’t do it unless those direct lines of communication have been
discussed and are acceptable to both parties. Follow the agreed upon communication
protocol that should be detailed in the Project Management Plan.
● Be open and honest. Strive to create an environment where the consultants truly are an
extension of your staff. The relationship should not be contentious or confrontational,
but rather a collaborative cooperation built on trust and mutual respect.
● Address issues promptly. Be it performance, personality, expectations, budget, billing,
schedule, scope, or quality related. Ignoring the problem usually only makes it worse. As
PM, you need to tackle difficult situations promptly and professionally. Not only is the
smart thing to do for your project, it is the right thing to do.
● Especially when conflict arises, remind yourself you are on the same team. You need
each other in order for you both to be successful. Search for win-win solutions. Find a
way to make it work.
● Celebrate successes. Although in different ways, the consultants may be vested as much
or more in the project as you are.
● Say Thank You!
151
Managing Quality
“Quality is never an accident. It is always the result of intelligent effort.”

– John Ruskin
8.1 Defining Quality
“Quality means doing it right when no one is looking.”

– Henry Ford
8.1.1 Overview
I was in a portfolio performance meeting once when someone wisely asked, “What is the
point? We can push a lot of crappy projects out the door on-time and on-budget. But are we
making good decisions?” This is the essence of why quality matters.
At its most basic level, the goal of most transportation projects is to design and build an
improvement that increases safety and positively impacts commerce and the community.
Ideally this means developing and delivering a fiscally responsible final product that serves
its intended purpose and satisfies stakeholder expectations.
Meanwhile, the old adage remains true, “Good, Fast, and Cheap…pick any two.” Public
transportation organizations should have a deeper perspective when answering this
question as they typically own and maintain the asset. As such, life cycle costs should often
be considered. Even on well-constructed projects, the long-term maintenance costs may be
significant. Quality matters.
So how do you as the owner effectively ensure a quality product, especially in those cir-
cumstances where the construction contractor is selected by low-bid? The textbook answer
is to create a set of approved plans and specifications that satisfies the project scope while
being designed in accordance with all applicable standards and regulations, and then build
it in accordance with these contract documents. This straightforward objective can be chal-
lenging to achieve.
If you concentrate too little on plan quality, you will pay for it in construction change
orders, operation, maintenance, and life cycle costs. If you concentrate too much on plan
quality, you may never get the plan set approved for construction as error- and

152 8 Managing Quality
omission-free plans and specifications are truly rare…like spotting Bigfoot rare. Striking
this delicate balance within the organizational framework and established boundaries is
often the responsibility of the PM.
8.1.2 Competing Definitions of Quality

Max Depree said, “The first responsibility of a leader is to define reality.” It is important to
determine how your organization does, and perhaps should, define quality. Accomplished
PMs acknowledge and understand that different team members and stakeholders may
hold and operate under very different definitions of quality. As such, the waters may
quickly become muddied when these different success criteria mix. It is the PM’s responsi-
bility to bring clarity and focus to these discussions.
Stakeholders may judge quality from a single or subjective issue that they extend to the
entirety of the project (e.g., how competently a presenter answered questions at citizens
information meeting, how smoothly the right-of-way acquisition process went, how business’s
access concerns were addressed, how efficiently school bus routes were detoured during
construction, and so forth). Design consultants may judge quality by the clarity of interaction
or direction with the project owner (e.g., number of scope supplements due to project changes,
number of comments by plan reviewers, number of non-billable hours to correct errors or
omissions, number of questions by contractors at pre-bid meeting, and so forth). Contractors
may judge quality by the inherent ambiguity, completeness, and constructability of the plans
(e.g., are quantities accurate, are there adequate staging areas, does the Maintenance of Traffic
plan include enough temporary pavement to stage the necessary equipment, and so forth).
The owner-operator may judge quality by the project’s triple constraint and leadership expec-
tations (e.g., on-time, on-budget, number and severity of plan review comment, did addressing
plan review comments add additional time or cost, number and cost of consultant scope sup-
plements and construction change orders, ongoing operations and maintenance costs of the
assets, degree to which process and product met or exceeded executive and political leadership
and key stakeholder expectations, and so forth).
It can sometimes seem like consensus on defining quality will never be reached. This
may be especially true for PMs as they float between the different project partners and
stakeholders. It is possible that some of these various definitions may not only be inconsis-
tent with each other, but may be in outright conflict. It is often the PM who navigates res-
olution in these situations.
Acknowledgment of the differences can often lay the framework for a productive
discussion. The reference point from there should be how the project’s owner-operator
define success, as they are the entity that is paying for, and administering, the project. The
definition of quality may be explicitly explained in their guidance, or may be implicitly
implied in their workflows and performance metrics. Regardless, start there and then work
to incorporate other definitions as you are able.
8.1.3 Qualitative vs. Quantitative Quality

At its core, most evaluate quality based upon the degree to which the perceived product or
process exceeds our expectations. These can take two distinct forms: qualitative (subjective)
or quantitative (objective).
8.1 Defining Quality 153
Qualitative quality can be difficult to capture, or even ascertain. A new road widening
may look fresh and new and impress some citizens, while others notice slightly off-parallel
lane lines, or poorly timed traffic signals, and conclude it was a sloppy job. It is not
uncommon that many form their quality judgment based upon a small number of aesthetic
elements, and then the conclusion is extended to the entire project. As such, finishing
touches matter.
Quantitative quality is able to be measured and has direct and indirect costs associated
with a low-quality product. There are two main reasons for quantitative quality on a public
sector project. First is to ensure the product is built according to the plans, specifications,
contract documents, and applicable standards and regulations. It should be noted that dem-
onstrating this as evidenced through consistent execution of an approved quality control
plan can be an essential requirement of some public funding sources. Secondly, transporta-
tion projects are often owned and maintained indefinitely by the project’s owner-operator;
therefore, you have a vested interest in ensuring you “get what you paid for.” The only rea-
sonable and reliable way to make certain of this is to plan, implement, and execute an effec-
tive quality control plan. Quantitative quality is where you and your project team should
and will spend most of your quality management time.
Impressions of perceived quality can also be formed over time, or be extended to your
project based on something completely unrelated. Imagine a driver annoyed by an
unrepaired pothole on a road that he recalls just being built a few years ago. He may
easily extend his opinions of quality and service regarding that pothole to the
administration of your nearby road project. Your organization’s reputation and
credibility matter when it comes to the public’s perception of quality. They will often
approach your project from a benevolent or skeptical viewpoint, and evaluate your
project through that lens.
8.1.4 Quality Control (Product) vs. Quality Assurance (Process)

For some, Quality Control (QC) and Quality Assurance (QA) are interchangeable ideas. In
reality, there are fundamental differences between these two concepts that have an inherent
and interdependent duality, as illustrated in Figure 8.1. Both are important, and serve very
different functions. However, it is when they are combined that they work together to dra-
matically improve quality. Their intentional and
strategic union should be the foundation of every
project’s, program’s, portfolio’s, and organization’s
QA/QC plan. Process
At its core, Quality Assurance focuses on the pro-

cess, while Quality Control focuses on the product. Quality
Figure 8.2 compares these two complementing con- Assurance
cepts. Understanding the differences between these
Quality
two will strengthen your ability to effectively man-
Control
age and control project quality during development.
QC is inherently harder to ensure and evaluate. As
Project
such, most firms and organizations concentrate
their effort on QA. QA processes can be standard-
ized, documented, and audited. It is important to Figure 8.1 QA/QC relationship.
Quality Assurance (QA) Quality Control (QC)
Primary focus Process of product creation End product (deliverable)

Approach Proactive Reactive
Purpose Prevents defects Identifies defects
How to monitor Audit workflows Plan reviews and field tests
Function Managing quality Correcting quality
Most useful to Managers Designers
End goal Enables better QC by ensuring Produce better product (PS&E) –
workflows followed Plans, Specifications, and Estimates
Priority to bottom Less Important – supports behavior to More Important – directly impacts
line encourage better product product
Difficulty in Easier to measure Harder to measure
evaluating
When done Performed in parallel with product Performed at milestone plan
development submissions and reviews
Figure 8.2 QA/QC comparison.
realize that this is one of those areas where good intentions can unwittingly create a
bureaucratic beast that requires constant feeding.
QA is meant to complement and empower QC. QC rarely occurs on its own without QA.
But successful QA does not inherently ensure successful QC. Organizations and project
managers should beware the point of diminishing returns. Make sure the juice is worth the
squeeze.
8.1.5 Layers of QC/QA

Pending the size and complexity of the project, there may be many layers or QC and QA
both in development and delivery of the project. These layers may be within a single orga-
nization, or shared across divisional or organizational lines.
While not all projects will have all of the following components, every project should
have some of them, both during development and in delivery.
● Quality Control (QC) focuses on the quality of the product. Examples during development
may include the compliance of the plans with applicable standards and regulations, and
the amount and severity of errors and omissions on the plans and specifications. Examples
during delivery may include compliance of installed materials with applicable standards,
and ensuring approved products are installed per manufacturer’s recommendations. QC
efforts often involve the designers, engineering discipline leads, plan reviewers,
construction inspectors, and others with designated QC roles and responsibilities.
● Quality Assurance (QA) focuses on the quality of the process. This effort can be summa-
rized as checking the checkers; the checkers being those who conduct the QC effort to
check those who produce the plans or build the end product. QA should be done by
someone who did not do the QC. In design, this is often others within the same engi-
neering firm. In construction, it is often personnel within a different company, organiza-
tion, or department who complete this effort. Examples during development may include
documenting QC reviews or cataloging quantitative statistics on plan comments.
Examples during delivery may include random material testing to verify the accuracy of
the QC tests, and ensuring compliance of QC testing frequency and results with the
approved QA/QC plan.
● Independent Assurance (IA) is an unbiased monitoring of the QC and QA efforts. IA is
checking the checkers (QA) who check the checkers (QC). To ensure an unbiased evalu-
ation, this should be an independent effort by those not associated in any way with the
QC or QA activities. Any testing or sampling that is done under IA should be conducted
on different equipment. IA is not typically performed on design, and used in construction
when specified in requirements.
● Independent Verification (IV) is an unbiased monitoring of the IA effort. This becomes
the fourth layer of quality management – checking the checkers (IA) who check the
checkers (QA) who check the checkers (QC). IV is not typically performed on design, and
is used in construction when specified in requirements.
● Owner Independent Assessment (OIA) is similar to IA, but is conducted by the project
owner. This is perhaps most common during Design-Build. If the Design-Build team is
contractually obligated to adhere to the approved QA/QC plan by conducting QC, QA,
and IA, the project owner may implement OIA to “spot-check” and monitor the Design-
Build team’s QA/QC efforts. OIA allows the project owner to judge for themselves if those
responsible are correctly implementing and complying with the approved QA/QC plan.
● Owner Independent Validation (OIV) is similar to OIA, but different in that it is com-
monly focused more on ensuring QA/QC compliance in order to process payment. As
such, OIV often concentrates on verifying the quality of products incorporated into the
project meet acceptable specifications.
● Quality Assurance Manager (QAM) is the designated individual responsible for ensuring
project adherence to, and compliance with, the approved QA/QC plan. This should be
one individual, not a committee, who is defined in the approved QA/QC plan. Pending
the size and complexity of the project, this is often a more senior management role with
the authority to direct other personnel or contracted organizations’ efforts.
● Construction Engineering Inspection (CEI) is an overarching umbrella under which can
be construction administration, testing, inspections, surveying, and other construction
oversight-related tasks. QC/QA often drives much of the CEI effort. On larger, more
complex projects this is often a service that a third party provides for the owner. In this
instance, the owner would oversee the CEI firm who is overseeing the contractor.
8.2 Monitoring and Controlling Quality
“Be a yardstick of quality. Some people aren’t used to an environment where excellence
is expected.”
– Steve Jobs
8.2.1 Fundamental Approaches

Plan quality management is the process of identifying quality requirements and standards for
the project, and documenting how the project will demonstrate compliance. Managing quality
is the process of translating the quality management plan into executable quality activities that
incorporate the organization’s quality policies into the project. Controlling quality is the pro-
cess of monitoring and recording results of executing the quality activities to assess performance
and implement necessary changes.
There are a variety of quality management methodologies that fall in and out of favor
over time. Their focus may vary from promoting uniformity while eliminating variability,
to identifying and removing causes of defects, to eliminating wastes, to emphasizing com-
pliance with applicable standards. Regardless of the current quality certification or mind-
set, they all generally include the steps in Figure 8.3 for existing or new processes.
Define
Measure
Analyze
Improve / Design
Control / Verify
Figure 8.3 Approach to monitor and control quality.
8.2.2 Organizational Maturity

There are many ways to describe an organization’s quality management maturity. While it
is difficult to capture the many workflow and cultural aspects of an organization that inher-
ently promote or inhibit effective quality management, it can be enlightening to reflect
upon where your organization falls within the relative spectrum.
W. Edwards Deming said, “85% of the reasons for failure are deficiencies in the systems and
processes rather than the employee. The role of management is to change the process rather
than badgering individual to do better.” Your organization’s maturity level will, in many
ways, define and constrain your challenges to effectively manage quality at the project,
program, and portfolio levels. Figure 8.4 depicts the spectrum of an organization’s quality
maturity. Figure 8.5 compares these organizational maturity levels.
Organizational Maturity
Ad Hoc Managed Enlightenment Wisdom Optimizing
Productivity and Quality

Risk and Waste
Figure 8.4 Quality and organizational maturity.

Ad Hoc Managed Enlightenment Wisdom Optimizing
Project and Projects get Projects are Organization- Organization is Organization

Workflow completed, but planned, wide standards data driven is focused on
Realities are often performed, provide with continuing
delayed and managed, guidance across quantitative improvement,
over budget measured, and project, performance and quickly
controlled at programs, improvement responds to
project level portfolios objectives seize
opportunities
Quality Very few Basic and Processes are Well-defined Proactive
Control processes, consistent well defined, processes process
Processes unpredictable, processes documented, quantitatively improvement
poorly established; standardized, measured and implemented
controlled, project and integrated controlled with through
reactive, managed across strategic qualitative
success based reactively with organization, analysis feedback;
upon approach that consistent Industry leader,
individual each project is practices are quality values
effort unique proactive embedded in
corporate
culture
How quality Problems Teams formed Quality issues Quality issues Quality issue
problems are addressed as to address are openly identified early prevented
handled they occur, major issues, discussed and in development
often without often settling worked to within a culture
resolution and on expedient resolution using open to
lots of solutions constructive suggestion for
finger-pointing dialog improvement
Leadership’s Does not Recognizes Grasps value of Recognize their Consider
attitude to consider quality quality personal role in quality
quality quality management management as continuing to management
management management a may be of quality emphasize an essential
tool; Tends to value, but not improving, critical part of
blame others willing to becoming importance of company
for quality provide helpful and quality system and
problems resources to supportive management culture
make it
happen
Summary “We don’t “We accept “We are actively “Defect “We know
Quote know or there will identifying and prevention is a why we do not
regarding understand always be some resolving quality routine part of have quality
problems why we have quality issues.” issues.” our operation.” issues.”
with quality quality issues.”
Figure 8.5 Organizational maturity comparison.
8.2.3 Product vs. Process Issue

When a defect occurs, mature organization and PMs seek to identify the root cause of the
issue. Is this a product or process issue? Is the problem with what we are making, or how
we are making it? Sometimes it can be both. Consider if an environmental scientist made a
critical error on the permit application, and then the internal QA reviews missed it. Does
this require an engineering solution, a process change, or both? Generally, one-off errors or
omissions should be addressed with engineering solutions, while multiple or repeated
errors in a discipline should be addressed with process changes.
In these circumstances, it is important to maintain a healthy perspective while striking a
balance between vigilance and understanding. Most of these issues, particularly process
changes, will likely be made at a program or portfolio management level. In order to be effec-
tive, organizations must have the courage not to dismiss issues for the sake of expediency, or
to walk the path of least resistance. Likewise, they should embrace the wisdom not to over-
react and to see outliers as what they are. Remember the old adage, “hard cases make bad law.”
Kaizen is a Japanese business philosophy that focuses on continuously improving
processes. The Kaizen approach is often framed in terms of continuous improvement of
quality. What this really means is small changes will build incrementally over time. These
changes can be the product and the process. Minor improvements compound over time to
dramatically improve quality. Quality-focused organizations and PMs build momentum in
pursuing excellence. Otherwise, they will struggle with apathy and scramble to react to the
inevitable errors and omissions.
8.2.4 Quality Management Plan

The Quality Management Plan is the part of the Project Management Plan that details how
QC and QA will be managed, monitored, and controlled throughout the life of the project.
The purpose of the quality management plan is to ensure the project is being designed and
constructed according to contract documents, specifications, relevant manuals, and appli-
cable standards. Most projects have separate QA/QC plans for design and construction.
While some more complex projects may require a project-specific quality management
plan, most projects will largely default to existing organizational protocol. An organization
may require different levels of QC/QA pending the size and complexity of the project, the
funding source, the procurement or delivery method, or other preestablished decision
points or thresholds. Other owner-operators have little-to-no QA/QC plan, and rely on that
which the consultant has defined within their corporate structure.
Given that many or most of the project’s QC and QA requirements are often predefined
by the organization, some PMs may not dedicate much effort to the quality management
plan. This can be a costly mistake. The quality of a project is ultimately a PM responsibility.
They may attempt to share the blame, but the PM is uniquely positioned to monitor the
QC/QA effort and ensure appropriate corrective action is taken when needed.
The quality management plan is a powerful tool that experienced PMs leverage to assist
them in this effort. This is the perfect place to document stakeholder quality expectations
and detail QC/QA processes in such a way as to bring clarity and direction to the team.
Tailoring this plan to your specific project can be enormously helpful in managing expecta-
tions and resolving conflict in a constructive way. Remember many quality judgments are
comparisons of perceived reality to one’s expectations. Plan the work, then work the plan.
8.2.5 Coordination Issues

On large or complex projects, there can be sizable intentional or unintentional ripples from
coordination issues that directly impact project quality. Consider if the water resources team
increases the slope of a drainage pipe to mitigate up-system hydraulic grade line concerns.
This now creates a conflict with the utility group’s planned sanitary sewer extension at the
outfall end. The sanitary sewer designers can effectively shift the gravity sanitary sewer, but
it means more temporary wetland impacts. This increased wetland disturbance sends the
environmental group into panic mode because it was not in the submitted permit application
and will cross the area threshold pushing them into an Individual Permit which will optimis-
tically add six to nine months to the project schedule. And through all of this scenario, no
one thought to bring the lead roadway designer or RW back into the discussion until it sur-
faces as an error in plan review that the easement areas are insufficient. Small problems can
quickly mushroom into larger ones if left unchecked. Well-intentioned modifications can
cast a particularly large net of ripple impacts when one makes changes or improvements to
the Sequence of Construction, Maintenance of Traffic, or Erosion and Sediment Control
plans without ensuring coordination with the other responsible team members.
Exceptional PMs have a diverse knowledge and experience base that provides an
insightful perspective. They have the ability to quickly size up a situation and determine
the fundamental risks and issues. They recommend solutions that will work and identify
those that will not. I remember many occasions as an eager, junior engineer where I was
with a senior engineer who demonstrated this omniscience. When I would ask, “How do
you know that won’t work?” or “Why were you concerned about this and not that?”; the
response often was, “I’ve seen it before” or “I just know.” I think most better engineers have
had a private moment of pride when realizing they have reached this level of experience.
That is certainly not to say they cannot and do not learn new things every day, but there is
a foundational base of knowledge and real-world experiences that can give you an advan-
tageous perspective from which you can approach most any situation.
Generally, consulting engineers work with many clients and gain experience designing
unique solutions for a variety of operational and situational circumstances. Generally, con-
tracting or construction engineering grants the experience of seeing how plans are built,
grasping equipment constraints and potential, understanding effective work sequencing,
and the like. Generally, public sector engineers gain the appreciation of building quality
products that last and satisfy broader success criteria as they can be involved with the
traffic flow, citizen input, and long-term maintenance. You can be an exceptional PM if you
have any of these backgrounds, but it is easier if you have done two, even easier if you have
done all three. If you have done all three, you have a rare perspective that can be a powerful
asset as you have first-hand insight others can’t and won’t offer. The broader your perspec-
tive, the better you will likely be at proactively identifying the intended and unintended
consequences of plan modifications, and the more you will know who to bring into the
resulting discussions to capture all that is needed so that ripple impacts will not become
quality issues.
8.2.6 Is Value Engineering (VE) QA/QC?

Yes and no.
Value Engineering (VE) is an effort to increase design efficiency and excellence while
reducing costs in a manner that adds value to the product or process. These seemingly con-
tradictory goals are the mission of a multidisciplined VE team that usually consists of five
and ten individuals who have had limited to no exposure to the project. The idea is that
fresh eyes from experienced perspectives may see new previously unseen or missed oppor-
tunities. The VE objectives are rather straightforward.
● Increase product quality.
● Decrease construction costs.
● Decrease long-term facility ownership costs.
● Reduce construction time.
● Simplify the construction process.
● Minimize project risks.
The VE team typically prepares recommendations that are then evaluated by the design
team. Examples of recommendations may include changing a bridge design to ease or accel-
erate construction, saving pavement sections as opposed to a complete rebuild, targeted
narrowing of lane or shoulder widths, leveraging innovative E&S measures to eliminate
a sediment basin and the associated easements, redesigning drainage to avoid temporary
travel lanes or utility relocations, and the like.
VE can be traced back to the Federal-aid Act of 1970 which required VE on Federal-aid
projects. Since that time, various regulations have defined the criteria when a VE study is
required. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requires VE on any project with a
total estimated cost exceeding $50 million that is designated on the National Highway
System (NHS), or any NHS bridge project exceeding $40 million. State DOTs often have
significantly lower project cost thresholds. If required, the owner has no choice. If not
required, the owner may still desire to conduct VE.
There are many VE strategies and methodologies, but they all generally contain the fol-
lowing steps:
● Information Gathering – VE team reviews the project history, information, and plans
with project management and designers. During this step, the VE team strives to under-
stand the project background, context, goals, and operational parameters.
● Brainstorm – VE team brainstorms on ways to build a better mousetrap. This step includes
questioning of assumptions and searching for creative, outside-the-box resolutions. The
ability to pursue tangential thinking free from initial judgment is crucial to success.
● Analysis – VE team evaluates brainstormed alternatives for materials, approaches,
construction means and methods, sequencing, and the like. They then rank these ideas
based upon viability, ease to enact, value added, and other project- or organization-spe-
cific criteria.
● Development – VE team investigates viable alternatives with more in-depth analysis
to determine feasibility, risks, and rewards of options. They then summarize and pre-
sent the findings and recommendations to the designers and decision makers.
Effective presentation and marketing of these ideas can facilitate consideration and
expedite acceptance.
● Implementation – This is often the most challenging of steps where the recommended
and accepted ideas are integrated into the project. Effective project management leader-
ship is essential to successfully incorporating these alternate solutions into the project
design in a cooperative, productive manner that I matched with positive morale among
the staff and designers.
As with all design QA/QC efforts, strategically choosing the responsible individuals who
are conducting the study is much more critical to success than the process itself. If done
correctly, VE can prove to be a powerful tool to reduce cost or construction time while
ensuring the Scope still satisfies the project objectives.
VE is a process that should be leveraged early on in the design process, before the
designed solutions get too much meat on the bones. VE should ask big questions first, such
as is this the right solution for this situation? FHWA offers relevant guidance, which is
often strengthened by DOT protocols. The goal is to be smart, practical, and innovative.
VE is a process.
VE is also a mindset.
Experienced PMs and designers capture the mindset from the process and apply it to
their smaller projects throughout development.
8.3 Measuring Quality
“Trust, but verify.”

– Ronald Reagan
8.3.1 Hard Truth

Most transportation organizations espouse that plan quality is of the utmost importance,
and yet having trouble articulating exactly how plan quality is measured. What does that
even look like?
One organization may gauge plan quality by the number and value of construction
change orders. Does this capture needless gold-plating or construction issues that never
surface because of exceptional construction inspectors? Another organization may gauge
plan quality by the number of review comments at each submission. Does this capture the
severity of comments, or the competence of the reviewers? Yet another organization may
gauge plan quality by whether the project made it through a detailed project development
process on-time and on-budget. Does this acknowledge that you can produce a bunch of
crappy projects on-time and on-budget? And so it goes.
The hard truth is that plan quality is extremely difficult to quantitatively measure. This
challenge is complicated when organizations focus on a single quality metric, which can
easily provide a distorted view of reality.
During development, engineering design is professional service. It is not a widget.
Consultants are hired for their expertise and professional judgment. Professional Engineers
are legally recognized experts in their field. Many other industries measure quality by the
number of defects or the financial impacts. These are valid approaches, but far more diffi-
cult to implement on public transportation projects.
The reality is QC is hard to measure. QA is far easier to measure and control. By intention
or ignorance, many organizations silently accept this reality. That is why most QA/QC pro-
grams emphasize the QA, assuming the QC will follow suit.
QA is process oriented. As such, engineers can readily determine ways to ensure processes
and procedures are followed, the correct reviews and signatures by the correct levels of
employees are completed, and how to track and document all of this in ways that are defend-
able and auditable. It is important to understand that many transportation owner-operator
organizations have their own QA/QC processes and procedures that often need to be
combined with those that are established within consulting firms or other partner organiza-
tions. These requirements should be captured and discussed to reduce redundancy of effort,
and to adequately accommodate all QA/QC efforts into the project’s schedule and budget.
8.3.2 Construction Engineering Inspections (CEI)

Managing quality (QC) is much clearer during construction. Projects are built in the field.
After project close-out, what matters is the product that was constructed. The vast majority
of all project budgets are allocated for construction. And in most cases, it is being built by
the low-bid contractor. To complicate matters, your organization or entity will likely own
and maintain the facility in perpetuity. Imagine hiring a low-bid contractor through sealed
bids for a fundamental home improvement that you will own, maintain, and rely on the
use of every day for the foreseeable future. Throughout the home improvement, you would
naturally want to check and ensure acceptable materials were being used and properly
installed. It is the same for public sector projects.
CEI is a well-developed field, the purpose of which is to ensure you get what you paid for.
This allows you make adjustments if the tests fail or to ensure compliance if the results are
favorable. It is worth noting that CEI can be expensive. It is imperative you budget for this
in your project development estimates. One may determine they can sacrifice CEI as a way
to cut costs, but know that CEI performs an important function. If you are pondering this
course of action, the question to ask yourself if you can’t afford CEI is can you afford the
alternative?
It is worth noting that there are different kinds of construction inspectors that I have
divided into the following categories:
● Construction Inspectors are responsible to ensure the project is built according to the
approved plans and bid specifications and that the project and the construction process
complies with all applicable laws, standards, and regulations. They typically work to this
end by ensuring the project is constructed according to the approved QA/QC plan. These
critical individuals work for whoever is responsible for construction management, typi-
cally, the project owner, contractor, or third party hired by the project owner. This is an
incredibly important position as it is where the proverbial rubber meets the road. An
experienced, innovative, pragmatic, and professional construction inspector can make a
bad set of plans look good and make a difficult project go smoothly; whereas a mediocre
inspector will cost your organization time and money.
● Enforcement Inspectors are those individuals who inspect the specific aspects of the
construction to ensure compliance with specific, applicable codes or regulations. These
are typically from the governing locality or other governmental organization with juris-
diction over the project. Examples include building inspectors, erosion and sediment
control inspectors, and inspections from permitting agencies.
● Governing Agency inspectors are from governing organizations that have some involve-
ment or jurisdiction over the project, are from the organization not directly responsible
for construction management, and are not acting in the capacity of an Enforcement
Inspector. An example would be a local roadway project that utilizes federal funds. At any
time during this construction, inspectors from the state’s Department of Transportation
or Federal Highway Administration may show up to review any aspect of your project.
● Manufacturer inspectors are those who conduct inspections at businesses that manufac-
ture materials for the project. These individuals typically work for the manufacturer.
Examples include bridge beam inspections at the steel mill, concrete pipe fabrication
inspections, and aggregate inspections at an asphalt plant.
● Specialty Inspectors are those individuals who inspect a specific aspect of the project for
which they have a unique and uncommon knowledge. The most common example
might be bridge inspectors who require specialized training to achieve bridge inspection-
specific certifications or certified SCUBA inspectors for underwater inspections.
● Testing Inspectors are those individuals who conduct materials testing and work for
geotechnical, environmental, civil, or laboratory testing service companies. Testing
inspectors perform the predefined tests utilizing properly calibrated equipment and fol-
lowing the standardized procedure. Their role is critical to provide accurate and timely
information as to what is being put in the ground, but they typically bear no decision-
making responsibilities other than to report the results to the construction inspectors. I
separate these from construction inspectors who are concerned with the materials, the
process, and the product.
8.3.3 QA/QC Tips

Measuring quality is a difficult challenge for most transportation organizations. There is no
silver bullet QC metric during plan development. Most organizations, by design or default,
have settled on systems that work for them given their constraints and risk appetite. Below
are ten best practices that can perhaps be incorporated pending your organization’s culture
and constraints:
1) If your state does not require it, encourage discipline leads to stamp and seal documents,
not just the PM. Responsibility and initial quality rise with the signing of plans by SMEs.
2) Leverage consultants’ and other agencies’ QA/QC practices.
3) Be responsible by pursuing consulting firms with glaring errors and omissions.
4) Ensure you accommodate QA/QC efforts into the project budget and schedule.
5) Involve all disciplines, and the right SMEs, in milestone plan reviews.
6) Schedule adequate staff review time for milestone plan submissions.
7) Host a comprehensive final review of the Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (PSE).
8) Leverage over-the-shoulder reviews with gray-haired, experienced engineers who
understand discipline interdependencies during development and know construction
realities.
9) Establish QA/QC processes and procedures that serve your needs and then consis-
tently follow them.
10) Remember the goal of QA/QC is to produce quality plans that enable smooth, surprise-
free construction. Find the right balance where you are accomplishing this goal and
not just feeding a created bureaucratic beast.
8.4 The Costs of Quality
“You may delay, but time will not.”

Most mature organizations embrace the notion that aggressively pursuing quality management
provides a good return on their investment. In transportation, this becomes more evident as
one widens their perspective.
Consider a plan design flaw, be it an error or omission. The design engineer may deem
correcting it is not worth the required rework. The discipline lead may add that it can best
be handled in the field as the benefit of fixing it not worth the time. The PM may realize this
error will significantly impact other disciplines and have concerns over schedule delays to
Advertisement. The Program or Portfolio Manager may be concerned pushing the error to
the field will increase change order costs. Organizational leaders may be concerned field
solutions will result in higher asset life cycle costs by increasing future operation and main-
tenance cost.
Obviously not all plan errors and omissions are created equal, nor do they result in equal
impacts to the project’s budget, scope, and schedule, and the asset’s life cycle costs. As such,
it can be a challenge to balance competing priorities. Add to this the reality that stake-
holders don’t often appreciate the cost of quality.
It is important to acknowledge that there has never been, and will never be, a perfect,
error-free set of transportation plans. The PM should leverage organizational guidance,
and the consultant’s QC/QA protocols if applicable, to catch and correct significant issues.
What is a significant issue? This should be defined by the organization, with more mature
entities having tighter definitions. Generally, a significant issue is one that adversely
impacts the project’s budget, scope, or schedule, or introduces longer-term asset operation
and maintenance costs, beyond the preestablished organizational thresholds.
It can be difficult for a PM to determine which issues are significant, especially when
there are conflicting priorities. Imagine trying to reconcile conflicting organizational pres-
sures to resolve issues on the plans so that they are not pushed into the field while still
making the scheduled Advertisement date. In these instances, organizational protocol
should provide guidance. Additionally, the PM and public transportation organization
bears ethical obligations to the public. If you become aware of a quality issue, then you bear
responsibility to take action. The decision may be to do nothing and accept the risk or
resulting costs, but be intentional and take action. Denial is not an ethical choice.
It is important to remember that Quality Management should not be an afterthought or
a series of selective decisions. To be effective, Quality Management must be woven into the
fabric of project development such that significant issues are identified early and aggres-
sively addressed to resolution. This requires transparency, trust, and cooperative collabora-
tion toward a common goal.
8.4.1 Cost of Conformance and Nonconformance

Generally speaking, the cost of errors and omissions increase over time. The lowest cost of
an error is never to make it in the first place. This is where experienced designers paired
with a mature quality management culture provide a tremendous return on investment.
The cost of many errors and omissions are never realized because they don’t occur, or are
quickly identified and resolved. As the design progresses, rework to correct errors become
more complicated. Discipline details are finalized. Permits are submitted or issued. Right-
of-Way and easement lines are delineated and presented to the public. Maintenance of
Traffic and Sequence of Construction plans take shape. The further the design progresses,
the more the ripple impact of correcting errors increases. Costs typically increase even
more if the error or omission is corrected in the field. Correcting errors or omissions on the
plans before advertisement can be pennies-on-the-dollar compared to corrective action
with a contractor’s change order.
The different aspects of the quality costs can be divided into two different categories:
Conformance and Nonconformance. Conformance costs are costs incurred in the effort to
prevent errors or defects. Nonconformance costs are those incurred when a defect or error has
occurred. Costs increase as a quality issue passes from conformance to nonconformance.
Conformance costs are frequently divided into two subsections: Prevention costs and
Appraisal costs. Prevention costs are those efforts to provide and support a culture of error
prevention. These may include training, process documentation, and adequate resources
to do the job right the first time. Appraisal costs are costs incurred to measure, monitor,
and control Quality.
Nonconformance costs are frequently separated into two subsections: Internal failure
costs and External failure costs. Internal failure costs are rework costs to correct the error
or omission before the product is delivered. This could be rework costs before the design
plan are advertised for construction. External failure costs are costs incurred to correct the
error and omissions after the product is delivered. This could be the change order costs to
correct the errors or omissions in the field.
8.4.2 I Thought Engineers Were Supposed to Be Smart?

A question many PMs have pondered is how can so many bright, educated engineers be so
wrong? This is especially frustrating considering most engineers are detail-oriented, and
internally driven to produce quality work. How can accomplished firms of intelligent,
conscientious professionals occasionally produce designs with such egregious errors and
omissions, or make recommendations that so clearly defy common sense?
It could be a proposed directional island whose nose extends into a travel lane, or a proposed
sediment basin atop an existing shallow sanitary sewer force main, or a sequence of construction
that traps water behind temporary pavement, or not providing needed staging areas for a
crane, or not sizing temporary easements to accommodate the construction equipment, or pro-
posing a sound wall directly atop a natural gas pipeline vault, or countless other examples.
Most experienced PMs have all looked across a conference table and politely paraphrased the
unfiltered thought running through their head, “Are you insane? What are you doing to me?”
In these and other situations, it can be helpful to be mindful of Hanlon’s Razor. This old
adage states, “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.” In
other words, bad things most often happen not because of bad intentions, but because of
reasons not directly related to you. Maybe they are incompetent? Or maybe they are dis-
tracted, or unmotivated, or untrained, or inexperienced, or are burned out and thinking
about their upcoming vacation, or going through a difficult medical situation with an aging
parent, or stressing about childcare, or just having a bad day.
As PM, you are leading the team. When errors and omissions occur and are identified,
they must be acknowledged and resolved. Part of your job is to ensure this happens.
Consultants will often live up to, or slide down to, meet the owner-operator expectations.
A PM should expect quality plans, and create a culture that promotes them. This often
includes transparency of errors, which enables faster and more thoroughly capturing the
intended and unintended consequences of the errors or omissions. Perhaps most impor-
tant, this often includes the freedom to openly and honestly discuss errors and omissions.
Work the issue; don’t attack individuals. First examine the processes, their internal training,
their internal QA/QC reviews, and so forth. If a pattern of errors or omissions develops,
then the conversations need to change, and likely be quickly elevated so as not to jeopar-
dize the project’s budget, scope, or schedule.
It is important to acknowledge not all engineers are created equal. They have different
strengths, different experiences, different level of commitment, different personalities, and
different communication styles. Similarly, not all consultant firms are created equal. They
have different cultures, different leadership, different profit models, different priorities,
and different training and mentoring for their employees. Consultants are not interchange-
able commodities. When you hire an engineer, you are renting their mind. You are lever-
aging their expertise in anticipation that they will solve your problems within given
constraints and move your project forward.
Pending the firms you hire, the ones doing the design may not be the individuals who led
the short-list interview presentation during the professional procurement process. Many
firms use draftsman, technicians, and junior engineers to do much of the foundational
design and modeling. In these instances, their work product should be closely reviewed
before being presented to the owner-operator. This can be especially true for junior engi-
neers whose perspectives, knowledge, and experience are commonly at vastly lower levels
than a senior engineer. Many junior engineers calculate numbers with no real contextual
understanding of what those numbers mean in the real world. Perhaps more important,
most junior engineers have spent little to no time in the field, and truly have no idea how
projects are actually built.
Plans are built in the field. Despite the obviousness of this statement, many designers
do not design plans with this in mind. This quickly becomes apparent when in a meet-
ing you ask the consultant how are you going to widen the road and maintain two-way
traffic without temporary pavement, or what equipment will be used to set the stream
embankment armoring solution you propose and how will you get it to the point of
installation. The reality is that many designers don’t have sufficient construction expe-
rience to draw from as they design the project. This can be especially true for those
firms that specialize in large or complex public transportation projects where there can
be some length of time between project origination, design, and construction. This is
why I would ask designers in professional services short list interviews which of their
sample projects have been built. It can be surprising how many projects engineers have
designed that have never been built. Some lessons you best learn when your plan goes
to the field. There is a huge difference between a design working on paper, and that
which can be built. This is another case where you want those gray-haired engineers
looking at the plans. Remember, the goal is to build things, not generate great looking
plans.
8.4.3 Thoughts to Ponder

There are two spheres of QA/QC during design that should coordinate and be complemen-
tary of each other, those performed by the consultant and those performed by the project
owner-operator or sponsoring organization. Most consulting firms have some internal QA/
QC plan. Some take this far more seriously than others. This should be discussed and
understood prior to retaining their services. For smaller projects where draftsman, techni-
cians, or junior engineers are doing the bulk of the design, it is imperative that more expe-
rienced eyes review the work product before deliverables are submitted. It can be
advantageous if reviewers have different areas of expertise. For instance, one may look for
constructability issues with the design while another may review the accuracy of hydro-
logic and hydraulic numbers. These same issues are present on larger and more complex
projects, along with increased coordination issues. In general, the larger and more complex
the project, the more time and effort should be spent on design QA/QC. Often larger pro-
jects will have a project-specific design QA/QC plan, complete with hierarchical charts,
defined roles, regular meetings, and the like.
The good news is that gross plan errors and omissions are relatively rare. In general, this
seems to be truer for larger projects where more experienced firms are employed that typi-
cally have more rigorous QA/QC programs that are administered by more experienced and
accomplished senior engineers. However, as the cliché goes, “the devil is in the details.”
Budget and schedule consequences from an erroneous unit cost line-item specification or
surveying error can become significant. Identifying and plugging these potential contractor
change order holes in the plans and bid specifications are where many better engineering
firms earn their fees and well-deserved reputations.
Irrespective of the consultant’s QA/QC efforts, the product is purchased by the project
owner. Organizations have vastly different opinions on how best to ensure they are
receiving quality plans and bid specifications. Regardless of where your organization falls
on this maturity spectrum, it is dangerous for any owner agency to do nothing. They may
assume they are hiring professional engineers who will seal the plans and bid specifica-
tions, don’t review the work, and don’t institute contractual measures to mitigate their
risks. You can only bury your head in the sand for so long before your foolishness is irrefut-
ably confirmed.
It should be noted that one critical question many owner-operators never bother to ask
or answer is whether they are approving or accepting consultant-designed plans. The
answer to this question should directly impact your project’s QA/QC approach and plans.
If you are approving the plans, then you are inherently implying you have the expertise to
adequately do so, and should take your organization’s QA/QC responsibilities very seri-
ously. If you are accepting the plans, then you should ensure your contracts adequately
transfer appropriate risks to the consultant such that they protect the owner-operator in a
way that best ensures quality plans and products.
So, what can your public organization do to manage plan quality? First you need to truly
accept that managing quality is an investment worth making and not wasted effort. Make
a concerted effort to advance your organizational maturity. Evaluate your staff resources
and enact a pragmatic approach that adds value to the project. When developing and
implementing a design QA/QC program, there is no substitute for having the right people
involved in examining and reviewing the plans and bid specifications. A colorful hierar-
chical QA/QC team chart and detailed workflow document is worth far less than a few
candid meetings with respected professionals who are experts in their fields. For example,
if your organization is administering the construction, get your construction SMEs with
decades of institutional knowledge to review the plans and specs. They may not like it, but
it is an investment that will pay big dividends.
So, what can you as a public sector PM do to manage plan quality? This is an especially
critical role on larger, more complex projects where the QA/QC risks are less based in lack-
of-knowledge and more rooted in coordination. I recommend having regular project walk-
throughs between the major milestone plan submissions. These can be in the field where
you walk the site or in a large conference room where you can walk around a roll-plan.
Have all engineering team disciplines present, start on one side of the project, and walk and
talk your way through it. This helps ensure each of the engineering discipline trains that
are concurrently running down their own tracks are still heading in the same direction.
Equally important is to accept the role of the communications clearing house for your
project. As PM, you are in more meetings on more aspects of this project than anyone else.
As best you can, the PM needs to ensure information, improvements, concerns, and
decisions are distributed to the right individuals to minimize unintended ripple effects that
may eventually surface as plan error or omissions.
169
Communications
“Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; courage is also what it takes to sit down
and listen.”
– Winston Churchill
9.1 Project Communications
“The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”
– George Bernard Shaw
This may be the most important chapter in this book.

Project Management Institute (PMI) estimates PMs spend 85% of their time communi-
cating with others. It is almost impossible to overemphasize the importance of consistent,
effective communication between the PM, the project team, executive leadership, and
internal and external stakeholders. The ability to consistently communicate effectively is
foundational in order to implement much of what this book discusses. PMI studies have
determined “Ineffective communications is the primary contributor to project failure one
third of the time, and had a negative impact on project success more than half the time.” Given
the obvious importance of communications, why do so many continue to struggle? As a
PM, how should you effectively manage project communications?
Communication is not just a PM obligation or responsibility, it is fundamental to all you
do. With the exceptions of perhaps risk management and operating within the triple con-
straint of budget, scope, and schedule, Communication is a priority that should permeate
all we do. Effective project management relies on effectively controlling the flow of project
information. It is imperative that you, as the PM, know the right information at the right
time. Similarly, it is imperative your team and stakeholders know the right information at
the right times. This is central to all that you do. The PM is in a unique position to receive,
evaluate, and distribute project information. Discerning the importance and unintended
consequences of new information, in addition to knowing who needs to know what and
when, is foundational to a successful project.
Besides discussing and distributing new information, regular updates are an important
technique to build trust and credibility with your team and stakeholders. Even if there is

170 9 Communications
nothing new to report, a polite check-in can provide assurance and validation. You may be
working your tail off to track down the answer to someone else’s question, but unless you
communicate that you are actively working on it, how are they to know. In silence, their
default assumptions regarding you and your priorities may be quite different than reality.
And especially for stakeholders, their perception is their reality. Effective communication
is the cornerstone for managing expectations, which is discussed in Chapter 10 of this book.
Successful PMs differentiate between communication and communications. Communication
(singular) is the process of exchanging information. These are focused acts that heavily rely
on our personal communication strengths and weaknesses. These are soft skills that
we can individually work to improve. Communications (plural) is the means by which
communication takes place. This includes the framework within which communication
occurs. A project’s communications can, and should, be managed, which involves three
distinct processes: Establishing a Communications Plan, Managing Communications, and
Monitoring Communications.
9.1.1 The Communications Plan

A project’s Communications Plan is an intentional approach that documents when and
how, who needs to know what. This effort would ideally be completed early in the project
and included as part of the Project Management Plan. However, if one is not completed,
better late than never. It is important, perhaps more so than you might think. PMI cites
that, “High-performing organizations (those completing greater than 80 percent of their pro-
jects on time, on budget and within goals) create formal communications plans for nearly
twice as many projects as their lower performing counterparts (those completing less than 60
percent of their projects on time, on budget, and within goals).” The essential components of
a communications plan are shown in Figure 9.1.
The size and complexity of the project will often determine the granularity level of
the Communications Plan. But in general, they all should have the same basic com-
ponents. It starts with a listing of who needs to receive information and updates. This
should include both internal and external stakeholders, and can be individuals or groups.
The Stakeholder register should be consulted during this process. The plan should also
specify who is responsible to prepare and distribute the specified communications. You
then need to determine what informational content should be conveyed. The plan should
define the anticipated frequency of when to communicate, and the method of how best
to communicate. Pending specifics, it can
also be useful to note why they should be
Who - (1) will do it (2) intended audience
contacted. Advanced Communications
What - message, information, content Plans also include clear guidelines
on issue escalation, which is often in
When - frequency, schedule
conjunction with other risk and issue res-
Why - objective, desired results olution specifics. The premise and inten-
tion is to tailor the Communications Plan
How - communication method
to satisfy the unique informational needs
Figure 9.1 Communications plan components. of all stakeholders.
For instance, your boss may want a project status update every Friday in email format.
Your Program Manager may want an in-person briefing the third Wednesday every month.
Your team may benefit from personalized task lists every Monday morning. You may
decide to provide key community stakeholder groups a video update every quarter, while
others who signed up for the project email list on your organization’s website prefer email
updates only at major milestones. Regardless of your specifics, the Communications Plan’s
goal is to establish an intentional, strategic, and workable framework by which project
information will be shared. This is a remarkably effective tool to leverage when managing
expectations.
The Communications Plan is also a great place to document expectations for project doc-
umentation. What will be saved, by whom, where, and in what format? Many organiza-
tions already have existing documentation protocols. Perhaps there is a centralized
electronic document repository with established naming conventions, versioning nomen-
clature, file hierarchy, and associated project metadata. If so, this is easy to reference, and
augment with any project-specific needs. If your organization is less structured, this plan
should carefully detail all project documentation expectations and requirements.
There can be overlap between the Communications and Stakeholder Engagement plans.
While they may seem very similar, the Communications Plan should focus on what to say,
and to whom it should be said. The Stakeholder Engagement Plan should focus on who to
listen to and what feedback you seek to elicit. The Communications Plan ensures the right
project information is being distributed to the right people at the right time in the right
way, all for the purpose of efficiently driving project progress. The Stakeholder Engagement
Plan ensures the right stakeholders are being engaged in an effective way in reasonable
frequencies for the purpose of efficiently managing expectations to promote a successful
project delivery.
9.1.2 Manage Communications

Managing Communications is executing the Communications Plan that you have pre-
pared. In the day-to-day PM rush of responsibilities, this is one that can easily slip through
the cracks. While it rarely shows up in project performance metrics or personal evalua-
tions, know it is foundational to your personal and professional success. There may be no
faster way for a PM to build credibility with internal and external stakeholders than to
humbly, reliably, and honestly convey progress in a proactive way that exceeds expecta-
tions. Credibility leads to trust. More than any budget, scope, or schedule, a PM must
fiercely guard their credibility and stakeholder trust.
Throughout the life of the project, you will leverage other work documents as founda-
tional inputs to what you communicate. Plans, engineering studies, issues logs, risk reg-
ister, and other project-working documents will drive much of what is conveyed and
discussed. For it all to work together smoothly, a PM should ensure all these project
management tools are fully utilized with current information, and available to the right
people at the right time.
Executing the Communications Plan is as much about discipline and persistence as it is
communication skills. If you are to provide your boss status updates every Friday and your
Program Manager an update the third Wednesday of each month, then make sure you do
it. Experienced PMs realize these are not obligations, as much as they are opportunities to
report project progress, proactively discuss risks and challenges, and praise team members’
success. These are scheduled events designed for you to actively manage expectations.
Seize these powerful opportunities.
9.1.3 Monitor Communications

As the project progresses, a strong PM will periodically review the Communications Plan
to ensure it is still effectively satisfying the informational needs of all internal and external
stakeholders. In your review, start with the Who, What, When, and How of the plan. Does
the Communications framework still make sense? In order to manage the process and con-
trol the product, you need to periodically revisit and answer the following two questions:
(1) Are we abiding by the plan? (2) Are we getting the desired result?
Throughout the life of a project, it is natural to adjust the communication frequency and
method to accommodate changing informational urgencies and sensitivities. As such, the
PM should also examine the efficacy of the communications. Perhaps a video call would be
more effective than an email update for certain stakeholders. Maybe your weekly status
update email to your boss would be more effective if it were a brief conversation instead. Be
strategic in your modes of communications. Should the communication be formal or
informal, written or spoken, in person or remote? Is this best shared individually, or in a
group? Are the methods effectively pushing (one way communication to specific stake-
holders), pulling (retrieving information you need), or conversationally interacting with
the right information at the right time with the right people? Be smart and intentional.
9.1.4 Four Different Communication Styles

Ned Hermann pioneered the whole brain model, which took the science of the four major
brain quadrants and applied it to business. He created the Hermann Brain Dominance
Instrument (HBDI). This brain-based study describes how we process information, which
can provide remarkable insights allowing us to more effectively communicate with all
types of people.
The four major brain quadrants are right brain, left brain, cerebral cortex, and the limbic
system. Those that are right-brain dominant tend to value and rely on emotions, intuition,
ideas, and human interactions. Conversely, those who are left-brain dominant tend to
value and rely on logic, reasoning, details, and facts. Those who are cerebral cortex domi-
nant tend to value and rely on longer term, less tangible solutions. Conversely, those who
are limbic system dominant tend to prefer shorter term, more concrete and practical solu-
tions. These four quadrants can be graphically displayed. This creates four distinct commu-
nication styles: Process-Oriented, People-Oriented, Action-Oriented, and Idea-Oriented,
as shown in Figure 9.2.
Process-Oriented communicators focus on details, processes, and implementation. They
tend to be practical, logical, methodical, factual, cautious, patient, sequential, and orga-
nized planners. They talk about controlling, management, and analysis. Their assertions
often rely on accepted references, proof, tradition, established protocols, and personal expe-
rience. This style often engenders reassurance and credibility as they tend to be reliable and
Cerebral Cortex task-driven individuals with a get-it-

Conceptual done personality. However, the pacing,
levels of detail, and protracted thought
process can undermine their points.
Action Idea
Oriented Oriented These individuals can be drawn into
Left Brain Right Brain
proving minor points, to the detriment
Rational Intuitive
Process People of the bigger picture.
Oriented Oriented People-Oriented communicators focus
on relationships with the audience, while
Limbic System
being keenly observant of the emotional
Instinctive environment. They tend to be kinesthetic,
supportive, empathetic, perceptive, emo-
Figure 9.2 Four different communications styles.
tional, and subjective. They talk about
people, needs, collaboration, self-devel-
opment, sensitivity, values, and expectations. Their assertions may be more improvised, as
they read the room and adjust accordingly. They like to talk and teach others. These verbal
and nonverbal styles are often lively and expressive. Often, they interweave anecdotes and
stories to make their message more personable and relatable. However, they can become
too emotional and underestimate the importance of substance, which may undermine their
credibility.
Action-Oriented communicators focus on rational, analytic reasoning. They tend to be
direct, pragmatic, impatient, critical, quantitative, energetic, and quick to decide and challenge
others. They talk about objectives, results, facts, productivity, efficiency, performance, and
next steps. Their assertions are precise, structured, and concise. This neutral style is generally
easy to understand, and relies on them knowing how things really work. The message is struc-
tured and clear. However, it can convey a clinical-like detachment between the speaker and
listener as it can easily discount emotions and human aspects of the issue.
Idea-Oriented communicators focus on concepts, innovation, and creativity. They tend
to be holistic, synthesizing, imaginative, flexible, curious, charismatic, thought-provoking,
and sometimes unrealistic. They talk about possibilities, opportunities, interdependencies,
problems, and potential solutions. Their assertions are passionate and engaging. This style
can lead listeners to consider different perspectives and realties. It can stimulate thoughts,
drive innovation, and win support. However, their enthusiasm and conceptualized thinking
may alienate some with more practical concerns.
While everyone has some natural and environmental affinities for each quadrant, most
tend to have one quadrant that is more dominant. The power in HDMI is understanding
how to communicate with all styles in ways that resonate. When speaking with an individual,
a group of people, your team, or stakeholders, there will undoubtedly be a variety of com-
munications styles. The best way to increase the effectiveness of your communications is to
make sure you address the foundational needs of each style. This doesn’t mean you trans-
form your style. It does however mean you should modify your style to include critical
aspects of the others to best reach all listeners.
To reach a Process-Oriented communicator be precise. Present a logical, organized
discussion. Tie the issues to practical, key elements. Emphasize past precedents, and logically
present your recommendations. Include a clear path forward of who will do what and when.
To reach a People-Oriented communicator, don’t be rushed. Encourage small talk before

you dive into the discussion. Include anecdotes, stories, examples, or humor that make the
issue human. Use first-person pronouns that make it personal. Acknowledge the relation-
ship between the people and your proposals or issues, while emphasizing past successes.
To reach an Action-Oriented communicator, define the result early. Tell them where the
discussion is headed by stating the conclusion at the outset. Be brief, concentrate on your
best recommendation, include facts, figures, and schematics, and emphasize the practi-
cality of your solution.
To reach an Idea-Oriented communicator, allow them time to think. Remain patient if
they go off on a tangent. While emphasizing the uniqueness of the topic at hand, mention
options and take time to relate it to broader concepts. Tie the future value or anticipated
impact to the future reality.
Work to integrate aspects of each into your own style, and sprinkle them throughout the
discussion to dramatically increase your connection and efficacy when communicating
with others. To become an exceptional communicator, pair this approach with effective
active listening skills.
Active listening builds trust and connections in that it conveys you value the other’s
thoughts. Active listening is hard as it requires your undivided attention, not thinking
about what you want to say next. It means concentrating on both what is said and what is
conveyed with nonverbal communications. It means being patient and focused, often
restating their position to confirm your understanding of their concerns. There are six key
steps to active listening:
1) Pay attention
2) Withhold judgment
3) Reflect
4) Clarify
5) Summarize
6) Share
Like many things in life, active listening is a skill that can be refined and become a habit.
9.1.5 Effective Communication

There are abundant resources focused on improving one’s communication skills. Most of
these emphasize time-tested truths. When writing, use correct grammar and spelling. Be
concise and clearly relate to the reader’s needs with logical paragraphs and flowing sen-
tence structures. Speak clearly and enunciate. Practice active listening. Be polite, kind, and
respectful. Remain professional and courteous. Be politically and culturally aware. Praise
in public; criticize in private. Be honest and forthright. And many more truisms your par-
ents taught you that can take a lifetime to master.
Successful PMs communicate well. While they find and embrace their own style, there
are some commonalities. Great PMs truly listen. They excel at nonverbal communication.
They bring clarity and maintain focus. They can read the room. They ask probing questions
and then give people time to formulate meaningful answers. They provide perspective.
They keep everyone in the loop. They promote their team and celebrate successes. They
talk to their audience, tailoring the message to the technical and situational awareness of
the listeners. They focus on the issues, and don’t take dissent or criticism personally. They
empathize while not letting their emotions cloud their judgment or responses. They have
an accurate bullshit-meter, and aren’t afraid to use it. They know when to be direct and
when to let an issue simmer. They promptly address conflict and seek win-win solutions.
They are inclusive and build relationships built on trust and mutual respect. They are con-
sistent and reliable.
Effective communication is the basis of almost everything a PM does. Perhaps more so
than any other area, this is one of the professional skills where we have trouble seeing our
own blind spots. We naturally assume our message was clearly conveyed, and if confusion
resulted it must be on their end. We naturally assume the listener heard our position and
completely understands it, even our mindsets and assumptions that we didn’t share
because they are so obvious. We naturally assume the audience absorbs the content and
ramifications expressed in our presentations and well-prepared slides. We naturally assume
the language we use to explain technical issues is understood by all those listening. Some
of these assumptions are assuredly not true. Seek candid, trusted feedback to help you see
your own blind spots.
Learn to become a storyteller. Especially in our increasingly distracted existence, grab-
bing and holding a listener’s attention is hard. Stories are a powerful tool to do exactly that.
We love stories. We remember stories. And many people are often motivated by feelings
and emotions over facts. Stories provide a powerful way to bind these all together. Stories
also can provide a platform to convey to the listener that their concerns are being heard and
considered. While we each have and will develop our own style of storytelling, the formula
is often the same. There is a situation, followed by an action, that produces a result, which
leads to a lesson learned.
President Ronald Reagan was one of America’s foremost orators, earning him the mon-
iker of “The Great Communicator.” Ken Khachigian, a former Reagan speechwriter wrote,
“What made him the Great Communicator was Ronald Reagan’s determination and ability
to educate his audience, to bring his ideas to life by using illustrations and word pictures to
make his arguments vivid to the mind’s eye. In short: he was America’s Teacher.” In describing
his own style, Reagan said, “What I said simply made sense to the [man] on the street.” He
also advised, “Talk to your audience, not over their heads or through them. Don’t try to talk in
a special language of broadcasting or even of politics, just use normal everyday words.” His
advice, approach, and example are directly applicable to every PM who wants to improve
his own communication skills.
9.2 Stakeholder Involvement and the Stakeholder

Engagement Plan
“The biggest communication problem is that we don’t listen to understand. We listen to

reply.”
– Anonymous
The PM is 100% responsible for stakeholder involvement. Team members may assist. Public
relations and graphic designers may be leveraged for their expertise. Leadership may
interject themselves in planned or impromptu manners. But the ultimate responsibility for
stakeholder relations falls squarely with the PM.
And the reason is simple. Effective stakeholder involvement is an incredibly important
component to efficient project advancement. As the project progresses, there is an inverse
relationship between the influence of stakeholders and the cost of change (both in terms of
time and money), as shown in Figure 9.3. This does not necessarily mean stakeholder
influence diminishes as the project progresses, but the impact to the project to implement
requested changes increases the further you are in the development process. Ideally stake-
holder input would be captured prior to scoping. Changes can become much more costly
to implement after Design Approval. Early engagement is not only the right thing to do, but
there are important business reasons to do it, and do it well.
St ak
High e h o ld
e r In h an ge
Co st o f C
(Time and Money)

f l u en
Cost of Change
ce
Stakeholder
Influence
Low
Time (Not To Scale)
Project Final Design Advertise
Preliminary Detailed
Development Scoping and RW and Award
Design Design
Phase Acquisition Plans
Design Plans 30% 75% 90% 100%
Key Project DesignPublic

Approval Advertisement
Scoping
Milestones Hearing
Public Hearing
Figure 9.3 Stakeholder influence and cost of change over time.
9.2.1 The Stakeholder Engagement Plan

Stakeholder issues are best managed within the framework of a Stakeholder Engagement
Plan. In this context, when you see “Plan,” think “How.” The Stakeholder Engagement
Plan details how you will engage the stakeholders. It is a formal strategy detailing how you
will communicate with stakeholders to build support for, and effectively drive, your project
development. This plan will list the stakeholders and specify the frequency and type of
anticipated communication to achieve the objectives. It may also include considerations
for media and specific communication events. While preparing, managing, and monitoring
the Stakeholder Engagement Plan may seem, and be, time intensive, this is a fundamental
responsibility of the PM.
Figure 9.4 shows the four distinct processes that comprise the Stakeholder Engagement
Plan: (1) Identify Stakeholders, (2) Plan Stakeholder Engagement, (3) Manage Stakeholder
Identify Stakeholders Plan Stakeholder Manage Stakeholder Monitor Stakeholder

Engagement Engagement Engagement
• Creating • Setting Team and • Executing the Plan • Evaluating and

Stakeholder Stakeholder • Engaging the Refining
Register Expectations Stakeholders Stakeholder Plan
Figure 9.4 Stakeholder engagement plan.
Engagement, and (4) Monitor Stakeholder Engagement. These processes begin early in the
planning stage, and extend through the life of the project.
Every project should have a Stakeholder Engagement Plan. Pending size, complexity,
location, and design solution of your project, you may not implement all aspects, but a pro-
active and intentional communication mindset is critical to your project’s success. The PM
should tailor the Stakeholder Engagement Plan to be appropriate and reasonable for your
specific project, while complying with your organization’s guidance and requirements.
9.2.2 Identify Stakeholders

The process of Identifying Stakeholders involves four distinct steps: (1) identifying who is
a stakeholder, (2) analyzing stakeholder’s motivations and potential impacts on the project,
(3) mapping stakeholder relationships and influences, and (4) listing and prioritizing stake-
holders on the Stakeholder Register. More time and effort should be spent on these four
tasks for larger and more complex projects, but all projects should go through the four steps
in Figure 9.5.
Identifying who is a Stakeholder
Analyzing Stakeholder motivations and impacts
Mapping Stakeholder relationships and influences
Documenting and prioritizing Stakeholders on Stakeholder Register
Figure 9.5 Identifying stakeholders.
9.2.2.1 Step 1 – Identifying Who Is a Stakeholder

A stakeholder is any person, group, organization, or entity that has a real or perceived stake
in the development, delivery, or results of your project. Identifying potential stakeholders
relies on wisdom, experience, and active brainstorming. The goal is to proactively identify
all potential stakeholders by which you can be intentional in your communications. This
doesn’t mean you will contact all identified stakeholders. That will be determined in Step 4
of this process, after you analyze and map them.
Stakeholders can be internal or external to your organization. Internal stakeholders may
include your boss, your project team, co-workers, financial support staff, consultant(s),
elected officials, and executive leadership. External stakeholders can be much more diffi-
cult to proactively identify. These may include adjacent or nearby property owners, prop-
erty renters, residential neighborhoods and their Home Owners Associations (HOAs),
churches, schools, businesses, economic development, community groups, parks and its
patrons, and the traveling public. There may also be other external stakeholders that don’t
readily come to mind, like Police, Fire, First Responders, school transportation (buses),
local hospitals and other medical facilities, business organizations, organizations that meet
in facilities that will be impacted (e.g., Scouting troops, Youth Basketball leagues, etc.), the
press, trade organizations, and local, regional, or national special interest groups (e.g., bike
and pedestrian advocates, environmental groups, etc.).
At the end of this step, you should have a list of stakeholders. This is the brainstorming
section of this process, and the results may be a little chaotic. It is okay if it is lengthy and
not as organized as you might prefer. This list is the start of your Stakeholder Register.
Future steps will refine the list that you will finalize during Step 4.
9.2.2.2 Step 2 – Analyzing Stakeholder’s Motivations and Potential Impacts on the

Project
Once stakeholders have been identified, the next step is to perform stakeholder analysis.
The purpose of this effort is to categorize the motivations and potential impacts each stake-
holder may have upon your project. These are relatively easy exercises that can provide
valuable individual insights and a comprehensive stakeholder picture that is crucial in
shaping an effective engagement plan.
The two most common techniques for stakeholder analysis are the Power-Interest Matrix
and the Salience Model. Both provide meaningful insights, but with slightly different
twists.
The Power-Interest Matrix is a two-dimensional grid with four distinct quadrants. A
stakeholder’s Power, or Influence, is qualitatively measured from low to high on the Y-axis.
A stakeholder’s level of interest is qualitatively represented on the X-axis from low (passive)
to high (active). Where a particular stakeholder falls within the four quadrants shown in
Figure 9.6 dictates how you should approach and prioritize their interaction.
Especially for those who are visually inclined, it may be beneficial to graphically show
key stakeholders on the Matrix. Remember this is a qualitative analysis. You should strive
to correctly place the stakeholders in the correct quadrant, and then it becomes a relative
Handle with care

Keep satisfied Top priority
High Keep completely Manage closely
Influence P informed
O
W
E Low priority Need to participate
R Monitor Keep informed
Low Regular minimal contact Anticipate and meet
Influence needs
INTEREST
Low Stake High Stake
Figure 9.6 Stakeholder quadrant definitions.
scale. A simple way to also display the position of the stakeholders is to color code their
names. In the example in Figure 9.7, green indicates advocates and supporters, red indi-
cates critics or blockers, and blue indicates those that are neutral.
Executive Leadership Elected Politician

High
Keep Manage
Satisfied Closely
Local Media Local Businesses
Power
Adjacent Church Adjacent School

Keep
Monitor Local HOA
Informed
Low
Bike Advocacy Group Local Commuters
Low High
Interest
Figure 9.7 Stakeholder quadrant responses.
The Salience Model analyzes stakeholders in three dimensions: Power, Legitimacy, and
Urgency. It is shown as a Venn diagram with eight specified regions, as illustrated in Figure 9.8.
Each stakeholder should fall into one, and only one, category.
1) Dormant Stakeholders have lots of power but no legitimacy or urgency, and therefore
not likely to become heavily involved (red region).
2) Discretionary Stakeholders have legitimate claims but little urgency or power, therefore
not likely to exert much pressure (blue region).
3) Demanding Stakeholders want things to be immediately addressed. Although they have
little power or legitimacy, they can make lots of “noise” (yellow region).
4) Dominant Stakeholders have both formal power and legitimacy, but little urgency.
They often have expectations that must be met (purple region).
5) Dangerous Stakeholders have power and urgency but are not really relevant to the
project (orange region).
Power
1 8
4 5
7
2 3
6
Legitimacy Urgency
Figure 9.8 Salience model.

6) Dependent Stakeholders have urgent and legitimate stakes in the project but hold little
power. These stakeholders often rely on others to amplify their voices (green region).
7) Definitive Stakeholders have power, legitimacy, and urgency, and therefore have the
highest salience. (white region at the intersection of all other regions)
8) Non-stakeholders have no power, legitimacy, or urgency (outside the regions defined by
the circles 1, 2, and 3).
9.2.2.3 Step 3 – Mapping Stakeholder Relationships and Influences

After the stakeholders have been analyzed, you should map their relationships and influences.
On smaller projects, this may be something you can do internally. However, projects that have
a large number of stakeholders should be mapped. This is a relatively straightforward exercise
that produces a visual representation of the stakeholders, organizing them according to key
criteria by which you can more effectively manage them throughout the projects.
The actual mapping can take many different forms. Typical tools are tree diagrams,
spider diagrams, and mind maps. The format may depend upon the number and type of
stakeholders, as well as our own preferences. Which format you select is less important
than the results they produce. When complete, you should have grouped stakeholders in
logical ways that provide clarity on formal and informal connections and influences.
9.2.2.4 Step 4 – Listing and Prioritizing Stakeholders on the Stakeholder Register

The Stakeholder Register is an incredibly important project document that relies on the
results of your stakeholder analysis and mapping. There are an abundance of Stakeholder
Register templates available to suit your particular needs and desires. They are generally
formatted as a table, with stakeholders in the rows and columns for all relevant details.
Typical columns may include contact information, preferred method of communication,
frequency of anticipated communications, Power-Interest Matrix quadrant, Salience Model
designation, priority, project attitude (e.g., supporter, detractor, neutral), role, critical rela-
tionships, and expectations.
The number of stakeholders and listed details should be tailored based on the size and
complexity of the project. On simple efforts, this can be accomplished relatively quickly.
Regardless of the time it takes to complete, it should be done. An organized and accurate
Stakeholder Register is a PM time investment that will yield positive results.
The Stakeholder Register should be a living document that is reviewed and updated reg-
ularly. This document is for the PM use. Refer to it often, but share it cautiously so as not
to inadvertently offend anyone on the list. This document should be a functional and
valuable resource to the PM. If it isn’t useful to you, then change it to make it so.
9.2.3 Plan Stakeholder Engagement

The second process in the Stakeholder Engagement Plan is to Plan Stakeholder Engagement.
As a reminder, when you see “Plan” in this process, think “How.” How are you going to
effectively engage your stakeholders? This process relies heavily upon the information pre-
pared and detailed in the Stakeholder Register.
As your stakeholder analysis and mapping identified, your stakeholders may have very
different levels of power, legitimacy, urgency, and interest. These different categories warrant
different approaches. As PM, your most valuable commodity is your time. Effective planning
can help ensure you spend your time wisely, where it should be spent.
The plan can be tailored in a format that is most usable for you. Often the Risk Register can
be expanded to suffice. Sometimes a separate and more formal document is preferred.
Spreadsheets can be very effective. Regardless of the project size or complexity, the same
basic components should be included: listed stakeholders, the content or deliverables, the
intended frequency, who is responsible to prepare and deliver the communication, preferred
method of communication, and the priority. Some general guidance is reflected in Figure 9.9.
More Effort, Less
Sh
Stakeholders
te
st
are agem
Hig bora
Int r
En
igh owe
ere
Dynamic
dT
g
P
lla
wo nt
h
Co
-W
ult
e
dH
ay
Active
ns
an
h
an r
Hig
Co
we
d
Po
Int w
st
Controlled Limited Two-Way

Lo
ere
Discussion Engagement
ere nd
a
Push Communications
orm
st
w wer
On gem
En
ga
e-W en
Inf
Po
Int
Less Effort
w
ay t
More Pull Communications
Lo
Lo
Stakeholders
Figure 9.9 Stakeholder engagement.
This lays the foundation of what you should expect from yourself as PM in communi-
cating with each stakeholder, a consistent and intentional approach. However, as with
most plans, there should be some inherent flexibility. If you see a stakeholder in a store and
they bring up the project, use that opportunity to determine if their expectations have
changed and assure them you understand their positions. Ask the HOA President if you
can attend the upcoming HOA social function and talk for ten minutes about the project,
since social functions are almost always better attended than the business meetings. There
will always be a place for face-to-face conversations and project meetings. But you and your
organization may choose to explore websites, leverage social media and email lists, or even
use radio ads, signage, or other advertising avenues. Be creative. Remember the goal is to
establish trust, building credibility, and effectively managing stakeholder expectations.
It should be noted that there are fundamental differences between a Public Information
and Public Involvement efforts. Public information is a one-sided dissemination of information
from the organization to the public. Public involvement is a two-sided conversation. Examples
of public information may include website or social media updates, and mass mailings. Public
involvement seeks to interact with the public in such a way as to encourage input and include
stakeholders in the decision-making process. Most successful stakeholder engagement plans
include both of these. Problems often ensue when the public perceives an organizational
public involvement initiative to really be a public information effort.
9.2.4 Virtual Stakeholder Engagement

Stakeholder engagement is a critical part of transportation project development. Federal and
state codes require public engagement to acquire the needed easements and rights-of-way to
build and maintain public transportation assets. Legally this establishes a public need and
enables Eminent Domain, which is the government’s right to expropriate private property for
public use with fair compensation. But stakeholder engagement is so much more than a for-
mality to check a legal box. It should not be discrete discussions at a Citizens Information
Meeting or Public Hearing, but rather an ongoing conversation throughout the life of the project.
Most organizations recognize the substantial benefits of more comprehensive and intentional
efforts. These outreach opportunities are the basis for community engagement where you can
mitigate risks, engender support, and promote cooperation during design and construction.
At its core, stakeholder engagement is where organizations build trust and manage
community expectations. It also allows achieving inclusivity, encourages community par-
ticipation, and provides a platform upon which consensus can be built. The goal should be
to strive to creatively and consistently reach the entire impacted and effected community,
regardless of race, age, economic situation, and political influence. Success relies on honest
communications, timely and transparent presentation of accurate project information, and
truly listening to the public’s input. Most stakeholders want to be heard, understood, and
have their ideas considered. While these fundamentals remain true, the methods by which
we achieve them are radically changing.
The reality is stakeholder expectations are rising. Some of this is due to accessibility of
information and social media’s integral place in our societal fabric. Another reason is the
general acceptance that the purpose of transportation projects now extends beyond
connecting people, products, and places. Success criteria such as social justice, equity
within the transportation space, responsible environmental stewardship, and community
transformation are mobilizing passions and bringing new stakeholders into the conversation.
Transportation project development rarely experiences a watershed moment. Due to the
nature of the business most changes are gradual, incrementally increasing efficiencies or
adjusting workflows over time. This recently changed. While internet and social media
have provided new pathways to connect to the public, it was the Covid pandemic that
forced a rapid paradigm shift. Seemingly overnight, there were restrictions prohibiting in-
person public meetings. Out of necessity, organizations scrambled to pivot their long-
established practices and processes, hurriedly restructuring their outreach to utilize a wide
spectrum of virtual platforms. As life returned to normal, the industry should take a deep
breath and determine how best to move forward.
Virtual engagement brought many benefits, often including greater accessibility and
increased participation. However, these gains came with some growing pains, and perhaps
did not adequately replace the human connections from in-person interactions. So how do
the industry and your organization strategically implement a coordinated, multiplatform
approach that combines virtual and in-person components to all projects in your programs
and portfolio? Generally speaking, challenges we face as an industry can be divided into
three categories: technical, external, and internal.
Organizations will require technical solutions, including robust and dynamic systems to
track individual and collective stakeholder engagement across platforms. This should capture
and prioritize feedback across time based upon stakeholder metadata, such as contact
information and other project specific categories (e.g. – adjacent land owners, HOA member,
local business owner, etc.). Systems would ideally assist the organization in discerning the
power, legitimacy, and urgency of each position. Forward thinking project managers and
organizations want to leverage this data to prioritize feedback and more effectively tailor
responses. There is also an organizational need for resources to stand up and support multi-
platform initiatives. This would ideally enable an organization to seamlessly capture and
leverage stakeholder input in all current social media platforms, as well as all traditional com-
munications. Organizations may also pursue mobile applications to further integrate project
digital visualizations, advanced mapping functionalities, and social data gathering trends
such as crowdsourcing. Concurrent with these technical advances, the organization may
need to review its workflows to ensure accurate and consistent messaging.
The big picture of the transportation game is to have the right money in the right place at
the right time so the pipeline of projects can be predictably developed and delivered. Thinking
externally, organizations need to balance project resources and constraints with increased
stakeholder expectations. While some projects may warrant a fully interactive virtual public
hearing, advanced simulations, dedicated website, and the like; others will not. What is the
new baseline of effort? How is it decided, and by whom? Can it even yet be established, or is
still a case-by-case decision? In the same state, the content, frequency, and quality of virtual
engagement in affluent urban areas may significantly differ from that in rural areas where
internet availability is limited and the community prefers in-person interactions.
Embracing these changes also represents significant internal workflow adjustments
within transportation organizations. This goes beyond the immediate need for graphics
and data specialists. There is an old engineering adage that says, “We can do anything with
enough time and money.” Increasing the quality and frequency of virtual stakeholder
engagement is certainly possible, but only with real project schedule and budget consider-
ations. This is particularly challenging for projects that are already active. It is common to
underestimate the amount of time required by the Project Manager and development team
to engage and respond to a comprehensive stakeholder engagement plan. Appropriate
change management procedures should be followed that properly adjust the project’s triple
constraint of budget, scope, and schedule. In order to be successful, each organization
should intentionally decide how to accommodate these project impacts.
It is clear we have crossed the Rubicon. Stakeholder engagement moving forward should
include virtual and in-person components. What this hybrid approach looks like, and how it
is implemented, may not be readily standardized in your organization or in the industry. As
responsible public stewards, we must balance the benefits of a comprehensive, multiplat-
form approach with the realities of diminishing returns at the project, program, and port-
folio levels. Schedule and budget constraints dictate organizations can’t be everything to
everyone; however, we should be intentional and strive to be effective. Organizations should
focus on the noble purpose of stakeholder outreach, and then strategically tailor their
approaches to the specific project and affected communities to best leverage the strengths of
all available platforms and outlets to responsibly accomplish the overarching objectives.
9.2.5 Manage Stakeholder Engagement

The third process in the Stakeholder Engagement Plan is to Manage Stakeholder
Engagement. In this context, when you see “Manage,” think “Doing.” This is executing the
plan. This is the real work of day-to-day, week-to-week, month-to-month, quarter-to-quar-

ter contact with the project’s various stakeholders.
PMs should use the Stakeholder Engagement Plan and Communication Plan as references
for the frequency and preferred method of communications with various individuals and
groups. These will help synthesize expectations with practical realities. Use the plan to keep
you on track with the regular updates, which are so important for others to feel connected,
valued, and involved. While there will certainly be exceptions to the plan, think of it as a
baseline of communications with stakeholders. There can be more, but there should not be
less. Many PMs find it helpful to log and summarize each significant stakeholder interaction.
The frequency and quality of these stakeholder touchpoints can build trust and credibility.
There may be times when you need to discover how your stakeholders currently feel
about your project. This information will enable you to update your Stakeholder Register
and provide you insight how best to engage them. A commonly overlooked technique is to
directly ask them. What financial or emotional interests do you have in this project? Who do
you rely on for information? What do you think of our performance so far? Polite and
professional direct questions can save you time and jumpstart a respectful and productive
relationship. In these circumstances, remember to strive to monopolize the listening.
Stakeholders want to be heard. They want to intellectually know and emotionally feel that
their concerns are being understood and considered.
When you are communicating with stakeholders, be intentional. Define the goals of the
conversation before you begin. Is it to inform, brainstorm, decide, persuade, or something
else? Let this guide how you strategically approach the conversation, how it proceeds, and
how it ends. Be sure you leave with what you need, be it a decision, a plan forward, or
acknowledgment of an update.
During the course of project development, it can be easy for stakeholder engagement to
shift to a back-burner priority. The PM’s job is to communicate and drive project development
with the triple constraint of budget, scope, and schedule. In order to satisfy project success
criteria, the PM must manage expectations. Managing expectations is foundational to stake-
holder engagement. Stakeholder engagement is not something that gets in the way of your
job; it is your job.
9.2.6 Monitor Stakeholder Engagement

The last phase of the Stakeholder Engagement Plan is to Monitor Stakeholder Engagement.
This involves monitoring and controlling the Plan. In this context, when you see “Monitor,”
think “Collect performance data.” When you see “control,” think “Comparing actual
performance data to planned expectations and then taking any preventative or corrective
actions.” This is all to evaluate the plan, the how.
This process is not monitoring the actual communications with the stakeholders, but
rather the efficacy of the framework of the plan itself. It is time to look in the mirror and
honestly see if you are doing what you said you were going to do. Are you sending out
monthly email updates to those all who signed up for the update mailing list? Are you still
sending your boss weekly project summaries? Is what you’re doing still working? Is it still
appropriate? Should stakeholders be added or removed from the Stakeholder Register?
Should any of your stakeholders be re-analyzed or re-prioritized? This is your chance to
adjust the plan to make it more efficient and effective.
The Stakeholder Engagement Plan should specify how frequently you will monitor the
plan. Pending the length of the project, it could be quarterly or annually. You can certainly
make changes whenever it is deemed prudent, but scheduled monitoring ensures you take
a holistic look at specified intervals. This enables you to remain proactive in managing
stakeholder expectations. All changes should be documented in the plan. This not only
helps during this project, but also can be valuable information that is leveraged for Lessons
Learned.
9.3 Media Relations
“It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. If you think about that,
you’ll do things differently.”
– Warren Buffet
The news media may play a pivotal role in shaping public opinion of your municipality or
agency. As a PM, you may receive requests for media interviews, be interviewed during
public participation, or hold a news conference. It is imperative you understand the opportu-
nity this presents to convey a positive message for your organization, and you appreciate the
damage it can cause if mishandled. As PM, you should be prepared should you pick up the
phone and hear, “This is John Smith from Channel 12 news. May I ask you a few questions?”
9.3.1 Different Media Types

There are three types of media outlets: print, voice, and video. Each offers unique opportu-
nities and challenges. A PM should be familiar and comfortable with all three of these very
different medias.
Print media relies on written words. Examples may be newspapers, social media, web-
sites, trade journals, regional magazines, homeowner association newsletters, online pub-
lications, internet articles, and blogs. Print is still a viable and reliable way to reach targeted
or special interest audiences. The first thing to understand with Print is that the quotes and
stories are permanent, and can be searched and retrieved indefinitely. Choose your words
carefully. Print also may introduce a translation of your message, as the reporter may filter
and edit the information for their readers. Their assumptions, interpretations, or agendas
can subtly or overtly shape what is conveyed. It is prudent to attempt to discern the slant of
their story before print so you can proactively correct any inaccuracies. The rapport you
develop with the reporter is critical as you may have multiple conversations in preparation
of a single article. As Yogi Berra said, “It ain’t over till it’s over.” Regardless of how you feel
the interview went, you never truly know how the article will represent you, your project,
or your organization until it is printed or posted. So be sure to read it after publication.
Unless there are truly egregious errors or omissions, it is usually not a good idea to demand
corrections. In print, the reporter or publication has the last word.
Voice media relies on the spoken word. Examples are radio and podcasts. Voice is often
considered the safest medium. This is in part because you can often use notes during the
interview. Radio allows you to easily convey your message clearly and accurately, in your
own words. Prior to the interview, prepare and practice sound-bite length quotes that
concisely and effectively convey your message. Whether the station is airing answers to
questions or pulling quotes from your interview, the message is in your words. Be thankful
and humble, but exude control. Use a strong, relaxed, and comfortable voice and pace. Your
tone can subtly promote confidence and authority while eliminating uncertainty and doubt.
Video relies on moving pictures. Examples are TV, video conferences, social media, webi-
nars, and other internet video broadcasts and content distributions. Most citizens still rely
on local TV news as the primary source for local information. Video is an emotional media
where your message can have a powerful impact. In addition to all of the nonverbal com-
munications, it is imperative that you accurately and succinctly respond to their questions
while not providing a response that can be misconstrued. The biggest challenge in TV
interviews is to be concise. This is especially challenging on complex transportation pro-
jects that take years to design and construct. Your conversation will likely not be aired in its
entirety. Responses are generally edited to sound bites of three to six seconds, with the
story narrated by the reporter. Plan ahead and be prepared with answers to anticipated
questions that summarize your message in less than six seconds. That is not easy. However,
like many things in life, there is no substitute for experience. Until you feel comfortable,
practice, practice, practice. Role playing with peers or your organization’s communications
office can be a great time investment.
The advent and explosion of social media has transformed how organizations gather and
distribute transportation project information. The ability to stay connected is constantly
evolving and expanding. News cycles continue to shorten. The expectations of immediate
access and updates are pervasive. While the applications and media vehicles may change
over time, the basics of print, voice, and video media remain unchanged.
9.3.2 Who Gives the Interview?

Organizations have different relationships with, and postures toward, local media. The first
question to answer is who gives the interview. Different organizations have different proto-
cols. It may be senior leadership, or a designated Department spokesman, or an organiza-
tional Public Relations spokesman. Other organizations have the PM conduct the interviews.
Many organizations don’t have a specific protocol and handle it on a case-by-case basis. As
a PM, it is your responsibility to know your organization’s preferences before you get the
interview request.
If you are not the one giving the interview, it the PM’s job to brief the interviewee so they
are able to convey the information in a manner that portrays they are in command of the
facts and situation. This can prove especially challenging if the designated spokesman is
not technically savvy or familiar with the history or details of the project. In these cases,
you may prepare a brief, bulleted summary of the message and history for the spokesman.
Be patient. Emphasize aspects of your message that are most important to convey. Based
on experience or instincts, the spokesman may prepare for a certain line of questioning.
Provide them what they need to be prepared. Perhaps most importantly, paint for them the
big picture. The spokesman should have information to address specific details, but most
stories are edited to sound bites of the highlights.
If your organization does clearly designate a spokesman, determine who is best suited to
give the interview. Interview requests can be the proverbial hot potato that is quickly
passed from one to another and ultimately up the chain of command. This may be due to
fear or intimidation of being quoted, or simply being on camera. But letting this responsi-
bility land on the desk of the one with the courage to do it is not always the wise choice.
There are times when it is important to have a senior leader give the interview as their
position lends credibility to the seriousness with which your organization is responding.
However, this is not always the case. Your organization should choose the individual that
can best promote the message you want to send. Ideally, they would be competent, confi-
dent, and professional. They would convey a presence of control and authority while not
seeming arrogant. They think before they speak and are careful, precise, and deliberate
with their wording. They are concise, calm, and charismatic. There are very few people
who can do all of this well, but many can convey an honest and straightforward message
with confident credibility. For project-specific issues, this is often the PM.
As PM, it is imperative you are aware of who is speaking about what, with which media
outlets. Public opinion can be a powerful force in project development, particularly during
public involvement. You should keep a close eye on what is being reported about your
project, as it is part of your job to keep your finger on the pulse of public opinion.
9.3.3 Setting up the Interview

When a reporter contacts you with a request, their goal is to schedule a time and place for
the interview. Your goals for that initial conversation should also include discerning the
nature of the story, the kinds of questions they may ask of you, and what aspects of the
project interest them. What information are they hoping you provide to their audience?
Most reporters will tell you: “We haven’t updated this project in a while and it’s a slow news
day,” “We have received some citizen complaints and want to hear your side of the story,” “We
want to know how the recently passed budget cuts will impact project delivery,” “We want to
know how this project will impact the new school,” and so on. Finding out this information
ahead of time will enable you to better prepare for the interview and dramatically increase
the likelihood of a positive message being delivered. Sometimes it can also be helpful to ask
the reporter if you can provide any background material, schematics, or maps to assist in
the production of the story.
It is rare that you will answer the phone and they will want to put you live on air. If this
occurs and you are not comfortable with the situation, it is acceptable to tell them you are
busy now, but could call them back a specific time later that day.
9.3.4 Interview Location

Since you are the one granting the interview, you have control where the interview takes
place. This is an important detail. There are advantages and disadvantages to each of the
four most common settings.
TV reporters like on-site interviews because the viewers appreciate action. It is much
more interesting to see a construction project than it is to hear someone talk about it. That
is one reason why TV journalists report “live from the scene.” The advantage of an on-site
interview is to present the picture of movement. A groundbreaking or ribbon cutting is a
powerful picture of progress. However, there are also risks. Construction is messy. Visual
pictures of you standing in front of bulldozers clearing trees can be unsettling to viewers
and quickly erode hard-earned trust you have cultivated with citizens. Know that most
news sources will shoot background footage of the ongoing construction anyway. So gen-
erally, there is no advantage to on-site interviews. Be especially wary of interviews on loca-
tion when responding to a tragedy. It doesn’t matter how well your words say the situation
is under control; if the scene behind you leads people to believe otherwise, they won’t
believe you.
Interviews outside your organization’s building entrance can lend credibility to your posi-
tion and convey that you are “of the people.” It can also be effective on sunny days in
providing an optimistic feel. Conversely, avoid this setting on cloudy days as the background
and setting can look gloomy, ominous, or disengaged. This can be a good location to provide
an update on a particular situation. Generally, it is not a choice for a longer interview.
An office or conference room interview is a controlled environment where you can more
easily control the setting, lighting, and sound quality. This is the best location for a longer
interview where you can have a more in-depth discussion of the project or situation. It
allows you to refer to plans, documents, or other visual materials that can explain and
strengthen your positions. A conference room can make it seem more like a work session
to the audience where you are approachable, cooperative, and productive. An office inter-
view where you are sitting behind your desk can present an image of authority and power.
Remember to ensure all background wall-hangings and desk displays present an image
consistent with your, and your organization’s, intentions and principles. It is important to
thoughtfully determine where you want to host the interview based upon what image you
want to project.
In studio interviews are not that common. When one is granted, perhaps for a local
morning show, approach this opportunity with an increased commitment to preparation.
Be especially cognizant of your body language and tone so you present a complete and con-
sistent image that complements and underscores your message. Give some thought to what
you will wear, and allow yourself plenty of time to prepare so you can effectively and suc-
cinctly deliver your message.
9.3.5 Preparing for the Interview

Never go into an interview without a clear plan. What questions may the reporters ask?
How might they approach this topic from different perspectives to make the story more
interesting to their audience? What is prompting them to do this story now? What have
they already reported about this topic? What, if any, new developments have recently
occurred. What is your message? Make notes and rehearse giving sound-bite length
responses, less than six seconds, that emphasize your key points.
Preparation can also involve gathering background information to provide the inter-
viewer. Some examples include project presentations or project schematics. Providing
basic project information can answer many of the general and background questions. This
enables reporters to prepare a more comprehensive report once they are back in the truck
or at the studio editing for final production.
If you are the designated spokesman, it is important you understand what authority you
possess. You may have authority to speak for all matters related to your project, or only over
specific aspects of your project. You may or may not have authority to speak for other
Departments, private entities, or other stakeholders involved in your project. You may or
may not have authority to speak for related or unrelated organizational activities. During
the interview remain focused on the project, and speak only to those issues upon which
you can authoritatively comment.
9.3.6 During the Interview

Once the interview is underway, remember the reporter wants information from you. They
are not interested in you personally. Reporters are doing their job. They need to get
information from you so they can edit the story before the deadline, and then move on to
the next assignment. While you have no control over the reporter or how they filter your
information, you have complete control, and take full responsibility, for what you say and
do in front of the camera. Be positive and remember this is a unique opportunity to provide
information to your citizens that they may need or deserve.
Rule number one is never lie, ever. Answer their questions with accurate and reliable
information. When possible, work in your key points. Throughout the interview, work in
your practiced sound bites, perhaps even a few different times. Do this by utilizing the
bridging technique, which answers the question and then segues to your main message.
For instance, “The planned shared-use pedestrian path is one example of the many benefit
citizens will realize from this project. Another is…” or “When complete, this will be a six lane,
divided roadway that will create a critical link between….” If they ask a question you don’t
know, simply reply, “I don’t know, but I will find out and get back with you.”
Don’t dodge unpleasant questions. You can only redirect questions so many times before
it looks like you are actively avoiding the topic. It is better to address an unpleasant situation
directly and honestly. Part of your purpose in giving the interview is to confront the truth
of the topics and help the citizens understand what matters most. If you cannot answer the
question, provide a reason. For instance, “It would not be appropriate to comment on the
ongoing negotiations.” Just as important as what to say is what not to say. Don’t give
responses that suggest you are hiding something. For instance, “I’m not allowed to talk
about that” or “no comment.” True or not, there is always a better response. Instead try, “It
wouldn’t be proper to comment upon that at this time.” However, there may be times when
you do need to deflect the question. Some possible responses are “I’m not really the expert
in that area,” “I’ll leave that speculation up to you,” “My personal opinion is irrelevant on this
issue,” or “You really need to direct that question to….”
Start strong. Regardless of what the first question is the reporter asks, make sure your
first answer includes the main message points you want to deliver. You do not want to
dodge their initial question, but you can effectively bridge from that answer to your main
message. Another point to work into your initial answer is gratitude for their interest and
assistance in providing current and accurate information to your citizens.
Keep in mind the audience and use appropriate terms and vocabulary. Leave the “engi-
neering-speak” behind. Strive to use nontechnical terms to describe the project. This avoids
confusion, minimizes misunderstandings, and creates better sound bites. Speaking in lay-
man terms can be challenging for engineers. Think about how you would describe it to a
precocious second grader. For example, don’t say, “the project will require 300,000 cubic
yards of borrow to achieve the necessary thirty feet of relief.” Instead, you could say, “the citi-
zens can expect to see a bunch of trucks bringing in dirt to create a thirty-foot-tall hill.”
Similarly, limit the numbers and statistics you cite and try to create images and analogies
that paint a mental picture for the audience.
9.3.7 Tricky Questions to Avoid

While some reporters intend to create controversy, most are focused on completing the
story before their looming deadline. They are hoping you will make the story more inter-
esting and compelling to their audience. Whether the reporter is intending to be deceptive
or not, there are some common questioning tactics of which you should be aware.
The Hypothetical Question. “What will be your response if a lawsuit is filed?” “If the
necessary funding becomes available, will you proceed?” These questions tempt you to com-
ment on an assumed reality. Don’t do it. You are the spokesman disseminating facts. Do not
speculate on “what if” scenarios. Redirect the questions from the hypothetical back to
reality, and end with a positive statement. For example, “I do not think it is proper or appro-
priate to speculate at this time, but I would iterate…”
The Other Guy’s Opinion. “How do you think the County attorney will respond?” “Will the
Mayor agree?” These questions prompt you to speak for someone else. Unless you have
been given specific authority to speak on their behalf, do not speak for someone else, even
if you are confidant of their position. It is best to suggest the reporter contact that person
directly for his or her comments.
The Non-Question Question. “Your department generally does a fantastic job, but it seems
this one got away from you.” This is not really a question. The reporter is expressing an opinion
to frame the story. In response you can acknowledge the compliment, if one is offered, then
challenge the incorrect premise, closing with targeted points from your message. For in-
stance, “Thank you for recognizing our consistent performance, but I respectfully disagree that…,
in fact ….” Another approach is to turn their statement into a question. For instance, “We fol-
lowed all applicable State and Federal guidelines. Should we have responded differently?”
The Off-the-Record Question. “Just between us, did the contractor…” “So, tell me how does
this really work…” These questions may be misconstrued as being “off the record.” A
reporter will often seem very friendly as they try to build a rapport with you before or after
the interview. As a public servant, nothing is off the record. Accordingly, be cautious when
the interview seems to be over and the cameraman is packing up the equipment. Remain
professional. Assume everything you say will be printed or aired.
The False Premise. “Now that you’re off the hook, what do you intend to do next?” These ques-
tions are dangerous in that if you respond without challenging the inaccurate premise, you
are silently accepting their assertion. The proverbial, “So when did you stop beating your wife?”
is perhaps the most common example of an accusing question. When faced with a false
premise, confront it, or the audience will assume it is true. Be tactful, but firm in your response.
The Open-Ended Question. “So, tell me about this project?” “How will this project benefit the
community?” These softball questions you should hit out of the park if you have properly pre-
pared. Use these opportunities to present key points of your message in previously rehearsed,
sound-bite length responses. Don’t ramble. When you have delivered your message, stop talking.
He-said-She-said Scenarios. “I understand the Mayor said….” “According to Mrs. Smith she
isn’t being offered fair market value for her property….” These questions rely on hearsay,
what someone else said. Unless you know exactly what was said, how it was said, the con-
text in which it was said, and what was intended; don’t fall into this trap. Even if you say,
“Assuming what you cite is correct, I would recommend…,” remember the editing room can
easily remove your disclaimer from the final broadcast. Talk about what you know and
keep on message. You can also acknowledge and respectfully decline their question before
bridging to your talking points. For instance, “I have no knowledge of that conversation and
therefore cannot speak to it, but I would like to emphasize…”
The Silent Pause. Many of us are naturally uncomfortable with silence. Reporters know
this, and will often use this powerful technique. They will ask you a question, and when
you are done talking, they will look at you with beckoning eyes as if to say, “keep going” or
“can you expand upon that thought.” It is a natural instinct to keep talking and fill this silent
void. Don’t do it. This can lead to providing more information that you intended to convey.
Once you answer the question, stop talking and stare back at the reporter, patiently await-
ing the next question. No matter how awkward it may seem at the time, be smart. They will
edit out the silent pauses before broadcast.
The Bait-and-Switch Ambush Interview. While not common, some reporters will use
this technique. They call to schedule an interview and describe the nature of their ques-
tions. At the interview, they will ask a few questions on this topic before completely switch-
ing gears and focusing on a completely different topic. Usually, the new subject is more
controversial, and the questions are direct and confrontational. In the moment, it is easy to
feel ambushed as they pursue a more sensationalized story. Their questions may be filled
with false premises, he-said-she-said scenarios, or other tricky questions. When this occurs,
it is imperative you remain composed, providing professional and diplomatic responses.
Remember, your body language, facial expressions, and everything you say may be aired.
Provide measured and authoritative responses that are securely rooted in facts. If questions
begin to repeat themselves, you may say, “I think we have covered that already. Is there
anything I can further clarify for you? If not, I appreciate your time.”
9.3.8 After the Interview

You should be in contact with your chain of command immediately after the interview.
Provide brief details on what was discussed, the angle of the story you suspect the reporter
will present, and when the interview will likely air or be printed. No one wants to be sur-
prised. It is your responsibility to let leadership know what information will be presented
so they are not surprised by any follow-up or fallout.
In dealing with the media, experience is the best teacher. So, after your interviews, think
about what you said and how you said it. Think about what you did well and what you can
improve next time. Critically read the story or watch the interview and evaluate if you
effectively presented your message. Each interview is an opportunity to further develop
these important skills. And as with most things in life, say Thank You!
9.3.9 The News Conference (How to Prepare and Execute a Successful

News Conference)
There are many reasons your organization may hold a news conference. Be it to make a
major announcement that will profoundly impact your citizens, provide an update for an
ongoing crisis, or to stay ahead of a breaking story. Regardless of the focus, the purpose for
a news conference is the same. You want to distribute a single, consistent factual message
to many media outlets at the same time. While not common for public organizations, these
can be a powerful tool when used correctly.
News conference rule number one, it’s your show. You control the timing, the setting,
and what is addressed. It is likely your organization’s Communications or Public Relations
office has expertise that should be utilized. The timing is important so that you make, or
miss, the various news submission deadlines. The setting is important because you want
the backdrop to match the intended tone. Whatever you decide, deliberately choose the
timing and setting. Plan the event to ensure there is adequate access, parking, seating,
lighting, and so on. Once the news conference is scheduled, your Communications or
Public Relations office can likely assist in notifying the local media of the event through
their established connections.
Another decision is whether you will distribute media packets immediately after the
news conference. These should be carefully crafted in advance and can effectively empha-
size your message. Typically, these may include a fact sheet, written remarks or statements,
relevant photos or schematics, and background information to help them complete their
story. Include the full names and titles of those speaking at the event, as well as contact
information for follow-up questions.
Once the event is underway, remember this is your show. Tell the reporters the agenda
and format of the event, and stick to it. Read a prepared, and rehearsed, opening statement
that incorporates key points of your message. Set the proper tone with your words and non-
verbal actions. Remain poised, confident, and in control. Smile, if appropriate. Keep your
remarks brief and on point. If you are taking questions, point to one reporter and recognize
them as having the floor. When you are ready to end the news conference, provide advance
warning, such as, “We have time for two more questions.” And remember to end by thanking
everyone for their time.
It takes the coordinated contributions of many individuals to pull together a successful
news conference. As with all team efforts, be sure to recognize and thank the team mem-
bers whose efforts made it happen.
9.3.10 When Tragedy Strikes – Crisis Interviews

Accidents happen and occasionally tragedy strikes. If a disaster occurs, it may be critical
that your organization approach or respond to the media. The task of emergency response
media communications is a serious responsibility.
First, it is essential that you understand the citizens want, and may deserve, to know sit-
uational information, provided it does not compromise anyone’s safety or privacy. Within
the moment and throughout the duration of the event, keeping the media informed is a
priority function. The public’s impression of your response may be largely shaped by your
cooperation and forthrightness with the media.
Most organizations have established emergency response plans. While no accident or
tragedy ever exactly fits the practice scenarios, contingency plans can bring some sem-
blance of order to chaos. All emergency action plans include notifying a long list of individ-
uals and entities. These often include police, fire, third-party emergency response units,
hospitals, schools, critical businesses, civic organizations, and the media. When in the
midst of a crisis, make sure there is a single, authoritative voice through which all
information flows to the media. This individual can change, but it is crucial to have only
one spokesman talking to the reporters at a time. This will better ensure consistency of
message and minimize misconceptions. During a crisis, it is imperative to remind staff that
no one talks to reporters other than the designated spokesman.
If you are your organization’s spokesman, know what you are going to say and how you
are going to say it. Remain calm. Be compassionate. Be reassuring and controlled. Start
your remarks by focusing on the safety of the individuals who are involved in the accident
and of those who are working to resolve the situation. Do not discuss money or schedule
impacts. As the event develops, you may provide information on injuries, damage, rescue
or remediation efforts, and other situational details, but remember to keep the focus on
safety. Do not rationalize that “accidents happen,” instead, say “The cause is under investi-
gation and our findings will be made available to you when complete.” Focus on the facts. Do
not speculate on causes, damages, or hypothetical questions. Know how are going to end
the interview. This can be a simple summary such as, “Our primary concern right now is for
the safety and well-being of the individuals involved. Everything else can wait. I will let you
know when additional information is available. Thank you.”
195
10
Controlling the Project
“Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.”

– Mike Tyson
The PM’s job is to develop and deliver the project within the established constraints of
budget, scope, and schedule. A straightforward objective. And then stuff happens.
There may be days you feel like Colonel George Custer making your own last stand, fac-
ing threats to your triple constraint from seemingly every side. Political indecision.
Changing priorities. Evolving success criteria. Funding complications. Technical chal-
lenges. Extreme weather. Unanticipated stakeholder influence or involvement. Union
strikes. Entropy. Inexperienced or unskilled team members. Staff turnover. Boneheaded
decisions. Realizing unanticipated or inadequately accounted risks. Bureaucratic inertia.
Some of these threats you can predict and control. Most you cannot.
These perhaps mostly external threats can then be further complicated by internal and
contractual constraints of quality, resources, and risk that lay atop your triple constraint of
budget, scope, and schedule. Effective PMs understand how to be successful amidst ambi-
guity. They have the innate ability to navigate uncertainty with the assurance of their
internal compass guiding them through the unknown. This behavior and the associated
results have nothing to do with chance or luck. Effective PMs actively monitor and control
their projects.
10.1 Managing Expectations
“Meeting expectations is good. Exceeding expectations is better.”

– Ron Kaufman
Managing expectations is one of the most important, and also one of the most overlooked,
responsibilities of a PM. It is typically not taught in school, is difficult to measure, is incred-
ibly time consuming, will likely not be considered on your performance evaluations, and
yet is an essential component to any successful project.
Each stakeholder approaches the project from a different perspective, with different heart-
felt and intellectual concerns, and with varying levels of passion and intensity. Each

196 10 Controlling the Project
stakeholder also approaches the project from a different intellectual and professional
background, often assuming their professional and life experiences directly transfer to the
transportation project workflow, which is often not the case. Even if all of these stakeholders
unanimously agree on the goals of this project, there would likely still be a wide range of dif-
fering expectations. Elected officials may expect a ribbon cutting before the next election.
Adjacent business owners may have expectations regarding construction hours, continuity of
access, uninterrupted power and utilities, temporary signage, and construction noise. Nearby
medical outpatient facilities may have expectations regarding notification in advance of blast-
ing. Local schools may have expectations regarding continuity of bus access and accommoda-
tions for parent and day-care pick-up lines. And so forth. As PM, it is essential you identify,
understand, and manage these expectations, which can vary widely and often conflict.
Experienced PMs know that one does not accidentally execute a successful public project.
There are far too many bureaucratic challenges whose institutional inertia will quickly
slow it enough that it can easily be derailed by competing interests, changing agendas, or
apathy. Successful projects are not planted and then left to grow without care, they are cul-
tivated. Projects require pruning, weeding, watering, and constant maintenance. When
expectations are proactively and effectively managed, all stakeholders can feel good about
the outcome of the project, even if the process or end results are different than they first
expected. Conversely, if expectations are mishandled or disregarded, a project can come in
on time and under budget and still be viewed by many as a failure.
10.1.1 How Are Goals and Expectations Different?

Goals are created from the project objectives and answer the Who, What, When, Where, and
Why of the project. They should be well defined and consistent with the project’s Purpose and
Need. Typically, they are outward facing, and well documented in the project’s Budget, Scope,
and Schedule. Often, they include that which the project’s performance metrics are measured
against. It is common that project goals remain static throughout the life of the project.
By contrast, expectations are typically dynamic and evolve throughout the life of the
project. While expectations can certainly be attached to the Who, What, When, and Where
of a project, they are often concentrated in the How. The process, feel, and atmosphere of a
citizen’s information meeting can have a major impact on how the content of the message
is received. Expectations are often formed by unexpressed preconceptions, and judged by
perceptions and interpretations. They are emotional, are usually less transparent, and can
be far more personal as they are often rooted in personal beliefs or hopes for a particular
result, sometimes completely unrelated to the specifics of the project.
It is important every PM understand that expectations have two critical functions. First,
expectations establish the Stakeholder baseline by which they will evaluate the project’s
success. Secondly, expectations often drive stakeholders’ actions and decisions.
10.1.2 Four Approaches to Goals and Why They Matter

Most every project manager knows of SMART (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic,
and Time-bound) goals. All goals can, and perhaps should, be SMART goals. However, the
lines between goals and expectations can easily become blurred. There are four approaches
to goals. Understanding the differences of how goals are established as compared to how
they are evaluated will enable the PM to more effectively manage expectations.
10.1.2.1 Approach 1 – Quantitative Goals that Are Measured Quantitatively

Quantitative goals relate to measurable quantities that can be expressed in numeric terms or
other clearly defined categories (e.g., a six-lane roadway of a specific typical section that can
support 40,000 vehicles per day). Quantitative goals are easy to define and quickly become
matters of engineering design. They typically drive the project, and are the specifics detailed
in the Request for Proposal and Consultant’s Scope of Services. These are the goals PMs
focus upon with laser-like intensity. Quantitative goals are easy to monitor, and do not typi-
cally create a gap between the goal and related expectations when measured quantitatively.
10.1.2.2 Approach 2 – Quantitative Goals that Are Measured Qualitatively

Some stakeholders will measure quantitative goals against their own qualitative scale.
Consider an intersection improvement that adds turn lanes and modifies the existing traffic
signal to raise the AASHTO Level of Service from “F” to “B.” Quantitatively this project may
have met its design goals and be a success. However, a citizen who regularly drives straight
through this intersection in off-peak hours and now experiences turning arrow delays to
support the limited number of cars they see, who by the way never seemed to have a problem
turning at that intersection before the improvements, may consider it a failure and complete
waste of money. Similarly improving a park’s recreational facilities by adding one new field
and ninety additional parking spaces may meet the standards and satisfy the design goals
but still be considered grossly inadequate by those struggling to find a parking space the
Saturday morning of their child’s twenty-team soccer tournament. When stakeholders use
their own qualitative expectations to evaluate quantitative goals, they may not be swayed by
reviewing the engineering reports, preferring to prioritize their own anecdotal experiences.
Qualitatively measuring quantitative goals can easily exaggerate the gap between project
goals and stakeholder expectations.
10.1.2.3 Approach 3 – Qualitative Goals that Are Measured Quantitatively

Some stakeholders will measure qualitative goals quantitatively. This can be used to assert
success or failure of the project to forward their own agenda or perspectives. Consider open-
ing a new bike path that was intended to revitalize a historic area. One group may assert it
was a success because the opening weekend drew 187 visitors. Another group may say it
was a failure because it didn’t even draw 200 cyclists. Both positions may be quite con-
vincing, but they are misguided. While their quantitative observations, projections, or
studies may be accurate, it is often not appropriate to evaluate qualitative goals with
quantitative analysis. It is analogous to mathematically trying to average averages – you get
a number, but it is meaningless. More than the basis for unrealized expectations, this
approach is often used as evidence to validate the stakeholder’s expectations. Beware of
those using this approach, both inside and outside of your organization.
10.1.2.4 Approach 4 – Qualitative Goals that Are Measured Qualitatively

Qualitative goals relate to the desired quality, essential nature, or character of the result.
They are often felt rather than measured. Although harder to define, qualitative goals can
be powerful and inspiring. Consider a streetscaping project that will rebuild a sense of
community in the neighborhood, or a pedestrian facility to be a community amenity and
encourage personal fitness. Because qualitative goals are inherently difficult to measure, it
is not always clear if and when the goal has been achieved. Occasionally there is a straight-
forward consensus of success, but far more common is a range of perceived results.
Qualitative goals often become secondary to quantitative goals because they are difficult to
measure. As the old PM adage states, “That which gets measured, gets done.” While many
PMs consider qualitative goals “touchy-feely” and less important than quantitative goals,
exceptional PMs know you do this is at your own peril. Everyone would readily agree citi-
zens should be treated fairly during acquisitions for a public project; however, different
stakeholders approaching acquisitions from very different perspectives may hold vastly
different expectations of what this process should look like. Similarly, adjacent residents
may have very different opinions of what constitute reasonable construction hours. And so
forth. The longer any expectation gap exists, the more entrenched it becomes. Most unre-
alized expectations begin with an admirable qualitative goal that is measured qualitatively.
As PM, be especially aware of the risks associated with this approach.
10.1.3 The Expectation Gap

Lee Atwater famously said, “Perception is reality.” The Expectation Gap is the gap between
reality and one’s expectations. But before we discuss this gap, it is important to clarify
which type of reality is being considered.
Consider the following situation. Your agency presents an offer to a property owner in a
critical, complicated, and politically sensitive acquisition. One week later their attorney
submits a counter offer that lists fourteen specific requests covering a wide variety of design
issues. As PM, you understand the urgency and push hard for resolution. Research is done.
Alternatives are analyzed. Meetings are held. And just four weeks later you have accom-
plished the remarkable task of securing official responses for all fourteen specific requests.
Lesser PMs gauge reality based upon intended value. In this example, the PM’s leadership
and interpersonal skills may have forged consensus from multiple departments that rarely
agree on anything. Thus, their intended value is providing the very best to that stakeholder.
More sophisticated PMs gauge reality based on delivered value. In this example, the inten-
tions and actions to be thorough and timely are irrelevant; the reality is the agency
responded in four weeks. Stakeholders gauge reality based upon perceived value. What if
after three weeks the citizen calls their attorney and asks for an update. The attorney replies
that they had not yet received a response. So, when the carefully crafted response arrives a
full month after they submitted the counteroffer, it is received with frustration. The stake-
holder’s perceived reality, the reality that matters, is that the agency is slow, unresponsive,
and dismissive.
Intended value is usually higher than delivered value as most everyone has intentions to
perform in ways that do not always materialize for a variety of reasons. Similarly, delivered
value is often higher than perceived value. As you begin to consider Expectation Gap, under-
stand you should be comparing the stakeholders’ perceived reality to their expectations, as
shown in Figure 10.1. To complicate matters, these are mostly concentrated on qualitative
goals that are evaluated qualitatively.
Stakeholder's Qualitative Evaluation
Expectation Gap
Outstanding Intended Value
Expect at io n
Very Good
Expectation
d Valu e
Neutral Deli vere Gap
Valu e
Per ceived
Deficient
Poor
Time
Figure 10.1 Expectation gap.
It can be beneficial to visualize this graph as you communicate with each stakeholder.
What does their graph look like before and after your communication? Did the gap grow or
shrink? Is the slope of the expectation line trending more favorably? The concepts in this
graph can be a valuable tool in managing expectations that allows you to proactively iden-
tify troubling trends, and assists in prioritizing where to spend your valuable time.
The goal is for the perceived and delivered value to exceed expectations. This is often the
case if the perceived value exceeds, or is equal to, delivered value. As Vin Scully said, “Good
is not good when better is expected.” If there is a negative Expectation Gap, meaning expec-
tations exceed perceived value, the PM can best close or eliminate this gap by:
1) Decreasing expectations
2) Increasing perceived value
3) Over time, maintain favorable slopes to close or eliminate this gap
In order to gauge a stakeholder’s perceived value, you need to ask them. Often the act of
initiating conversation and soliciting feedback will increase the perceived reality value in
and of itself. Additionally, these interactions can be valuable self-reflection tools that illu-
minate our blind spots so we can be more effective moving forward. This is especially true
if there are significant discrepancies between intended, delivered, and perceived realties
versus expectations.
For most stakeholders, satisfaction is how their perceived reality measures against their
expectations, not your intentions or how the project satisfied its purpose and need within
contractual constraints. The Triple Constraint of budget, scope, and schedule, along with
organizational performance metrics, are inconsequential to most stakeholders. These are
mostly internal constraints and objectives. Exceptional PMs understand and leverage the
differences.
Expectation Gaps may be project risks that should be logged on the Risk Register. This
may be especially appropriate should critical stakeholders or leadership have significant
expectation gaps, or if there seems to be a systemic expectation gap that is indicative of
larger PM or organizational issues. Corrective actions can be documented in the project’s
risk response plan.
10.1.4 How to Manage Expectations

Managing expectations can be more art than science. Accomplished PMs do this exception-
ally well. Conversely, most PMs never quite figure it out, and consequently are perceived to
be mediocre, at best. Those who are skilled at managing expectation do the following nine
things very well, as shown in Figure 10.2.
Know your Prioritize Influence

capabilities expectations expectations
Be honest and Address Monitor

forthright conflict expectations
Capture Communicate
Deliver
expectations often
Figure 10.2 How to manage expectations.
1) Know your capabilities

Before you can effectively manage expectations, it is essential you know your own, your
team’s, and your organization’s capabilities and limitations. You need to know what can
and cannot be realistically produced. Nothing spoils existing and future relationships faster
than over-committing and under-delivering. You need to thoroughly understand the PDP
and workflow processes so you can correctly anticipate the intended and unintended con-
sequences of your actions and decisions. You need to have a firm grasp on how the involved
agencies interrelate so that you can coordinate them to the benefit of your project. You
need to have command of the engineering principles involved so you can understand the
foundational issues driving the technical challenges, which will enable you to effectively
steer the ship toward resolution. It takes experience and wisdom to hear an idea or look at
a set of plans and determine what won’t work in the field. If you don’t have that first-hand
design and construction expertise, it is imperative you have someone that you trust on your
team who does.
2) Be honest and forthright
Words mean things. Stakeholders can sense sincerity. Be yourself. Be genuine. Build trust
and respect by demonstrating reliable credibility. Accordingly, never lie, ever. Nothing
erodes trust faster than dishonesty or hypocrisy. “I don’t know” is an acceptable answer.
Exceptional PMs all have built a respected reputation as one who can be trusted. General
George Patton perhaps said it best, “Say what you mean and mean what you say.”
Being honest, forthright, and realistic can be especially critical when expectations are
still forming. Actively listen. Empathize. Convey to stakeholders that you acknowledge
and appreciate their concerns. Consistent sincerity is noticed and valued. These actions
build trust that can prove invaluable when conflict arises. It is very satisfying to receive
calls from stakeholders saying they have heard troubling rumors, so they called you to find
out the truth.
There are also times when the whole truth cannot be shared. This may be due to design
decisions that are under debate, privacy issues, political considerations, potential private
developments, pending legal actions, or a variety of other issues. Discretion is a professional
necessity. In these situations, it is acceptable to divert the conversation, not to say anything,
or to state you can’t discuss that issue at this time. Whatever your response, never lie.
The pressure on PMs to develop and deliver projects can be immense. Mediocre PMs are
easily manipulated to saying “yes” or making ill-advised concessions. This may especially
common in public meetings or closed-door meetings where directives are given by leadership
in a way that does not invite debate. However, in addition to being politically savvy, successful
PMs strategically reshape the discussion into what is achievable and follow established
change management procedures.
3) Capture expectations
Expectations can be deep and broad or singularly focuses and extremely specific. They can
be formed by what you said, what you didn’t say, or even how you said it. They can be
formed by something someone else said or did, past histories, hopes, or desires. They may
be rational or irrational, valid or unfounded, practical or impossible. Some stakeholders
will directly tell you. More may allude to them. Others will remain silent and presume you
should know.
Before you can effectively manage expectations, you first need to capture them. Empathy
is critical. You need to hear what they are saying, and infer what they are not saying. If it
still isn’t clear, ask direct and probing questions. It is important that you fully understand
their position because you need to not only identify the expectation, but also the driving
force behind it. A citizen’s unusually strong attachment to a particular tree makes sense
when you discover it was planted in memory of a deceased loved one. A private school’s
illogical entrance request becomes reasonable when you understand the adjacent tract of
land is to be bequeathed to them. You can more effectively resolve the issue at hand when
you understand and consider the underlying motivations. When talking with stakeholders,
it can be very efficacious to repeat the expectations and motivations back to the stakeholder
to confirm understanding. For instance, “I want to make sure I heard you correctly. I under-
stand that your expectation is that there will be a median break on the proposed roadway at
your business’s side entrance because you are concerned about delivery trucks being able to
make a U-turn and safely enter your site?” This acknowledges understanding of their issue
while inherently allowing flexibility in resolution. It is incredibly important to most stake-
holders that they feel like they are being heard. It is imperative that you convey empathy
for their situation and acknowledge their position. This is an essential step before you can
genuinely reassure them you are committed to doing what you can to address their con-
cerns. The final resolution on most issues will not satisfy all stakeholders. However, they
are much more likely to accept an undesired outcome if they feel heard, understood, and
part of the process.
Identifying and capturing expectations is an ongoing effort that needs to be sustained
throughout the life of the project. Realities and opinions change. Expectations are a
dynamic, constantly changing landscape. It is critical you continually keep you finger on
the pulse of the expectations. On a large-scale public project, you cannot logistically gather
the expectations of all involved stakeholders. If a project has ten adjacent property owners
you can, and perhaps should, meet with each of them. If you have a hundred adjacent prop-
erty owners, the PM will not have time to meet with each individually. You need to proac-
tively identify the pivotal players and actively seek them out. Be it the corner business
owner, the church’s pastor, the HOA President, or the neighbor who knows everyone, find
the stakeholders who influence others. If you don’t know who they are, ask.
4) Prioritize expectations
You may find there are as many expectations as there are stakeholders. Eventually you
need to prioritize them, assigning a relative importance and urgency to each. Some consid-
erations include who holds the opinion, how many people this stakeholder may represent
or influence, and the size of potential risk they pose to the scope, schedule, and budget of
the project. These practical considerations must be appropriately weighted while striving
to do the right thing the right way. Prioritizing expectations is a dynamic process throughout
the life of the project. This is especially true for larger transportation projects where the
schedules can stretch for years. More detailed information on Stakeholder Engagement is
included in Chapter 9, Communications. Those expectations that generate risks should be
appropriately documented and addressed, as detailed in Chapter 6, Risk Management.
5) Address conflict
Transportation projects often create conflict. Sometimes there appears to be winners and
losers. If you are straightening a roadway curve for safety, it is moving closer to one side of the
street but further away from the other side. If you are installing a new water line, some will
benefit from the increased capacity while others will be inconvenienced by its construction.
Some have the ability to enter seemingly almost any situation and walk out with con-
sensus, or at least a reluctant acceptance, of the decision. These individuals can have very
different styles to bring two sides together, convince one side to adjust their thinking, or
have one side accept the outcome. There are many outstanding resources on how to suc-
cessfully navigate conflict to an acceptable and desirable resolution. But there is one com-
monality; when it comes to conflict, leaders confront it.
Whether you enjoy conflict, tolerate it, or dread it, conflict resolution is an essential PM
skill. You cannot ignore it and hope it goes away. Like mold on forgotten leftovers in the
back of the refrigerator, unless you take care of it, the mess will only grow. This is especially
true with conflicting expectations. The longer a stakeholder holds an expectation, the more
entrenched it becomes. If left unchecked, this anticipation of a perceived reality can trans-
form into a powerful fact in their minds that becomes difficult to refute. If you become
aware of stakeholders with conflicting expectations, promptly address them. Don’t let
them fester and grow into larger issues. The saying, “an ounce of prevention is worth a
pound of cure” definitely applies here. Many conflicting expectations can be avoided with
proper planning and proactive, consistent communications.
6) Communicate often
Any concerted effort to manage expectations includes proactive and consistent stakeholder
communications. In general, frequency is much more important than length, or sometimes
even content. Frequent and concise communication instills an assurance that you are on
the job and actively looking out for their interests. These “touches” maintain a dialog
throughout the project that builds into relationships that can become critical when and if
priorities shift and concerns arise.
Within your communications, be honest, straightforward, and forthright. Most can sense
sincerity. Don’t bluff. Don’t lie. Never assume. Be humble. Compliment others when
speaking to groups. Praise in public and criticize in private.
Many PMs struggle with detailing technical and procedural knowledge to stakeholders
in a way that fosters confidence while not appearing arrogant or condescending. It is vital
that you can describe complex engineering situations in nontechnical terms. If this is not
easy for you, practice. Practice describing a project issue without using any technical terms
or acronyms. If you are not sure how to begin, pretend you are talking to a group of par-
tially-interested fifth graders. To hold their attention and get your point across, you should
be interesting, concise, and perhaps a little entertaining. When nervous, many naturally
revert back to their technical comfort zone terminology. Resist this urge as it may make
you appear insecure or aloof. Impressions matter.
One of the main purposes of an active communications plan is to avoid surprises. These
surprises can be unpleasant questions from citizens or the media that blindside your
elected leaders. They can be legal action by a property owner or activist group to slow or
stop your project. They can be consultant delays in meeting a deliverable date. Many of
these situations could have been avoided if the PM communicated effectively such that
they had their finger on the pulse of the project.
The media is another tool that can be used to disseminate project updates to a large
number of stakeholders. Proactively publicizing a traffic flow shift on an active construction
site can minimize citizen frustrations. If your project just made a major milestone, let the
media know the good news. If it is a slow news cycle, they may be searching for content and
would be glad to profile how your important project is moving forward. Be creative and
intentional.
Additional information can be found in Chapter 9, Communications. Section 9.2 dis-
cusses Stakeholder Involvement and Stakeholder Management Plan. Section 9.3 addresses
Media Relations.
7) Influence expectations
It is very difficult to manage expectations if you cannot effectively influence expectations.
If a stakeholder’s Expectation Gap graph is unfavorable, there are only two ways to change
the graph in your favor: (1) lower expectations, and/or (2) increase perceived reality.
The best sales professionals are outstanding listeners. They want to learn what motivates
and matters to their customers. This will enable you to be more persuasive. What are their
expectations? What are their assumptions? What are their desires and fears? What drives
their expectations? What is it they want, and why? What will they accept? Like managing
expectation tasks, influencing expectations is an on-going, dynamic process that benefits
from persistent and concerted efforts.
To effectively influence others often requires acute emotional intelligence and a refined
host of soft skills. Being charismatic, funny, and a good storyteller can all be very helpful
character traits. While these can be developed, we are all blessed with different gifts. Don’t
focus on what you may be lacking. Concentrate on your strengths. Be yourself. Be genuine.
Be logical. Listen. Empathize. Speak to others’ emotions. Find common ground and empha-
size shared values and goals.
Additional information on influencing others can be found in Chapter 11, PM Soft Skills.
Section 11.5 details the Seven Pillars of Influence Management.
8) Monitor expectations
Stakeholder expectations will change over time. While Budget, Scope, and Schedule changes
should be well documented, changing expectations often are not. You must monitor expec-
tations. It is essential to keep your pulse on stakeholders’ expectations so that you know
when and how they are evolving. You cannot manage that which you do not know. So,
ask questions. Listen to your stakeholders. These regular interactions also provide oppor-
tunities to identify incongruent expectations and influence them while at an infant stage
before they become too entrenched.
9) Deliver
The most powerful impact in managing expectations is to deliver. Successful PMs shape
expectations to mirror what they are able to produce. This approach fundamentally relies
on being able to deliver. As such, it is essential you assemble a team with complementary
skills, experience, knowledge, and technical expertise to get the job done. With public
transportation projects, the ability to navigate through the sea of red tape is invaluable.
Exceptional PMs have that unique combination of patience, persistence, tact, and
hard-nosed determination to will something into fruition. Strive to develop and maintain a
reputation for making realistic commitments, and delivering results based upon those
expectations. This can be major project milestones, or promptly returning their phone call.
There is no faster way to build trust and strengthen your credibility that doing what you say
you will do.
10.1.5 Managing Up
Managing up can be a challenging and a high-risk proposition. But pending the project,
there are times when a PM must manage up in order to keep the project moving forward.
You need to understand how your organization really works. Be aware the practical
reality may significantly differ from the current org chart and published procedures. How
are decisions made? Who makes the decisions? Who do those people rely on and trust?
What are the big picture organizational and programmatic objectives leadership wants
to advance? You need to have a mental map of the leadership and decision dynamics in
order to effectively strategize how best to secure your desired results. You need to know
who to influence, and when, to increase the likelihood your proposal is accepted or the
right decision is made. You want to establish a layered foundation so decision discussions
become a chorus of affirmative head nods. Bringing decision makers together prema-
turely, or before you really understand all the issues at play, can result in unexpected and
unpredictable results that can directly impact your project’s budget, scope, and schedule.
As exceptional trial lawyers never ask a question to which they don’t already know the
answer, so PMs should not bring critical project issues to decision makers without some
advance preparations.
In order to effectively manage up, those above you need to know and trust you. They
need to be familiar with your work, your values, and your commitment. It is important to
find ways to establish these connections and build social capital before you need to use it.
Realize that people are persuaded by different means. Some require a logical argument.
Others look for passionate emotions. The most effective persuaders strategically combine
facts and feelings, but in different measures pending their audience. Listen. Ask questions.
Understand how to best tailor your message by leveraging and emphasizing the information
and benefits.
Approaches that best resonate with feelings are Reflecting and Asserting. Reflecting is the
ability to reflect back to the other person not only what they are saying, but what they are
feeling. This relies on active listening and empathy. Asserting is the ability to express your
own needs and desires in a compelling way that authentically leverages emotions. This
relies on connecting the idea to deeper feelings. Both of these approaches can forge pow-
erful connections to feeling-minded decision makers.
Approaches that best resonate with facts are Questioning and Suggesting. Questioning is
the ability to ask neutral, open-ended, logical questions whose answers provide you insight
into meaningful data or opinions held by others. Suggesting is the ability to propose a well-
crafted case or business plan that is supported by facts and reason. Both of these approaches
bring credibility and order to fact-minded decision makers.
Reflecting and Questioning are most applicable early in the influencing process as you are
gathering information and preparing to advance your preferred course of action. Asserting
and Suggesting are best used later in the influencing process, after you are satisfied the table
is set for a favorable response. Since most decision makers consider combinations of facts
and feelings, you may need to use all four approaches in varying degrees. The intention is
not to manipulate anyone, but rather to ensure a fair case is made for your assertion in the
way that most resonates with each individual.
10.1.6 Managing Down

Managing down relies on the same foundation of influence management. Listening and
connecting to others is paramount. Pending your organizational structure, you may be
empowered with positional authority where your entire team reports directly to you. More
likely, different team members have different hierarchal ladders but everyone is coming
together as resources for this project. It is very difficult to manage down if you do not know
your team members. If it is a large team, focus first on the individuals that others respect
and trust. This can quickly amplify your influence. While it may be easy to tell direct reports
exactly what to do and by when, many PMs need to also rely on influence management for
nondirect reports. Chapter 7, Managing Resources, particularly in Section 7.1, Developing and
Managing a Team, and Section 7.2, Personality Assessments, provide additional information
that is directly applicable to this effort.
As PM, you play a critical role in a project’s information flow. As information, expecta-
tions, and feedback flow to and from leadership, stakeholders, and team members, you are
uniquely positioned to act as a filter. Be an intentional and strategic buffer between leader-
ship, stakeholders, and team members. Choose to filter out the unproductive static while
conveying essential messages. Protect positive morale, be consistent with the truth, and
look for ways to highlight others’ contributions.
Where self-assurance can be advantageous in managing up, humility can be beneficial
when managing down. Your team members and SMEs likely have expertise you do not. Be
respectful of their unique skills and abilities. Be curious of their knowledge and processes.
Find ways to make their job easier. Surprise them with acts that express appreciation for
their important contributions. Invest the time and interest to get to know them as people,
beyond their team role. Discuss the who, what, and when. Trust them enough to share the
why, and figure out the how. Act as Tim McGraw sings in the song entitled, “Be humble
and kind.”
10.2 Monitor/Control the Project
“If everything seems to be going well, you obviously don’t know what is going on.”
– Edward Murphy
As PM, you will spend most of your time monitoring and controlling your project. Monitoring
is the collection of performance data. How is the project progressing? What do the formal
and informal metrics convey? Controlling is what you do with the performance data. This
starts with comparing actual progress versus that which was planned, but then also includes
analyzing the variances, identifying trends, and taking preventive or corrective action,
if necessary. For example, if your monitoring shows the project schedule to be late, then
controlling is analyzing the impact, making schedule adjustments, and pursuing change con-
trol processes if the delay is unrecoverable.
A monitoring and controlling mindset is critical to PM success. These are not part of your
job; they are your job. The cyclical processes described in this section are to be continually
practiced throughout the life of the project. This discipline and consistency will enable you
to position your project for success, even in the most trying of circumstances.
10.2.1 The Three Tiers of Importance

All issues can be important. That doesn’t mean they share the same priority. As PM, your
most valuable and scarce resource is your time. It is difficult to successfully manage your
project schedule if you cannot manage your own schedule. It is very common for many
PMs to have more emails and voicemails and meetings than there are hours in a day. While
all issues may warrant your attention, they do not all warrant the same amount of your
time and thought. The three-tier system in Figure 10.3 will enable you to better discern
where to spend most of your time and your best thoughts.
10.2.1.1 Tier 1 – Communications

Tiers of Importance Tier 1 leverages project communications to
focus on other’s expectations. As PM, you
Tier 1 need to have your ear to the ground so you
Importance
Communications
can know and control the pulse of the project.
Tier 2 Acute situational awareness will prove invalu-
Support able in positioning you to strategically man-
age change. The tasks themselves are rather
Tier 3
Foundational simple to describe, but can be challenging
to do well. To be effective, this cycle must be
Figure 10.3 Tiers of importance. continually repeated throughout the life of
the project. While important, Tier 1 issues may be the

lowest priority.
Tier 1 control is repeating the cycle of engaging
stakeholders, monitoring expectations, and manag-
ing expectations, as shown in Figure 10.4. This
Tier 1 control cycle should include leadership,
team members, internal stakeholders, and external
stakeholders.
These actions should be performed in accor-
dance with the Project Communications Plan and
Stakeholder Engagement Plan. Specific details are Figure 10.4 Managing expectations.
discussed in Chapter 9, Communications, partic-
ularly in Section 9.1, Communications Plan, and
Section 9.2, Stakeholder Involvement and the Stakeholder Engagement Plan. Understand
that these plans should contain the minimum communications. Pending the situation or
stakeholder, additional measures may be appropriate and beneficial.
10.2.1.2 Tier 2 – Support

Tier 2 focuses on risks, resources, and quality. These must be closely watched as they are
all core secondary project issues that can directly impact more important Tier 3 Foundational
project issues. If your Project Management Plan includes a Risk Management Plan, as dis-
cussed in Chapter 6, Managing Risk, Section 6.2, Risk Management Plan, a Resource
Management Plan as discussed in Chapter 7, Managing Resources, Section 7.3, Resource
Planning, and a Quality Management Plan is detailed in Chapter 8, Managing Quality,
Section 8.2, Monitoring and Controlling Quality, then Tier 2 project monitoring should be
relatively straightforward. If you do not have these management plans, you still will need
to establish evolving ways to monitor and control these critical areas.
One can assert most all of project management somehow falls under a risk management
umbrella. As such, it is absolutely essential that you actively monitor and control risks
throughout the life of the project if you want to be successful. Similarly, resources and
quality must be actively monitored and controlled throughout the project. This can best be
done by repeating the cycle of evaluating risks, eval-
uating resources, and monitoring quality, as shown
in Figure 10.5.
10.2.1.3 Tier 3 – Foundational

Tier 3 are the foundational issues that define and
guide your project. These are the triple constraint of
budget, scope, and schedule. Due to the inherent
interdependencies of these three critical constraints,
any disruption to one impacts the other two. Any
Tier 3 issue has the potential to partially or fully jeop-
ardize the project if not properly managed through
established and accepted change management Figure 10.5 Managing risks.
procedures. As such, all Tier 3 issues should

be a high PM priority.
In order to effectively monitor and control
Tier 3, the PM should regularly repeat the
integrated tasks below, as shown in Figure
10.6. Work with your team to confirm the
scope. Monitor the Schedule. Use the current
schedule to update the estimate. As the
estimate changes, work with programming to
verify the budget. Then restart the process.
Remember one of the superpowers of the tri-
Figure 10.6 Managing the triple constraint. ple constraint is to enable your project to
better satisfy the big picture program and
portfolio goals of having the right amount of the right type of money in the right place at
the right time to keep your project moving forward as detailed in your project schedule.
You can only do this if you are actively monitoring and controlling Tier 3 issues of budget,
scope, and schedule.
10.2.2 How to Discern Priorities

Tier 1 issues may impact Tier 2. Tier 2 issues may impact Tier 3. As PM, you need to actively
monitor and control all three tiers. While situations may elevate the urgency of a Tier 1 issue, as
PM you need to keep the proper perspective. Tier 1 issues are serious, but not as serious as Tier
2 issues. Similarly, a Tier 2 issue can be very serious, but it assumes a new urgency when it
becomes Tier 3 concern. For example, a particularly involved stakeholder may be raising all
kinds of public relations issues (Tier 1). Whatever the specifics, it deserves more of your attention
if it becomes a risk that needs to be actively managed or requires restructuring resources (Tier
2). Similarly, the issue deserves your foremost attention if it elevates to the point where it is
adversely impacting the project’s triple constraint of budget, scope, or schedule (Tier 3).
10.2.3 When Crisis Occurs

Scott Adams said, “One ‘Oh Shit’ can erase a thousand attaboys.” If you are a PM and you
haven’t yet had one of these moments, just wait. The very nature of public transportation
projects is inherently filled with stakeholders and risks that can be challenging to define,
predict, and control. For many projects, the question is not if a crisis will occur, but rather
when will it occur, what will it be, who will be involved, and how will you handle it.
When crisis occurs, it is imperative that you do not overact. You are the PM. The project
is your responsibility. You need to be a steady and calming force in the midst of the storm.
Even if you don’t know where you are steering the ship, it is comforting to others to know
someone is at the wheel. Intentionally exert an authoritative presence. When it hits the fan,
take a deep breath and follow the five steps in Figure 10.7.
1) Think; don’t react
When crisis occurs, chaos may ensue. Assumptions may be turned upside down. Paradigms
may shift. Tempers may flare. Time can feel like it is speeding up as information, reactions,
1. Think; don't react
2. Define the problem
3. Identify solutions
4. Take action
5. Assess results
Figure 10.7 When crisis occurs.
and expectations are pouring on you faster than you can absorb it. It is in time like these that
prudence is absolutely essential. You need to slow things down. Resist the urge to assess
blame. There will be time for that later when it can be handled in a constructive manner. In
the midst of the storm, you need to focus on the problem. This requires clarity of thought.
Be fiercely protective of you limited time, prioritize critical information, and think.
Voltaire famously said, “No problem can stand the assault of sustained thinking.” But solu-
tions do require thinking. In the moment, this can seem counterintuitive. In most sports,
you ideally want to eventually think less and react to the situation in a way that relies on
your strategic preparation and disciplined practice. This focused and instinctive response
allows the athlete to quickly and nimbly adapt in a rapidly changing environment. Many of
these premises are also true in business. As PM, there are plenty of times when you should
rely on your experiences and the strategic game plan for you project. You should trust your
instincts and be able to improvise with thoughtful and agile reactions. However, crises are
not these situations. While you may very well rely on your own instincts to eventually
make a decision, it is imperative you recognize the level of seriousness of the issue and
identify the intended and unintended consequences of the action and reactions. This
requires disciplined and intentional thought. When things seem to be falling apart around
you, this is exactly when you need to stop, take a deep breath, call a time-out, and think.
2) Define the problem
You can’t solve what you don’t understand. What problem are you trying to solve?
Answering this question may be challenging. For example, imagine you find out you didn’t
get your environmental permit because the plans changed and now show additional
impacts that were not previously discussed or approved. Is the problem that you don’t have
your permit? Is the problem whatever design considerations caused the plan change to
increase the environmental impacts? Is there a communications problem within your
team? Is it a job performance problem in that the environmental agent didn’t update the
permit to show the design changes? Is the problem that this information will cause addi-
tional work for the consultant which will strain the already tight budget? Is the problem
that any resolution will delay project advertisement, which will push up against funding
deadlines on this politically charged project that was promised to be delivered on time?
What is the problem? What if it is more than one of them?
Think back to proofs in geometry class. The first step is to define the givens. Do not allow
yourself to be distracted. It is imperative you define which problems you are trying to solve.
You can’t do this effectively if you are reacting, and not thinking. You need to strategically
determine what are the core issues. And when there are more than one, you must search
for dependencies and then prioritize them.
Defining the problem can be challenging when the information flow is less than ideal.
This may be due to the accuracy or completeness of the information, or the timing of when
you become aware of it. There are times when it is difficult to know what to believe. In
these instances, you must remain focused and objective. As Ronald Reagan said, para-
phrasing the old Russian proverb, “Trust but verify.”
In all cases, effective communication is critical. You need to reach out to those you trust, and
to those who have the answers you need. As the situation develops, remember to keep com-
munication as transparent as it is appropriate and productive. This means reaching out to
your team, your peers, and your leadership. Strive to keep all those who need to be in the loop
in the loop, be they below you, above you, or at your level in the organizational hierarchy.
3) Identify solutions
Once the problem is defined, then you can search for solutions. Resist the urge to put the
cart before the horse and jump right to possible solutions before you have defined the
problem you are trying to solve. Haste will often lead you down the wrong path.
There are three aspects to enacting solutions: (1) does the solution work, (2) what are the
intended and unintended consequences, and (3) buy-in from the team and stakeholders on
the new path forward. Searching for solutions is what engineers do well. This is what we
are trained to do. Pending the size and complexity of the problem, PMs should resist the
urge to do it all themselves. While a PM may be able to find the solution by themselves, and
maybe they can even identify all the intended and unintended consequences of the solu-
tion by themselves, they most likely can’t secure team and stakeholder buy-in by them-
selves. Project development is a team sport. Seek out different perspectives. Include key
stakeholders and team members in the discussions. If there is time, this effort can foster
collaboration and spurn innovation. Look beyond positional authority. When it hits the
fan, seek those who you can trust to tell you the truth and provide sage advice and direction.
Just as there may be more than one problem, there may be more than one solution. In the
previous project example, while the immediate problem is securing the permit, you may need
to concurrently be adjusting budget realities and managing stakeholder schedule expectations.
The strategic solution may include multiple aspects on parallel fronts. When this is the case,
clear and consistent communication to the team, leadership, and stakeholders is essential.
While finding solutions, don’t speed, but be speedy. Avoid the cliché of paralysis of anal-
ysis. Pending the situation, you will likely not know all the information you want to know
before you need to move forward. Leadership is often a series of calculated and educated
guesses. As such, spend your limited time wisely. In the previous project example, if it is a
design issue that has caused the unanticipated encroachments, get the right people in the
same room and figure it out. Target thinkers and experienced engineers. Consult the ide-
alists, attorneys, and regulators to make sure you stay on track, but focus on the problem
solvers. Spend your time with those who look for solutions, not those who look for problems.
Whatever your solutions, be sure to evaluate the implications to your project’s triple con-
straint of budget, scope, and schedule. Whichever solution you pursue, you must practice
appropriate change management in order to sustain project viability. Don’t win the battle
only to lose the war.
4) Take action
While it is important not to hastily rush to action, it is likewise unwise to doddle. Fish or cut
bait. Shit or get off the pot. These clichés are true. There comes a clear time for action when
you, as the PM, need to make a decision and move forward. Especially in times of crisis, the
perception of authority is paramount. In the midst of a storm, the captain of the ship needs
to be seen at the wheel.
How do you know when it is time to act? When facing tough decisions, General Colin
Powell succinctly describes his 40/70 rule, “Once the information is in the 40% to 70% range,
go with your gut. Don’t wait until you have enough facts to be 100% sure, because by then it is
almost always too late.” The 40/70 rule is shown in Figure 10.8.
Need more Window of Too late for

information to take opportunity meaningful
action action
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Degree of Certainty
Figure 10.8 40/70 “Powell” rule.
As the Powell Rule details, sometimes more information is not helpful. Complex
phenomenon and problems can often be narrowed down to a simple set of criteria to eval-
uate the underlying fundamental issues. At a point, extra layers of information may only
confuse the issue. As Einstein said, “If you can’t explain it to a six-year-old, you probably
don’t understand it yourself.”
Sometimes you won’t know what to do. In these cases, you can seek wisdom from trusted
advisors with whom you have established relationships of trust. The first impression of
experts is worth more. Just as an experienced gray-haired engineer can look at a set of plans
and quickly identify where there are looming construction issues, so can experienced
leaders approach a complicated or contentious situation and offer valuable insights.
Once you decide what action to take, and when to take it, you must bring everyone into
the loop who needs to be included. The old adage counsels that a passenger jet liner pilot
can make dramatic and unexpected turns, but not without causing quite the raucous in the
cabin. As pilot of your project, you need to provide warning to those who need it in the
cabin, updates to controllers on the ground, and have your team prepared and ready to exe-
cute the changes so they can respond to any complications. Effective communication may
not guarantee success, but lack of it will expedite failure.
In 1519, Spanish Conquistador Hernan Cortes landed on Mexico and promptly burned
his ships. With their way home laying on the bottom of the ocean, his men were extremely
motivated to succeed in their mission. While I am not suggesting you so drastically mark
every decision as a point of no return, it is important that you and your team are properly
motivated to move forward on the decided path. This can be especially challenging for
those who may have been proponents of possible solutions that were not selected. In these
instances, address the issue. Whether you meet with them individually or as a team,
emphasize shared principles and the collective team goals. Projects are a team sport. Each
member of the team has a vital role to play, and we must do our jobs well in order for the
project as a whole to succeed. Even after these efforts, there may be some holdouts. It is
then your responsibility to kindly remind them that not everyone agrees with every decision
all the time, but when the flag goes up, we all need to get in line and salute.
5) Assess results
There is a time for everything.
After the problem is defined, solutions are identified, and actions are taken, then you
should evaluate results. Are your solutions working? Are the intended and unintended
consequences acceptable? Are there new risks that need to be managed? Are there relation-
ships that need to be repaired or rebuilt?
Exceptional PMs have the ability to effectively triage priorities during crisis. They then
do not allow themselves to be distracted, and with laser-focus they address first things first.
That often means that after the dust settles from the original sprint to action, there are
other issues that must be addressed in their proper time. Once the course is charted and
you are steering the ship out of the storm, is often that time.
Your efforts to define the problem and identify solutions may necessitate recreating some
course of events or decisions. During those phases, it is usually not productive to distract
yourself with assessing blame or exacting retribution. The exceptions for this are if there is
criminal activity, individual actions that warrant organizational disciplinary action, or if
individuals’ roles on the team need to be adjusted in order to effectively move forward.
Crises can be remarkable teaching moments. The stress, urgency, and stakes of the
situation often sear these lessons learned into our professional fabric. Understand this
unique opportunity, and strategically use these occasions to train team members and stake-
holders. Be candid, kind, and constructive. Invest in them to strengthen your team for pre-
sent and future success. This is what leaders do.
10.2.4 Juggling Multiple Projects

Most PMs are responsible for more than one project. Pending your organization and the
size and complexity of each project, you may have five, ten, twenty, or more. How does that
possibly work? There are only forty hours in a typical work week.
If everyone has the same number of hours in the day, why are some people so much more
productive? This rhetorical question seems especially true when we ponder an extremely
high achieving PM. How is it possible they can successfully manager that many projects?
How can they seem to know current updates about each one? How can they keep track and
follow-up on all of the outstanding issues? How do they seem to be able to break through
the bureaucratic inertia to keep things moving? How do they seem to consistently develop
and deliver projects on-time and on-budget?
This book is written from a single project perspective. That is very intentional. Each
project should stand on its own accord. Transportation projects are typically funded by tax-
payers and administered by public transportation organizations. As such, their development
and delivery should remain above reproach. This inherently necessitates that each project
be selected and funded on its own merit. Successfully managing multiple projects means
successfully managing a collection of individual projects.
Effective time management is absolutely critical to success. Use the three-tier system of
importance, described earlier in this section, to evaluate issues and discern priorities. Keep
a proper perspective. Use the strategies discussed in Chapter 11, PM Soft Skills, Section
11.4, Time Management. Trust your team, and delegate. Be protective of your time. Make
daily to-do lists. Schedule time each day to think and plan. Find balance. Use self-reflection
to evaluate if you are being effective. Not busy, but effective. Strive toward self-awareness
and self-improvement. Find a mentor. Learn from your mistakes. Read business and
industry books. Strive to be exceptional at your craft.
Be aware of project interdependencies. Perhaps this is shared team members or the same
design consultant. While each project and contract must stand on its own, these situations
may present opportunities to optimize efficiencies. This does not mean muddying the
waters by mixing resources, but it does mean being situationally aware to leverage resources
where possible to realize increased efficiencies. Some examples may be strategically sched-
uling plan submissions to normalize workloads and expedite review times, or completing
the hydraulic analysis of an upstream structure before finalizing the hydraulic analysis for
the downstream structure on another project.
Perhaps most important, you need to find a way to see the whole picture. What is your
entire workload and schedule of commitments? If you only concentrate on the fires of the
day, you will never get anywhere. You need to keep a laser-like focus on the long-term
goals, and managing interim goals to ensure you are positioned for success. Leverage your
organization’s project, program, and portfolio management tools. If they are lacking, find a
way to overlay your project schedules so you can see future workload, upcoming mile-
stones, and submission deadlines. Know, and be fiercely protective of, the triple constraint
(budget, scope, and schedule) of each of your projects. A successful PM portfolio is built on
individual projects that are developed and delivered on-time and on-budget.
10.3 Change Management
“The only constant in life is change.”

– Heraclitus
While a project’s Budget, Scope, and Schedule should be set at Scoping, a transportation
project can resemble a living, breathing organism that changes with the political tides,
economic and financial realities, adjacent community developments, upgraded industry
standards and regulations, stakeholder expectations, public input, and evolving prior-
ities. For example, if a project takes five years to develop and deliver, it is likely unrea-
sonable to assume site conditions, community needs, and involved stakeholders would
remain unchanged. A growing urban area can be completely transformed in a far shorter
time with residences, retail, business, and industry that may completely change the antici-
pated needs, benefits, access points, multi-modal accommodations, and traffic flow of your
project. Often the biggest challenge a PM faces is how to successfully and seamlessly incor-
porate these changes into your project.
It is the PM’s job to manage the project within the triple constraint while balancing risk,
resources, and quality. This can be extremely challenging to accomplish pending the pro-
posed or dictated changes. To proactively manage these triple constraint risks of change, it
is imperative the PM keep their finger on the pulse of stakeholder expectations, public
input, and leaderships goals and priorities. Whether you see the change request coming a
mile away or if it is thrust upon you at an unscheduled meeting Friday afternoon, your
response should be the same.
One of your most important PM responsibilities is to faithfully and consistently practice
effective change management procedures. Many organizations have established change
management policies. If yours does, know it and follow it. If yours does not, I recommend
you use something similar to general guidelines described below as it protects you, your
organization, and the project.
Once the Budget, Scope, and Schedule are set, they are set, and it is your job to fiercely
protect the triple constraint and work within it. All Budget, Scope, and Schedule change
requests should be in writing. This documents who is requesting the change, when, and
why. A change request form should then be completed that describes the request and the
details the resulting Budget, Scope, and Schedule impacts. This should then be evaluated
by the designated change control board/agent. This may be the project sponsor, a
director, or other assigned individual empowered to make these decisions. While some
organizations may allow the PM to serve as the control agent, this is not typical. Assuming
the change request is approved, all change control documentation should be appropri-
ately saved, necessary adjustments to the Budget, Scope, and Schedule should be made
in the appropriate systems, the decision should be communicated to the team and all
impacted stakeholders, and any associated project documentation (e.g., permits, risk
register, etc.) should be updated. This should be followed for all requests, whether they
adversely impact, or benefit, the triple constraint. Astute PMs realize that change request
forms can be the most powerful and impactful tool in their arsenal. It can calm emo-
tional agendas, reinforce clarity of purpose, promote collaborative progress, and bring
order to chaos.
Changes are not necessarily bad. They are a normal and expected part of project
management. However, a project can quickly get into trouble if changes are made without
regard to, or approval of, the resultant impacts to the existing Budget, Scope, and Schedule.
When an overeager or overaccommodating PM works to incorporate a requested change
into their project without analyzing and documenting the resultant impacts to the triple
constraint, they do so at their own risk and they introduce a significant project risk. Well-
intentioned undocumented changes can quickly become a nightmare should there be staff
turnover, the winds change course and request additional or conflicting changes, or if
there are inconsistencies with federal, state, or funding boundaries, requirement, or
established purpose and need. If the project ends up with Budget, Scope, or Schedule busts,
undocumented changes are extremely difficult to explain and defend. In these circum-
stances, a PM can quickly find themselves alone at the end of very long and unstable limb.
Even though it can be time consuming and some control agents may not want to attach
their name to all requested changes, practicing good change management procedures is an
essential PM responsibility.
10.3.1 An Engineer’s Bias

Transportation organizations are notoriously terrible at saying “no.” There may be a number of
reasons for this reality. Sometimes there are simply too many cooks in the kitchen. Other times
leadership or PMs are determined to avoid conflict and pursue appeasement. Other times there
are simply not good ways to say “no” for a variety of reasons. It should be noted that there may
be other factors as well.
Engineers love challenges. Many thrive on the opportunity to solve a difficult puzzle. As
such, when ideas or issues arise in a project, it is not uncommon for an engineer or PM to
think to themselves, “I could do probably make that happen.” Resist this urge.
Regardless of the reason for saying “yes” or “no” to project issues, it is incumbent on the
PM to insist on practicing approved change management protocols.
10.3.2 Change Management Plan

Every project should have a Change Management Plan that details the acceptable change
control process. Many organizations achieve this by deferring to their established change
management plans and procedures. Change Management Plans do not need to be lengthy,
but should cover the process by which the PM and team will evaluate, consider, decide, and
implement change throughout the project. At a minimum, the Change Management Plan
should address how the PM, team, or organization. Most Change Management plans gen-
erally follow the steps in Figure 10.9.
The PM is responsible to ensure changes are identified, evaluated, approved, and imple-
mented using the organization’s acceptable change control processes. One common foun-
dational principle is consistency. This begins with a formalized change request that
considers impacts of the proposed change to the existing budget, scope, and schedule. It is
critical that the PM not act upon the change request until the request has been evaluated
and approved by the designated change control authority. Another important role of the PM
is to ensure all changes are properly implemented. This includes proactive communications
to team members and stakeholders. This also includes updating all project documentation
in the correct configuration, and with the proper versioning.
• Define the challenge and contraints

• Identify risks
• Impact analysis − Budget, Scope, and Schedule
• Evaluate options
• Decide path forward
• Gain necessary concurrences/approvals/resources
• Document decision and update project management plans
• Communicate change to all parties
• Implement change
Figure 10.9 Change management plan.

10.4 Balancing Innovation – Performance-Based Design
“Good design is good business.”

– Thomas Watson, Jr.
The triple constraint dictates that you cannot change the budget, scope, or schedule without
impacting the other two. This fundamental principle has underlying impacts on how a
project solution is pursued.
The traditional approach to project development is quite formulaic. The transportation
industry is overflowing with manuals, standards, and guidelines. Time tested and trusted,
these standards can expedite design in a manner that enforces consistency and uniformity.
The traditional approach is for the standards to dictate the scope. For example, this
classification of roadway requires a specific pavement section and typical roadway section.
Waivers and exceptions were discouraged. The solution was determined and then the
needed money was programmed to fund it. Scope drove the budget and schedule.
Our transportation infrastructure and systems are aging. Our populations are growing.
Citizen expectations are rising. Environmental regulations continue to expand. Costs are
increasing. Revenues are not keeping up with demands. The bottom line is we have more
transportation needs than available financial resources. As Aubrey Lane said, “Limited
transportation dollars have consequences.” Today’s reality is that the industry has transi-
tioned to where the budget is often driving scope and schedule.
Something needed to change. The transportation industry has responded with a radical
idea that requires a fundamental paradigm shift in transportation solutions. Performance-
Based Design (PBD) focuses on pursuing context-sensitive solutions that satisfy the defined
purpose and need. The traditional approach starts with the design standards, which dictate
the scope. PBD starts with the purpose and need, considers project-specific conditions and
constraints, and then develops a cost-effective scope. These different approaches are depicted
in Figure 10.10.
This change in approach represents a seismic shift in thinking. Sound engineering princi-
ples haven’t changed. PBD promotes finding new and innovative ways to apply them that may
Design Standards
Traditional
Approach
Design standards dictate
Scope
Project Scope
Performance Based
Design
Build up Scope from
existing conditions to
Purpose & Need satisfy Purpose & N eed
Figure 10.10 Performance-based design.

10.4 Balancing Innovation – Performance-Based Design 217
be outside of the manuals, while ensuring safety. It does not dismiss engineering standards,
but rather emphasizes engineering judgment. PBD remains flexible in approach, unwavering
in the objective, encourages innovation, and balances the solution with economic realities.
The roadway geometrics and project solutions are based on needs, not blind application of
standards.
The industry transition has been slow and steady. In 2006 FHWA released their
“Flexibility in Highway Design” publication. Subsequent years saw many DOTs and orga-
nizations begin to embrace design exceptions, waivers, and deviations. Engineers began
parsing the manuals for “shall” versus “should” conditions. In 2018, the AASHTO Green
Book (A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets) shifted to Performance-Based
Design. While this approach may not be applicable in every circumstance, the intention of
this transition is to provide greater flexibility to the designers so organizations can optimize
their Returns-On-Investments (ROI) of transportation dollars, improve safety and mobility,
and ensure solutions are appropriate for the setting and satisfy the purpose and need.
The PBD mindset can be especially advantageous to the PM during change management
circumstances. A growing number of criteria-based funding applications set the project
budget earlier in the process. Some of these are set as early as funding application approval.
At this early stage, preliminary plans may be available, but likely not beyond 30% design
plans, if that. In these situations, the project risks may not be fully identified or evaluated.
Project schedules are preliminary best guesses. The project is likely not yet scoped. If the
budget leg of the triple constraint is fixed, then any subsequent changes to Scope or
Schedule will require some creative change management solutions.
PBD thinking can be an invaluable tool to navigating these sticky wickets. The team will
use the manuals and engineering standards, but seek context-sensitive solutions that are
appropriate for the specific site conditions and satisfy the big picture purpose and need.
Examples may include saving a pavement base instead of tearing it out and rebuilding, or
integrating a diverging diamond interchange into the design, or shrinking bike path widths
during critical sections of the improvement. While there likely is some crossover between
this and Value Engineering, there are some differences. Value Engineering is typically a
singular event involving professionals with little or no prior exposure to the project who
review an existing design and seek to identify opportunities to reduce costs or expedite
construction. PBD similarly seeks ways to reduce cost and expedite delivery, but also main-
tains a laser-like focus on the project’s purpose and need, concentrating on the needs not
the wants, while never compromising safety. PBD is also not a single event, but a mindset
that can be integrated into the project from funding application through final design.
While PBD is a powerful design tool, it may not be applicable for every project. There are
challenges in its evolving implementation. Engineering discipline and divisional silos need
to be broken down. Collaboration needs to be embraced. Designers need to release their
death grip on manuals and standards and truly think about each unique situation and solu-
tion. This approach takes courage. Engineers may not readily recommend a waiver or
exception to standards as this bring additional organizational and professional risks. What
if the idea doesn’t work? The standard solution will work and is irrefutably defendable. It
is said civil engineering is the one profession where our mistakes become monuments of
incompetence for all to see. The degree to which an organization or individual pursues
PBD is proportional to their commitment to the strategy and their risk appetite.
Innovation can also bring additional challenges. For example, where adding a round-
about into the design may improve safety and lower costs, it may ignite substantial public
concern that necessitates significant stakeholder outreach efforts.
The PM is responsible to develop and deliver the project within the established budget,
scope, and schedule. As such, the PM plays a pivotal role in balancing scope solution inno-
vations that balance economic and schedule realities. They should remain focused on the
scope, but flexible in approach. Especially during change management challenges, PBD
can be a powerful tool the PM and designers can leverage to progress to success.
10.5 Goals and OKRs
“A goal should scare you a little, and excite you a lot.”

– Joe Vitale
The majority of engineers and PMs are inherently goal-oriented. Many of these are also
disciplined, inwardly driven, and intensely competitive. This blend can create a lethal
combination of dedication and productivity that can seemingly will a project forward.
Other PMs have vastly different approaches, but experience similar results. While it may be
possible to be a successful PM and not be goal-oriented, it is not common.
Most everyone is familiar with SMART goals. They should be Specific, meaning they
state what you will do. They should be Measurable, meaning there is an objective way to
evaluate progress and success. They should be Achievable, meaning they are possible to
accomplish. They should be Relevant, meaning they are reasonably connected to your role
and worth doing. And they should be Time-based, meaning they have a schedule. SMART
goals are well-established tools that can be remarkably effective in forwarding short-term
and long-term agendas. A PM should be experienced and accomplished at setting and
achieving SMART goals.
Many forward companies have supplemented SMART goals with OKRs (Objectives and
Key Results). The Objective should speak to the intrinsic value of the work itself, and be
inspirational in nature. Each Objective should be paired with three to five Key Results.
These are the real-world, metric-driven realities that balance quantity and quality. They
should be specific enough to be accurately measured. An OKR often takes the format of
(objective) “as measured by” (key results). Employees should have no more than three to five
OKRs at one time, which should be consistent with established short-term and long-term
goals. This allows them to come to work and easily know and focus on their top priorities.
Great leaders have uncluttered thinking that allows them to clearly drill down on what
needs to happen to move forward. OKRs can be operational and aspirational. Operational
OKRs are those that need to be achieved within an established schedule and budget.
Examples would include many of the project development tasks. Aspirational OKRs are
the audacious goals that ignite our passions. Examples may include innovative engineering
solutions. Particularly when formed with team member input, individual and team OKRs
can be a powerful force to focus, align, track, and stretch your team.
Both goals and OKRs should drive us to be innovative, efficient, and productive. At their
best, goals and OKRs should push us beyond our comfort zone, leading us to achievements
that live between our abilities and our dreams. Timid goals that intentionally underesti-
mate potential to ensure success will not improve you or your team. Similarly, establishing
goals or OKRs with low value objectives that really don’t matter to anyone, or key results
that are nearly impossible to actually measure is an academic exercise of futility. While
these sandbagging tactics may seem successful if your goal is to Cover Your own Ass (CYA),
they will never drive or meaningfully improve your operations.
One key to success with SMART goals or OKRs is often the ability to say no to things that
distract or detract. This can include our own pride or expectations. As Voltaire said, “Don’t
allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good.” Know when good enough is good enough.
Much like SMART goals, the power of OKR is in the mindset that drives success with
these tools. OKRs inherently value merit over seniority. What you know is less important
than what you can do with what you know. What do you produce? It is simple and straight-
forward. What is the objective, and what are the specific key results to know if you achieved
your objective? This “can-do,” “get-it-done” approach is especially important in transporta-
tion project management.
Transportation PMs are often faced with goals set for us that are not SMART goals. What
then? While these circumstances can be frustrating and challenging, they are not impos-
sible. Perhaps there is no silver bullet, but combining a number of tools in this book can
position you for success. Communication, stakeholder engagement, managing expecta-
tions, managing the project’s triple constraint, practicing change management, and leading
the team are all tools that will enable you to set and achieve individual, team, and project
SMART goals or OKRs.
10.6 Project Management Methodologies
“Management is, above all, a practice where art, science, and craft meet.”
– Henry Mintzberg
10.6.1 Changing Conditions

Many transportation organizations continue to use waterfall policies and practices that have
served them well for many years and decades. This relies on a well-defined Work Breakdown
Structure of carefully arranged tasks within a Critical Path Methodology. Whether it is
rooted in history, precedence, pride, or just trying to keep their heads above water, many
transportation organizations are hesitant, or outright resistant, to revisiting their well-estab-
lished project development processes. In some cases, this may be an intentional decision. In
many other cases, this may more so be the lack of clarity or confidence that considered
changes would produce more good than harm it may cause. Not all public agencies are
nimble and aggressive in pursuing increased efficiencies. While most desire to improve, they
carefully weigh uncertainties against full workloads, established workflows, and valued tra-
dition. “We’ve always done it that way” resonates in a culture that relies on institutional
knowledge. However, the reality is the transportation world is changing before our eyes.
Traditionally, the scope was fixed in transportation projects. If we were going to build a
bridge carrying a four-lane, divided roadway over the river, we would build a bridge that
carried a four-lane, divided roadway over the river. The Scope would be defined by this
objective and conformance with applicable design and safety standards. If the project took
a little longer, or cost a little more to construct, that was accepted as long as we built a
bridge that carried a four-lane, divided roadway over the river that complied with all appli-
cable standards. The scope was fixed, and the budget and schedule components of the tri-
ple constraint were the more flexible constraints.
This approach is rapidly changing. As the transportation moves toward more objective,
application-based project selection, often the budget or schedule becomes the fixed compo-
nents, with the Scope becoming the flexible constraint, as shown in Figure 10.11.
Fixed Scope
Constraints
Sc
et
le
he
dg
du
Bu
du
Bu
he
dg
le
Sc
et
Flexible
Constraints Scope
Traditional Model Growing Trend
Figure 10.11 Fixed and flexible constraints.
This trend will continue to grow. Limited resources have consequences. Engineers are
encouraged now more than ever to pursue innovative designs, using the project’s Purpose
and Need as their guide. Design waivers and exceptions are no longer viewed as something
to be avoided at all costs, but rather an approach to be leveraged to promote context-sensi-
tive solutions. This power of flexibility is the basis of Performance-Based Design, as
described and advanced in AASHTO’s Green Book. Design is no longer driven by blind
applications of standards in all circumstances. Design is increasingly encouraged to accom-
modate a project’s unique circumstances.
Upon this landscape is an ever-growing list of success criteria that transportation organi-
zations and PMs are compelled to address. Organizations, and their resulting performance
metrics, often focus on a project being on-time and on-budget. These are tremendously
important priorities, but they are not the only success criteria. Some expanding criteria lends
itself to being objectively quantified, such as safety, congestion mitigation, and economic
development. Others are more subjective in nature, such as accessibility and wealth creation.
Still others have local or political priorities, such as maintaining the character of a corridor
or opening the new roadway to traffic before the start of a new school year. There are
technical and social aspects to these new realities.
Technically, transportation systems and assets have continued to become increasingly
complex. Transportation projects are so much more than concrete and steel. Integrated
traffic signals and intelligent traffic systems have transformed our roadways. The amount
of automated and physical data collected on projects and systems is staggering. Drones can
capture seemingly unlimited data points during a remote bridge inspection. Integrated
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) can display layers of seemingly every asset from
extensive data sources. We are designing roads in 3D models that can create remarkable
life-like simulations of facilities not yet constructed. Success criteria on many transporta-
tion projects now extends far beyond opening up new pavement to traffic.
Most transportation organizations have many more needs and wants than resources.
Infrastructures are aging. In lean environments, preventive maintenance is often the first
effort to be pushed back. This short-term solution often brings longer-term problems as dete-
riorating assets become more expensive to repair, or may reach the point of being functionally
obsolete and require complete replacement. Unpredictable market conditions, such as infla-
tion, supply chain issues, or other economic constraints, only exacerbate the situation. All of
this further emphasizes the need to be flexible in individual project solutions.
Socially, there is a growing appreciation of transportation systems. This realization man-
ifests itself in many ways. Take the holistic understanding that transportation assets are
more than roads; they are a fundamental and shared community asset. This simple asser-
tion can bring with it many cascading success criteria. Subjective concepts like community
building, expanding access, wealth creation, environmental stewardship, and economic
justice are now commonly emphasized transportation project success criteria. These ideas
are often bolstered by guiding legislation and political agendas. These subjective goals may
clash with objective design criteria, and often surface during stakeholder engagement.
Virtual stakeholder engagement has expanded the avenues by which citizens can become
involved in the process. While transportation organizations and projects benefit from
increased transparency and stakeholder involvement, it does necessitate an increased
ability to shift project development in a more Agile way.
10.6.2 Waterfall Project Management

Waterfall project management is what most non-IT folks think of as traditional project
management practices. It is a clearly defined, linear process of carefully sequenced tasks.
The Critical Path (CPM) methodology fits nicely within a waterfall mindset. The project
flows down a prescribed workflow, like water flowing down a well-worn path.
Waterfall is terrific approach for highly regulated and complex processes. It more easily
accommodates staff turnover, and encourages documentation. There are clear gates through
which one must pass before continuing, be it for funding or development. Objectives are
clearly defined, and documentation is embedded into established workflows such that the
organization maintains process and project control. This predictability and clear division of
labor is well suited for most transportation projects, which is why most transportation pro-
jects, programs, and portfolios are administered using Waterfall.
The primary disadvantage of Waterfall is its inherent inflexibility. Once a project has
passed a milestone, it becomes troublesome to go back and revisit those decisions or direc-
tions. It also has difficulty incorporating ongoing stakeholder feedback into the project
design throughout the life of the project. This inflexibility is fundamentally challenged
when requirements change, or success criteria evolves.
Even with these disadvantages, the nature of transportation funding and workflows
necessitate that many of the fundamental tenets of Waterfall project management are here
to stay. However, much of Waterfall does seem to contradict the changing conditions in the
transportation world.
10.6.3 Agile Project Management

Agile project management takes a completely different approach, with vastly different
values and objectives. At its core, Agile is a management mindset for project development.
The four values that capture this approach are:
1) Individuals over processes
2) Working solutions over comprehensive documentation
3) Stakeholder collaboration over contract negotiations
4) Responding to change over following a pre-set plan
These four values are further clarified by twelve principles that are defined in the Agile
Manifesto. This approach was born in the software industry to satisfy a need to be more
adaptive and responsive to industry trends and market conditions. While mainly concen-
trated in the computer and software sectors, aspects of inherent flexibility are transferable
to most industries.
There are many different approaches by which Agile can be implemented. The most
common is SCRUM, which typically relies on a collaborative team that focuses to achieve
short-term objectives within a series of two-week sprint that are consistent with larger
objectives. Every sprint intends to produce a tangible or working product. While there is a
master plan at the outset, priorities can change during each sprint with the constraint that
resources are fixed. The nimble organizational structure enables promptly concentrating
on evolving priorities. This is one of Agile’s primary strengths, but also one of its biggest
disadvantages.
10.6.4 A Hybrid Approach

Modern-day Transportation project management is neither purely Waterfall nor purely
Agile. In Waterfall, the scope is fixed and the budget and schedule are estimated con-
straints. In Agile, the budget and schedule are fixed, and the scope features are estimated
constraints. Most transportation projects now lie somewhere in between these two extremes
within the Hybrid zone, as shown in Figure 10.12.
Generally speaking, Waterfall is often most appropriate where there are clear requirements
and processes. Meanwhile, Agile is often most appropriate when requirements are changing and
Waterfall Hybrid Agile
Predict ive Adapt ive

Project Project
Management Management
Figure 10.12 Project management methodologies.

processes are evolving, as shown in Figure

10.13. The nebulous Hybrid lives in-between Evolving
and tries to leverage the strengths and con-
straints of each to improve efficiencies. Agile
Requirements
Figure 10.14 compares these two
management approaches by highlighting Hybrid
some of their key differences.
When considering the spectrum of trans- Waterfall
portation projects, from large and complex
Clearly
megaprojects to local streetscapes and Processes
Def ined Evolving
everything in-between, it is obvious that
one size does not fit all. Pending the size, Figure 10.13 Project approach comparison.
Waterfall (Traditional) Agile
Approach Predictive Adaptive

Focus Process-centric People-centric
Prioritization Process over product Product over process
Team Mindset Disciplined Innovative
Management Style Controlling Facilitating
Management Philosophy Command and Control Leadership and Collaboration
Goal Predictability and optimization Innovation and adaptability
Organizational Values… Governance Work Done
Methodology Building Blocks Work Breakdown Structure Feature Breakdown
Project Requirements Clearly defined very early Evolving during project
Project Scope Fixed Variable
Project Scope Risk Low High
Project Schedule Variable Fixed
Project Schedule Risk High Low
Project Budget Variable Fixed
Project Budget Risk High Low
Team Composition Specialists Cross-functional
Workflows Linear and Sequential Iterative
Stakeholder Involvement Low High
Attitude toward change Slow and resistant to change Flexible and embraces change
Ability to respond to change Time-consuming and difficult Quick and straightforward
Guiding question “How” things get done “Why” things get done
Control Approach Documented and Quantitative Internalized and Qualitative
Size Larger teams and projects Smaller teams and projects
Issue Escalation and Decisions Time-consuming Prompt
Documentation Requirements High Low
Figure 10.14 Waterfall compared to Agile.

specifics, and complexity of any transportation project, there may be certain Waterfall or
Agile aspects a PM may want to leverage and embrace.
It is interesting to note that many of the comparisons in the Figure 10.14 are organiza-
tional decisions. These portfolio-wide decisions are often based on the company’s cultural
precedents and risk tolerances.
One could assert that Agile strengths are already being leveraged in a hybrid approach in
Design-Build project development and delivery. In these projects, schedules can be crashed
as disciplines are often pressed to work concurrently, and in a more iterative fashion.
For most transportation owner-operators, on Design-Bid-Build projects, there are some
inescapable truths that entrench waterfall methodologies. The project development process
is paramount as it is carefully crafted to satisfy all applicable federal, state, and local require-
ments and design standards within a wide range of subject areas. Project durations can be
lengthy. Team turnover can be high. Documentation is paramount to satisfy the various
federal and state reviewing and auditing entities. The flow of federal and state funds is
extremely prescribed. Yet, stakeholder engagement can and does influence the project scope
halfway through design. Performance-Based Design does encourage innovation and flexi-
bility in solution approaching throughout the design. Changing market conditions does
require flexibility and nimbleness in order balance resources and priorities to successfully
develop and deliver projects, programs, and portfolios. So how do we leverage some of the
benefits and practices of Agile into the necessary Waterfall structure, processes, and roles?
10.6.5 Altitude Matters

As an organization struggles with how to leverage and embrace aspects of Agile project
management, it is important to recognize that approaches and implementations may be
different at different altitudes within an organization. This means there may intentionally
be differences at the project, program, and portfolio levels.
Especially for larger and more mature transportation organizations, Waterfall may be
entrenched with extensive procedures, practices, and PDP. There are good reasons why
this is so, and should remain so at the portfolio level. The portfolio big picture is to pursue
your organization’s mission by successfully executing program objectives. Inherently, this
requires accurate waterfall schedules to ensure the right amount of the right kind of money
is at the right place at the right time to keep all projects moving forward. The culture at the
portfolio level may be inherently at odds with Agile. Meanwhile, at the other end of the
spectrum, many organizations encourage innovation and enable flexibility at the project
team level. They want projects to be nimble and adaptive to stakeholder input and chang-
ing conditions. As such, PMs often seek to leverage and incorporate Agile strengths. In this
scenario, the program level may be caught in the middle trying to balance portfolio
Waterfall requirements with project Agile characteristics, as shown in Figure 10.15. One
example is a waterfall schedule of meaningful task spans of significance (e.g. – the spans
between Scoping meeting (30% plans), Public Hearing/Design Approval (50% plans), Field
Inspection (60% plans), Pre-Advertisement Conference (90% plans), and Advertisement
(100% plans), while granting project teams more flexibility between these milestones.
Culture, leadership, acknowledgment of realities, and vertical concurrence of success cri-
teria are crucial elements to successfully implementing Hybrid solutions. While it may
seem unwise to embrace different

project management approaches at the Waterfall Hybrid Agile
project, program, and portfolio level,
Project Team
this stratified approach can be quite
effective provided each level is consis- Program
tent in objective, flexible in approach, Port f olio

and collaborative and supportive in
practice. Predictive Adaptive
Understanding these realities, one
Figure 10.15 Varying PM methodologies at
significant challenge can be identi-
different levels.
fying and implementing practical ways
to secure vertical concurrence of goals
while enabling flexibility of approach. One needs to first acknowledge contextual real-
ities, givens, and constraints in order to create a culture where scope, schedule, and budget
changes can be candidly discussed and addressed. Especially within public agencies, it
can be challenging to create a safe space for work product, which encourages positioning
and game-playing and is enormously counterproductive and inefficient. Pursuing trans-
parency, responsible public stewardship, and active stakeholder engagement can uninten-
tionally inhibit candid conversations of project change. It can be difficult to break down
organizational and process silos to embrace an iterative mindset that relies on nimble-
ness of cross-functional teams. While each transportation organization that moves toward
Hybrid may settle on slightly different solutions, there will be consistent similarities. They
will all almost certainly modify their change management thresholds and practices, adjust
their performance metrics, and initiate a bold cultural change.
10.6.6 Concurrent Engineering

Most transportation organizations have an established Project Development Process (PDP).
These are almost all inherently Waterfall, and for good reason. Many of the tasks in a trans-
portation PDP are prompted or driven by a federal, state, and local policies, procedures,
and standards.
Concurrent engineering focuses on conducting tasks in a simultaneous, rather than con-
secutive, manner. The ultimate purpose of this is to increase efficiencies, optimize resources,
and expedite project development. Concurrent engineering does not inherently change the
existing PDP. It contains the same tasks, but looks at the PDP from a slightly different perspec-
tive. One may assert concurrent engineering is just practicing smart schedule management
principles. And they would be right. Concurrent engineering aggressively leverages Critical
Path scheduling to identify concurrent tasks that will minimize the critical path.
The reality is that this does not always naturally happen. Many organizations, PMs, and
team members work to the schedules. They don’t always act proactively, or in a way that is
best for the project. If a hydraulics study takes 2 months, they may choose to wait until they
receive all the survey data. Another option is to start the hydraulics study when a critical
mass of survey data is received such that progress can be made in an unimpeded way until
the additional data is received. Another common practice is for the hydraulics study to be
delivered within the two-month deadline, even if it is completed in one month. Task owners
don’t own the float. PMs don’t own the float. In project centric environments, the organi-
zation owns the float.
Organizations can use concurrent engineering to create fantastic ways to graphically
depict the PDP is a slightly different way. This is most often done by discipline, with each
disciplines’ tasks shown concurrently with the others. Especially for the PM, this can be a
tremendously useful tool. While each discipline is making progress, swimming in their
own lane, a PM can and should be searching for ways to expedite the schedule by identi-
fying opportunities to leverage floats in a way that encourages concurrent progress to opti-
mize the critical path. This focus is empowered when paired with other good project
management practices, such as proactive risk management and preemptive stakeholder
engagement.
10.6.7 Changing Performance Metrics

One of the biggest questions a transportation organization faces when moving toward
hybrid project management is what to do about performance metrics. This is important
because many organizations’ performance metrics do more than reflect realities, they often
drive progress, shape culture, and influence behaviors. It can be challenging to strike an
acceptable balance between meaningful project development process milestones, funding
requirements, focused organizational objectives, and agile methodologies. One reason
many organizations struggle is the underlying workflows. Where waterfall is predictable,
agile is inherently iterative, see Figure 10.16.
Waterfall
Time
Agile
Figure 10.16 Waterfall vs. Agile.
This creates a clear paradigm conflict for performance metrics. By nature, many
performance metrics compare what actually happened to that which was expected. While
there can be significant contextual nuances with each of these concepts and compared
fields, we will refer to that which is expected as the baseline. Be it a schedule, budget, or
some other entity, the baseline is that by which actuals, or more current information, are
compared to determine acceptable progress or success, however that may be defined or
endorsed by the organization.
There are many ways in which organizations assign and prioritize baselines. Some orga-
nizations capture budget and schedule baselines at Scoping. In these instances, these three
triple constraint components are formalized in a scoping document that passes through a
prescribed approval process. Scoping approval then sets the project’s scope, schedule, and
budget baselines. Other organizations may use other triggers to capture baselines. Many
organizations set performance metric schedule and budget baselines based upon the
planned Fiscal Year for advertisement. In these instances, previous baselines may be cap-
tured, but are not prioritized as those for the current Fiscal Year. Still other organizations
use different triggers to capture scope, schedule, and budget baselines at different points of
project development. For instance, scope may be captured at time of project selection from
an application-based prioritization, the prioritized schedule baseline may be captured at
Public Hearing, while the prioritized budget baseline may be when the project is in the
planned current Fiscal Year for advertisement.
There are a few fundamental decision points. When will baseline(s) be captured? What
are the performance metric tolerances? And under what circumstances will the organiza-
tion’s change management policy enable adjustments of the baseline(s)?
The iterative nature of Agile encourages multiple points to “reset” baselines. Scoping is
obvious. Design Approval, which is after Public Hearing, is another reasonable choice. At
this point, the public has been engaged, and by its very nature, Design Approval provides
concurrence with the design and approval to move forward. Other potentially logical
choices may be the major 30%, 60%, and 90% design reviews. At each of these milestones,
the different disciplines come together and the project is momentarily “static” during the
plan reviews. Organizations should strive to intentionally choose points that are logical
and reasonable. One key factor is when and how data is collected. You may decide a
baseline(s) should be captured at Design Approval, but that only works if your systems and
workflows support capturing meaningful baseline(s) at that point in development.
Another choice organizations must make is whether to capture scope, schedule, and
budget baselines at the same time, or individually capture them at different points of
development. As long as it is an intentional decision with sound logic that supports your
organization’s mission and objectives, there may not be any absolute, or more correct,
option. Ideally, you would only reset baseline(s) at a point of clarity where risks have been
mitigated, design has significantly progressed, or key decisions were secured.
Another way organizations can implement a hybrid approach in performance metrics is to
expand their change management procedures. This often resonates with more mature water-
fall organizations that value formal approvals and robust documentation. By expanding the
criteria by which scope, schedule, or budget baselines can be revisited, an organization can
retain process control while embracing flexibility. This approach can encourage innovation,
while discouraging a performance metric “get-out-of-jail-free” card by automatically grant-
ing a baseline reset that accommodates poor project management or progress.
Another option is to integrate contextual realities with agile approaches by leveraging tol-
erance logic in existing waterfall metrics. Consider the budget baseline. Let’s assume an
organization acknowledges the reality and adopts a cone of uncertainty. If their cone of
uncertainty states a preliminary cost estimate is +/− 30%, then performance metrics should
reflect this understanding. Similarly, if the cone of uncertainty specifies an expected accu-
racy of +/− 15% at Public Hearing, then performance logic should reflect this understanding.
The logic behind automated performance metrics can be modified to accommodate chang-
ing estimates within these organizationally approved tolerances.
10.6.8 Conclusion
Transportation project development is predominately Waterfall, and will remain so.
However, industry changes beckon for a more Agile approach. It is now common for
project changes in budget, scope, or schedule to be dictated to the project, throughout the
project. When this occurs, the processes need to be nimble and adaptive enough to respond.
More mature organizations recognize the inherent inconsistencies and opportunities
within these changing industry dynamics, and are choosing to pursue a Hybrid approach.
The basis of hybrid project management is to acknowledge contextual realities, and then
leverage the strengths of Waterfall and Agile to improve efficiencies and streamline
development. While the challenges transportation owner-operators face may be similar,
each organization will likely follow their own path as they strive to responsively and
responsibly move forward. It will be fascinating to see how the industry evolves and
embraces the best of Waterfall and Agile.
10.7 Performance Metrics
“Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted
counts.”
– Albert Einstein
10.7.1 The End Goal

The idea of performance metrics is imminently reasonable and seemingly rather straight-
forward. But then it quickly gets complicated.
Is your project successful? This is a relatively simple question that can be very difficult to
answer. Is your project healthy? An even simpler question that can be even more challeng-
ing to answer. How do you know? What criteria is important? What do you measure? How
do you measure it? Are you measuring the right things, at the right times, for the right rea-
sons? And to what end?
Performance Metrics should collect data that succinctly and accurately answers specific
questions. Start at the end and work backward. What is the question you want answered?
Just because data has always been, or can be, collected and measured doesn’t make it
valuable. In order to create meaningful metrics, you need to ensure you are collecting the
right data and using in the right way. There are potential dangers if you go the other way.
If you start from the data you have or can collect, one can easily stretch the use of that data
to infer answers to questions it cannot support.
Over time, the use of a metric may evolve. This may create a situation where the practical
purpose of a metric has shifted to a result that extends beyond what the original data can
support. Beware these intended and unintended consequences. Consider the desire to
track educational competencies in public schools. Standardized tests are created. Rewards
are established to encourage higher individual and school performances. Positive results
and trend lines are publicized to celebrate successes. All well-intentioned efforts. But at
what point do some schools stop teaching the entirety of the subject to concentrate on
focused test preparation? At what point does the metric stop reflecting reality and start
driving schools’ decisions and actions? Is this a good thing or a bad thing? Some may assert
a bit of both. Regardless, the metric of standardized test scores has evolved to empower the
standardized test writers to drive the curriculum and modify teaching practices and prior-
ities in many schools. Similarly, does your organization’s on-time metrics reflect reality or
drive decisions and influence behaviors? What master are you serving – good business or
the metric? Are you making good decisions, or is the metric driving your actions? Is the
data being used to answer questions that stretch beyond the data’s meaning and reasonable
influence? Beware the tail wagging the dog.
It is easy to lose the forest for the trees. If a project makes its schedule but blows its
budget, was it a success? If the PE is completed under budget and the project is advertised
on-time, but the quality of the plans is such that construction becomes a drawn-out,
change-order infested quagmire, was the project a success? Would your answer change if
you were the PM who brought the project to Ad on-time and under-budget before hand-
ing it over to Construction? There is rarely a single performance metric that tells the
whole story.
10.7.2 The Road to Hell Is Paved with Good Intentions

The old cliché says, “That which gets measured gets done.” Peter Drucker later modified this
to, “What gets measured gets managed.” One important question to answer regarding any
performance metric is, to what end? If done right they can provide a picture of your progress,
and insight on how to enhance your efficiencies. They can bring clarity and focus on what
you do well and where you have growth opportunities. They can encourage transparency
and promote accountability. They can document successes and generate healthy competi-
tion. They can balance reality and drive productivity and innovation. However, always
remember that performance measures are not your product. Performance measures are not
your deliverables. The process draws you in. In the world of performance metrics, it is easy
to become overly focused on the production of information to the point you drown in the
data. If not careful, the servant can quickly become the master. Remember also that met-
rics can subtly or overtly shift the focus, change the culture, or alter professional behavior
in an organization, program, or individual projects. Be observant and aware of a metric’s
intended and unintended consequences.
10.7.3 Organizational Maturity

There are different data science, or data analytics, maturity models, but most of them share the
same underlying fundamental tenets. For our purposes, the specifics of the different models
are less important than the general overtones. As your organization’s data maturity level rises,
so should the tangible value and benefits you realize. However, each level also brings inherent
constraints. This is important to understand as most transportation organizations are solidly
positioned on the left side of Figure 10.17.
Descriptive Analytics strive to answer the question of “What Happened?” Typically, this
reactive reporting is static or passive in nature. Organizations at this maturity level are sys-
tematically or unintentionally decentralized. Underlying the data analytics is a fundamental
Organizational Data What I don't

Maturity Model know?
What should Cognitive AI /

we do? Machine Learning
tion
What could Prescriptive
happen? Analytics iza
tim
Value
Op
Why did it Predictive
happen? Analytics ght
esi
For
What Diagnostic
happened? Analytics t
igh
Descriptive
Ins
Analytics
ht
dsig
Hin
Difficulty
Figure 10.17 Performance metrics organizational maturity.
reliance on manually created and manipulated reports, often in simple or highly custom-
ized spreadsheets. Consequently, individuals at every level create their own spreadsheets
to track their own operational issues. This inconsistent environment inevitably leads to
endless conversations as to the origin and accuracy of one’s numbers, at the expense of
focusing on what story the data can convey.
Diagnostic Analytics strive to answer the question of “Why it Happened?” This dynamic
reporting is a giant leap forward for an organization as it fundamentally shifts to using data
analytics to guide decisions and drive progress. Data owners are defined. Data sharing is
encouraged. Business Intelligence (BI) tools are leveraged so everyone has the same data.
Dashboards are created and embraced. While originally conceived to convey a simplified
view (think of an old car dashboard with a handful of dials clearly conveying specific
information), many become a behemoth of a data dump to answer a growing list of ques-
tions, enabling users to dive as deep as they desire. This means more users need to become
analysts to discern what is really going on. BI and reporting expertise become concentrated
in smaller, siloed pockets as users struggle to reconcile the accuracy of the data as filtered
through complicated business logic against the story the Dashboard is telling. Any apparent
disconnects between the Dashboard results and the perceived reality can create skepticism
of the tools and advance the idea of multiple sources of truth. Remember the end goal is not
a flashy report or integrated Dashboard. Just because the data is accessible, doesn’t mean it
is worth reporting. What question are you asking? And are you really answering it?
Predictive Analytics strive to answer the question of “What could happen?” This level
of maturity surfaces when organizations transition to focus on understanding what
information different employee roles need to be successful. Here the data is telling a story,
bringing IT and the Business together to serve the employees by answering their most
relevant questions. This requires aggressively combining different systemic data sources
across the organization. However, as opposed to working to get as much data in everyone’s
hands as possible, this strips down the data to that which is essential for different roles.
Strategically filtering the data streamlines performance and allows more focused decision
making. This data evolution requires a consistent view of data throughout the organiza-
tion, and ultimately enables more proactive insights and measurable results.
Prescriptive Analytics strive to answer the question of “What should we do?” Here intel-
ligence emerges from the data that can rapidly add value to your organization. Employees
should feel supported by proactive information the data provides that can even be tailored
down to the individual. This maturity level relies on collaborative, cross-functional cooper-
ation, which is built upon a reliable trust of the data.
Cognitive AI/Machine Learning strive to answer the question of “What I don’t know?” At
this maturity level, the organization is using AI and Machine Learning in real and mean-
ingful ways. This transformational environment should allow the organization to reach
new levels of optimization by focusing employees on high-value efforts and automating
low-value tasks. Approval hierarchies and organizational structures become flatter.
Governance becomes less restrictive and more cross-functional. Employees are empow-
ered to nimbly and effectively use the data-driven culture and resources. Know that this
maturity level remains aspirational for most organizations and industries.
10.7.4 Apples to Apples

One basic tenet of performance metrics is comparison. To measure progress, evaluate
performance, and predict future trends, you must be able to compare one data marker to
another. The characteristics, precision, and accuracy of the data is paramount. We all know you
shouldn’t compare apples to oranges. Yet this happens all the time in metrics. Obtaining a true
comparison of apples to apples can be difficult, especially over time. Sometimes you have to
settle for comparing different varieties of apples, but you can’t compare apples to oranges and
draw meaning or insightful conclusions. Yet this is what many organizations regularly do. This
situation is often exacerbated as those creating, assembling, and reporting the metrics often do
not fully understand the power, meaning, and limitations of the data they are processing.
Every engineer learns of significant figures, and how they detail the precision of the
number. A young engineer may design the curb elevation detail to a thousandth of an inch.
While this may be accurate in the computer model, the meaningful design elevation is only
as accurate as the contractor can build it. And the true elevation is only as accurate as the
surveyors can document the as-builts. Similarly, someone may determine the exact loca-
tion of an underground utility based upon the fact GIS clearly shows the bend to be trian-
gulated 4.87ʹ from feature one, 13.24ʹ from feature two, and 9.58ʹ from feature three. Would
you be as confident of the location if you knew the GIS utility layer had an accuracy of plus/
minus three feet and the aerial photographs were slightly stretched to match the GIS-
referenced map tiles? GIS and other applications are powerful and incredibly useful tools.
But there is a reason you still send out ground survey crews and dig test holes. Detailed
design requires a higher level of accuracy than most GIS models can provide. Experienced
engineers know and understand significant figures during design, using the correct data
precision for the task at hand. Yet this concept is often disregarded in metrics. You can
compare a metric of 8.6 to one of 9.843, and readily calculate the delta is 1.243. In this
example, the 0.043 of the difference has no meaning, while providing an incorrect sense of
accuracy. Yet many organizations make decisions and take actions based on this 0.043.
10.7.5 Innumeracy
John Allen Paulos’ book, Innumeracy, Mathematical Illiteracy and Its Consequences, details
how even well-educated people often struggle to understand basic mathematical principles,
the meaning of numbers, and their associated probabilities. This pervasive innumeracy reg-
ularly results in misinformed decisions at all levels. Most metrics are not well understood.
In large part, this is due to innumeracy in those who create and interpret the metrics.
Magnitude matters. Engineers often use units and assume the data consumers under-
stand. In reality, most engineers can likely not truly grasp the magnitude difference bet-
ween an environmental contaminant reading in ppm (parts per million) vs. ppb (parts per
billion). The general public most assuredly would be less enlightened. The same is true for
other units. Are 12,000 vehicles per day reasonable or excessive for your project’s ADT
(Average Daily Traffic) volume? Is 18,000 cfs (cubic feet per second) peak stream flow rea-
sonable or excessive for the proposed road crossing? Is a $1.5 million change order reason-
able or excessive on a $20 million project? Most struggle to fully grasp the magnitude of
numbers, particularly in context. This means most can be swayed to accept an asserted
agenda that cites most any number.
Many lack foundational arithmetic, algebraic, and geometric skills. This can translate to
basic miscalculations in those that create, interpret, and consume data and performance met-
rics. This is particularly tricky when paired with moral equivalency. For instance, an evalua-
tion of the anticipated benefits of light rail or biking facilities may appear convincing when
compared to automobiles; however, most do not normalize for cost, usage, and volume. You
cannot compare siloed data in an equivalent way without properly scaling the comparison.
Percentages are especially susceptible to misinterpretations. Traffic congestion is down
15%. Projects are now being delivered 20% faster. Project development is now 75% on target. One
may assume these three examples are conveying good news. Are they? Benjamin Disraeli
said, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.” On their own, these three
examples convey no context as to what is really being evaluated, and to what it is being com-
pared. You would have no idea if this is good news or not? To conclude otherwise you must
disregard logic or fill in the many gaps with your assumptions or predispositions.
There are two common innumeracy traps that can make percentages especially mis-
leading. First, the denominator matters. If a couple has their child come home from college,
their volume of dirty dishes may increase by 50%, but when the child goes back to college
the couple only experiences a 33% reduction in dirty dishes. Assuming equal contributions,
the volume of dirty dishes generated by the child didn’t change, but the percentages don’t
appear to add up. Second, you can’t average averages, but that doesn’t stop many from
doing it. If look closely, you will likely be stunned how many metrics and reports rely on
averaging averages, a clear violation of mathematical principles.
10.7.6 Objective vs. Subjective Measures

Difficulties often arise when organizations attempt to convey subjective matters in objective
truths. In these situations, it can be easy for performance metric creators and consumers to
overvalue the resulting numeric information. This is often exacerbated when metric crea-
tors attempt to oversimplify the context and meaning of the data. Some situations cannot
be accurately simplified. Road rage is up 25%. Can you accurately define, determine, and
quantify the collective subjective emotional state to consistently define and delineate road
rage in an accurate and comparative manner?
As a general rule, objective data can be measured objectively while subjective data should
be measured subjectively. Expressing traffic volumes in a detailed statistical analysis makes
sense as traffic data is inherently numbers based. Accurately capturing the tenor, urgency,
and level of passion of citizens at a Public Hearing is a different kind of challenge. Consider
a public hearing in which 100 people attend. 60 submit comment sheets. Based upon
the subjective check boxes (strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, strongly agree), it
appears 30 are generally in favor of the project. Of the 60 comments, 120 different specific
issues were mentioned. 30 people spoke. 10 endorsed the project; 20 spoke against some
aspect of the project. All speakers inferred they were speaking on behalf of others. Did
the public hearing go well? Is the public in favor of the project? Many times, the provided
answer frames the data to support the preference of whoever is responding. It can be chal-
lenging for an objective statistical analysis of the data to accurately tell the whole story.
Attempting to objectively summarize subjective issues often results in the temptation to
attach weight to metrics that they were not intended to carry or cannot accurately support.
Math, definitions, assumptions, and reality matter.
10.7.7 Outputs vs. Outcomes

One underlying tenet of performance metrics is to clearly delineate outputs versus out-
comes. Lack of clarity can cause systemic confusion, frustration, and cynicism.
Outputs are the tangible product or progress. These are deliverables and the things that
happen. They are quantitative, measurable, and well-defined activities that requires con-
sumption of resources. When did the Field Inspection meeting occur? Was the project
advertised on time? Outputs are primarily handled at the project management level.
Outcomes are the results that reflect the impact or value of the product. These are the
consequences of the outputs, and should convey the impacts and effectiveness to achieve
the organizational mission and goals. They can be qualitative in nature. Did the funding
source satisfy its objectives? Are your customers happy? Outcomes are primarily handled
at the Program Management level.
Outputs precede outcomes. Outputs are the products, services, and activities of the orga-
nization that lead to achieving the outcomes. For instance, outputs of the number of miles
paved and number of bridges repaired may lead to the outcomes of number of accidents
and reduced travel time for the traveling public.
Difficulties arise when outputs are confused with outcomes that can permeate an organi-
zation and its culture. An organization can quickly, and unknowingly, value and pursue the
wrong things. A good place to start is asking if your organization has made a conscious dis-
tinction between outputs and outcomes. There is value in deliberately debating and deciding
at what level should outputs and outcomes be evaluated. Reason dictates there is benefit in
appropriately filtering hierarchically nested information. For instance, does it make sense
for executive leadership to be concentrating on outputs such as individual project schedule
tasks and details on deliverables? Similarly, does it make sense for PMs to be focusing on the
outcomes of how efficiently the organization is executing the multiyear improvement plan?
Carefully crafted outputs should consistently aggregate upward to outcomes that can satisfy
your organization’s missions and overarching goals.
10.7.8 Organizational Motivations for Performance Metrics

One aspect of performance metrics that is often overlooked is the organization’s motivation
to create and value the effort. Some are motivated by a desire to provide greater account-
ability, transparency, and visibility to the public. Some are motivated to build or restore
credibility and demonstrate proper management and responsible leadership. Some are
motivated to educate the public and improve the perception of the organization’s
performance. Some are motivated to enhance prestige or expertise among other agencies or
peers. Some are motivated to streamline operations and optimize resources and their orga-
nization’s positive impact. Some are motivated by a desire to evaluate employees. Some are
motivated by pride. Some by fear. Some by strategic design. Of course, all of these may be
internally driven or externally dictated. Regardless, an organization’s motivations will
likely shape how the metric is created, how it is valued among staff, and how resulting
insights are utilized by leadership. It is important to note that an organization’s motivation
may change over time. Mature organizations will be self-aware of these changes, and con-
sider modifying their metrics to remain consistent with their shifting motivations.
An organization’s motivations may also dictate how a metric is framed. Is it a mirror that
reflects your current state? Is it a carrot that inspires and drives your organization toward
excellence? Or is it a stick that your employees consider punitive. Intense focus on metric-
based achievement can bring unintended consequences to an organization, its culture, and
the behavior of its employees.
10.7.9 Metric Creators vs. Consumers

As organizations mature in their data science advances, it is common for the metric crea-
tors to be concentrated in areas where this expertise can be best utilized across the organi-
zation. Complicated and impressive looking reports and dashboards are created by the data
manipulation experts to be consumed by the end user. While this certainly can make good
business sense, in some cases those creating the metric do not fully understand the nature
of the data they are leveraging. Reports should answer questions, not be created because
the data can readily be packaged in a clever and visually appealing way. Data scientists
often do not understand the nuances of the data upon which they are reporting. There are
some basic questions that are often not adequately asked or answered.
● Is the data accurate? For example, you may have very accurate GIS data search results
but then summarily dismiss the inherent accuracy of the source GIS data.
● Is the data being entered in a timely manner? For example, are schedule task finish dates
being entered into the schedule the day the task is completed, or does the promptness of
the data entry vary?
● Does the workflow inherently constrain the accuracy or timeliness of the data? For
example, how long is reasonable to wait in your organization before reconciling all
invoice and payment information before one summarizes current project financial
metrics?
● Are you using the data field in the same way as the end user would define the field? For
example, is the project budget reflecting allocated amounts, obligated amounts, the latest
estimate with or without contingencies and inflation, or something completely different?
10.7.10 Metric Logic

The practical realities of constructing consistent and comprehensive metric logic can
quickly complicate simple questions. The logic behind a metric is an aspect that those
who consume the data rarely consider. Yet the assumptions and logic rules that build the
metric greatly influence the observed trends, ensuing insights, resulting conclusions, and
subsequent actions.
Before you even begin, what data should be included? A simple question with a compli-
cated answer. Think of a project. Or start with an even simpler level…when is a task on-
time or late? This is a simple question with a complicated and qualification-filled answer.
The simple answer is, was it completed before or after it was supposed to be completed? But
compared to what? For this example, let’s assume there is universal agreement on what
constitutes the completion of the task, whose responsibility it is to complete the task, and
whose responsibility it is to report its completion, and everyone fulfills their role in a timely
manner. How do you determine when the task was supposed to be completed? When and
how do you establish the baseline against which progress is compared? Is this consistent
across all projects and programs? Do your change management policies and procedures
allow for modifications that support or erode the integrity of the data and resulting metrics
and summaries? And for these summaries, when is progress counted, when it is completed,
or when it was planned to be completed? The answer to these sample questions can greatly
impact project and program decisions in order to prioritize short-term results and long-term
sustainability. Consistency matters. For instance, switching definitions midstream can dra-
matically improve short-term results while jeopardizing long-term stability, while tainting
the historic data for accurate trend analysis.
Performance metrics use data to tell a story. Even when the right data is selected, the
resulting metric can still tell a misleading story to the data consumers. Talk with the
everyday practitioners to ensure data is promptly and accurately captured. When devel-
oping a metric or dashboard, it is critical to include the right Subject Matter Experts
(SMEs) to ensure you are measuring the right data, in the correct context, and applying
logic in a way that retains the integrity of the data and tells a meaningful and accurate
story.
10.7.11 Beware Simpson’s Paradox

Simpson’s Paradox is a statistical phenomenon in which consistent trends appear in dis-
creet groups, but disappear or reverse when the data groups are combined. This is different
than apparent statistical inconsistencies within the same data set. An example of this may
be when evaluating the durations of project schedule tasks. Pending the specifics of the
single sample set, you may find a task’s average duration is longer than the 75th percentile.
The Simpson’s Paradox involves multiple data sets or variables. Consider two high school
baseball players, John and Rick. John has a better batting average than Rick every year, yet
Rick has a higher career average over these same four years, as shown in Figure 10.18.
At first glance, the above chart makes no sense. It may seem counterintuitive at best, or
even impossible, but it isn’t when you look at the math behind the percentages, as shown
in Figure 10.19.
Player Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Career
John 0.250 0.273 0.375 0.421 0.317

Rick 0.235 0.242 0.344 0.403 0.339
Figure 10.18 Simpson’s paradox – table 1.
Player Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Career
John 0.250 0.273 0.375 0.421 0.317

7/28 12/44 12/32 8/19 39/123
Rick 0.235 0.242 0.344 0.403 0.339
4/17 8/33 21/61 29/72 62/183
Figure 10.19 Simpson’s paradox – table 2.
Understanding that this reality does occasionally occur should prompt us to confront the
fundamental question of which data should we value, the aggregated or the partitioned?
The answer depends upon the story behind the data. This cuts to the heart of effective
performance metrics, that being the insights from the resulting metric should not extend
beyond the inherent constraints of the data itself. This is another reason why those creating
the performance metric should work closely with the data generators and data owners to
ensure the weight and meaning of the data is accurately reflected and leveraged.
Pavlides and Perlman demonstrated that in a random 2 × 2 × 2 table with uniform distri-
bution, Simpson’s paradox will occur once every sixty times. Meanwhile Kock demon-
strated in path models (i.e., models generated by path analysis) with two predictors and
one criterion variable, Simpson’s Paradox would occur once every eight times. While
Simpson’s Paradox is not common, it does occur. As such, experienced performance metric
creators and consumers resist the urge to quickly infer causation, and double check the
assumptions and logic before waving the statistically significant banner.
10.7.12 What Works

Many transportation organizations are data rich and information poor. Among these, a
common business objective is to better leverage and utilize the available data. Ideally it
wouldn’t stop there. Organizations should strive to advance up the data science maturity
ladder. Accurate data should become meaningful information that leads to thoughtful
insights that allows strategic foresight and enables the progression to new levels of organiza-
tional optimization. The experience should become knowledge that translates into wisdom.
Transportation projects can be far more challenging to track and measure than many
other engineering disciplines. One of the foundational tenets of traditional Industrial
Engineering is to define a process with discreet tasks that can be meticulously measured.
This data can then be mathematically evaluated and optimized to ultimately decrease cost
while increasing the speed, efficiency, and quality of the process and product. This can be
a challenge when making widgets in a factory. It becomes significantly more challenging
when evaluating a transportation project that has multiple funding sources, extends for
years, and has a significant number of stakeholders, many of which have conflicting goals
and success criteria. This is complicated as many of these factors in a transportation project
are outside of your direct control. Don’t let yourself get overwhelmed. Focus on what you
know is true.
The PM is responsible to develop and deliver the project within the triple constraint of
budget, scope, and schedule. Accordingly, transportation project performance metrics
should start here. The PM must also consider the resulting impacts to risk, resources, and
quality. Your organization may choose to extend performance metrics to these areas as well.
Then you may wish to expand to others.
Choosing the right metrics is as much an art as it is a science. Resist the urge to pick
metrics that are indicative of progress. Instead choose metrics that drive progress. For in-
stance, does Federal Right-of-Way Authorization worth tracking? From a funding perspec-
tive…absolutely. To ensure the authorization is secured before proceeding with associated
Right-of-Way costs…absolutely. To track the development of the project…not so much.
Since the federal authorization creates a schedule start-no-earlier-than constraint for some
downstream tasks, it is important; but it does not drive progress since securing the autho-
rization may occur long before other tasks. While it may create a schedule constraint, it
rarely drives the critical path.
The specific metrics your organization will choose are highly dependent upon your avail-
able data and priorities. The higher the stakes, the more important it is to track progress. It
can be challenging to weigh competing metrics. For instance, a project that is delivered
on-time and on-budget may be a short-term success but long-term failure if the quality is
substandard. At the program and portfolio level, the focus should shift from individual
project progress to efficiently executing the organization’s multiyear improvement plan.
The big picture is to develop the projects so you can balance the program so the right
money is the right place at the right time to develop and deliver projects that improve safety
and positively impact our communities and commerce. Governments bear an ethical obli-
gation to be responsible stewards of public funds. The same schedule, budget, and scope
metrics at the project level can often be scaled up to a program or portfolio level. Various
Business Intelligence objects allow detailed diagnostic analysis that can easily transition
from program-wide views down to project specifics.
10.7.13 Earned Value Management (EVM)

Earned Value Management (EVM)is the Holy Grail of performance metrics when it comes
to capturing the overall health of a project. That is because it cleverly combines time and
money in a single metric. EVM can be a challenge to fully implement, but the results can
be well worth it. Tailored EVM is common on unique Design-Build projects, bur far more
difficult to enact across programs or portfolios. It usually requires a robust systemic data
infrastructure and more mature organizational processes and procedures.
Figure 10.20 shows a typical EVM graph. Figure 10.21 provides explanations of what is
shown. Understanding these relationships unlocks the full power of this tool.
k
Ris
Project Budget
Schedule Variance
(SV)
Budget At
Actual Cost Completion
Cost
(AC) Cost (BAC)

Variance
(CV)
Planned Value
(PV)
Earned Value
(EV)
Current Planned Estimated

Time Completion Completion
Figure 10.20 EVM overview.
Name Abbreviation Description
Planned Value PV Value of planned work scheduled to be completed

Earned Value EV Planned value of all work that has been completed
Actual Costs AC Actual cost of all work completed
Budget At Completion BAC Total value of the planned work (e.g., project budget)
Figure 10.21 EVM definitions.
EVM is built upon four fundamental ideas that are measured in dollars on the “Cost”
y-axis across “Time” x-axis. These four measures can then be manipulated to provide
meaningful analysis and valuable forecasts.
PV is determined by summing the value of the planned work that is to be completed at
any point on the baseline schedule. This can be calculated by the organization as a tem-
plate based on past experience and specific project criteria, or by summing the budget
assigned to each work breakdown structure component, or scheduled task, and cross-ref-
erencing it to the baseline schedule. The PV serves as the EVM baseline, and enables
schedule progress analysis.
EV is the measure of work that has actually been completed. The EV is the corresponding
sum of completed tasks. This is graphed on EVM, and then compared to the PV to deter-
mine project health by enabling schedule and budget progress analysis.
AC are the actual costs incurred by the project at any time. This is graphed on EVM and
used to determine the financial health of the project by enabling budget progress analysis.
BAC is the project budget. This is a specific point on the EVM graph that is a specific
budget amount at specific time on the schedule, that being at Award or at project comple-
tion pending the span of the EVM analysis.
These four measures can be used to the following standard variances that can be espe-
cially insightful to PMs. Cost Variance (CV) is described in Figure 10.22. Schedule Variance
(SV) is described in Figure 10.23. They are graphically represented in Figure 10.20.
Cost Variance (CV) compares the Earned Value (EV) to the

Actual Costs (AC). This represents how the project budget is
performing relative to the work performed.
CV = EV - AC
Bad (Over Budget) Good (Under Budget)
Negative 0 Positive
On-Budget
Figure 10.22 Cost Variance (CV).
Schedule Variance (SV) compares the Earned Value (EV) to

the planned Value (PV). This represents the value of work
by which the project is ahead or behind of the planned
schedule.
SV = EV - PV
Bad (Behind Schedule) Good (Ahead of Schedule)
Negative 0 Positive
On-Budget
Figure 10.23 Schedule Variance (SV).
These fundamental measures can also be used to calculate standard indexes that provide
additional insight into the health of the project. Cost Performance Index (CPI) is described
in Figure 10.24. Schedule Performance Index (SPI) is described in Figure 10.25. Figure
10.26 shows how these two indexes can provide project insights.
EVM also provides established ways to forecast the project’s progression that the PM can
use to proactively identify situations that may require corrective action. The following are
the EVM standard forward-looking measurements.
● Variance At Completion (VAC) is the forecast of what the CV will be specifically at the
point of project completion. This represents the expected amount the final cost will be
over or under the original budget. The formula is VAC = BAC − EAC. This essentially is
the old budget minus the projected budget.
Cost Performance Index (CPI) is a budget analysis ratio

that compares the amo unt of money scheduled to be spent
(PV) against that which was actually spent (AC).
CPI = EV / AC
Bad Good
Less than 1 Greater than 1

0.5 1 2
CPI = 0.5 means project spent On-Target CPI = 2 means project spent
twice as much as it should have half as much as it should have
Figure 10.24 Cost Performance Index (CPI).
Schedule Performance Index (SPI) is a schedule analysis

ratio that compares the value of accomplished tasks (EV)
against the value scheduled to be realized at this time (PV) .
SPI = EV / PC
Bad (Behind Schedule) Good (Ahead of Schedule)
Less than 1 Greater than 1

1
On-Target
Figure 10.25 Schedule Performance Index (SPI).
CPI and SPI Project Insights Estimate At Completion (EAC) is the esti-
●
SPI mated final project cost based upon the

1 past project performance. It can be calcu-
Ahead of Schedule Ahead of Schedule
Over Budget Under Budget lated by four different methods to eval-
uate different future scenarios.
CPI 1) Scenario one is when there is an outlier
1
-1
cost event that is not anticipated to be
Behind Schedule Behind Schedule repeated. EAC is determined by adding
Over Budget -1 Under Budget
the work remaining to the Actual Cost.
This assumes the future work will be
Figure 10.26 CPI and SPI project insights.
done at the budgeted rate. Use this for-
mula: EAC = AC + (BC − EV)
2) Scenario two is when you expect future performance to be similar to past performance.
Use the formula: EAC = AC + [(BAC − EV)/CPI]
3) Scenario three is when you assume the costs and schedule performance will con-
tinue, and the schedule has a direct impact on costs. This is meant for slow performing
projects, and is not applicable for projects ahead of schedule. Use this formula:
EAC = AC + [(BAC − EV)/(CPI × SPI)]
4) Scenario four is when events are such that you need to start over to determine a new
accurate estimate. You take the Actual Cost and add a newly calculated ETC. Use this
formula: EAC = AC + ETC
● Estimate To Complete (ETC) is the expected remaining cost to complete the project. This
is not the expected total project cost (EAC), but rather what is yet to spend to complete
the project. ETC can be calculated one of two ways.
1) Based on past performance, use the formula: ETC = (BAC − EV)/CPI
2) ETC = a new revised estimate that is prepare for all remaining tasks
● To Complete Performance Index (TCPI) represents the CPI efficiency that is needed to
complete the project by the scheduled completion. This is an indication of whether the
project’s baseline schedule is recoverable. TCPI is calculated one of the following two
ways. In both cases, you divide the remaining work by the remaining cash.
1) Scenario one is when you assume the original BAC is still achievable. Use this for-
mula: TCPI = (BAC − EV)/(BAC − AC)
2) Scenario two is when you assume the original BAC is not achievable, and the EAC is
now the new budget target. Use this formula: TCPI = (BAC − EV)/(EAC − AC)
A TCPI of 1.3 means the project must be 30% more efficient to finish on budget.
10.7.14 Lessons Learned

An organization with a performance metric-oriented mindset will experience the intentional
or unintentional cultural paradigm shift as to why data is collected. As it advances, the orga-
nization will move away from collecting data for diagnostic analysis that is more analogous
to an audit mindset, to collecting data for predictive analysis that is more a conscious plan to
improve performance. Regardless of where your organization is on the data science maturity
spectrum, below are a number of time-tested lessons learned for performance metrics:
● Performance metric difficulties are often rooted in a lack of clarity of an organization’s
goals.
● Those creating the metric should involve the data owners and practitioners to better
ensure the metric reflects the meaning of the data and accommodates the inherent con-
straints of the data and workflows.
● Metrics that are designed to reflect results can end up changing the culture and driving
behavior in unexpected ways.
● Many metrics are used in ways that exceed their inherent constraints, resulting in the
wrong answer to the right question or the right answer to the wrong question.
● Organizations often create and value new performance metrics because they can, never
stopping to ask if they should.
● Less is more. Too many metrics can burden staff, dilute collective focus, and promote
apathy. Concentrate on the core outputs and outcomes that really matter.
● The cost, effort, and difficulty of collecting and reporting data is regularly underestimated.
● A simple, intuitive, and compelling graphic visualization can be powerful factor in an
organization’s willingness to embrace and value a metric.
● The success of a performance metric could, and perhaps should, be the degree to which
it influences decisions and business operations, especially resource allocation.
● Performance-based planning is a never-ending process amidst evolving political guidance,
public expectations, and advancing technologies.
243
11
PM Soft Skills
“Soft skills have more to do with who we are than what we know.”
– Marcel M. Robles
Soft skills drive business success. A study from Boston College, Harvard, and the University
of Michigan determined that soft skill training delivers a 250% Return-On-Investment
based on productivity and retention. Given the importance of these topics, perhaps Soft
Skills would be better labeled Human Skills.
11.1 The Importance of Soft Skills
“It’s what you learn after you know it all that counts.”
– John Wooden
Engineering is the application of mathematic and scientific principles to improve and con-
trol our lives and the world around us. It is a noble profession with grand aspirations.
Engineering is a strange combination of technical expertise, creativity, and stubborn deter-
mination. Most non-engineers have a stereotype image of engineers. Whether the profes-
sion attracts or amplifies the stereotypical personality is an interesting question. Regardless,
there is something different about most engineers compared to other professions. A large
part of this is because engineering is about more than solving problems; it is a mindset in
how we define problems and pursue solutions.
Let’s start by looking at the college engineering education. While there are exceptions,
most engineering students scored very high on their Math SAT/ACT, and perhaps less so
on the English sections. Most took advanced science in high school, and did quite well.
Most have an inherent interest and aptitude in math, combined with a natural curiosity to
know Why, and understand How, things work. They get to college and work at a major that
typically requires more credit hours to graduate, and has more demanding coursework
than many other majors. A wise engineer once told me that an engineer’s college education
was structured in phases to intentionally shape how we think, each tweaking our thinking
just enough to prepare us for the next phase. They teach us math because it is the language
of engineers, and so that we can think in different ways than we could before. Once we

244 11 PM Soft Skills
understand the math, they teach us physics, which uses math to describe the world we
observe around us. How to define the problem. Once our mind has shifted enough, they
teach us Theoretical and Applied Mechanics (TAM), or other applied engineering sciences
so that we can learn the principles of statics, dynamics, thermodynamics, materials, and
others. How to manipulate the world. How to approach solutioning. Once we understand
those fundamental theories, we shift into our focused engineering disciplines where we
can apply all we have learned in the form of engineering. If we were to jump right into the
Engineering courses, while we may be able to solve the problems, we wouldn’t understand
how to think about the problems so that we can apply it correctly to other situations.
Engineering education is focused on training engineers how to think. How to define prob-
lems. How to assign risk. How to describe assumptions. How to think about solution strat-
egies. How to optimize resources. How to calculate and build solutions.
These are aspects that excite engineers. These are why most engineers became engineers.
We grew up building overly complex Lego creations and took things apart to figure out how
they worked. We asked Why…a lot. We played strategy games and enjoyed competing to get
the right answer. While there are certainly exceptions, there are undeniable commonalities
among most engineers. And I don’t know of any engineer who went through the gauntlet
of their engineering education with the aspiration of pushing papers. We want to solve
problems. We want to build things. It is how we are hard-wired.
This passion and technical expertise are fundamental to being a good PM. But they do
not ensure you will be a great PM. In order for you to be a good PM, you must have both
technical proficiency and the knowledge and understanding of the Project Development
Process. These are foundational for you to have the opportunity to be a great PM.
But in order to be a great PM, you must excel at skills that stereotypical engineers tradi-
tionally lack. While engineering educations are heavy on math, science, TAM, and engi-
neering, they may not include formal training in, or even recognize the importance of,
interpersonal soft skills. As you advance in your careers, emotional intelligence and inter-
posal skills can become even more valuable than your technical base. This is perhaps
nowhere more evident than as a PM, where most of your job is collaborating and commu-
nicating with your team, leadership, and stakeholders.
Below is an unprioritized list of essential PM soft skills that are required for you to reach
your full potential and be a great PM:
● Leadership – the ability to transform vision into reality by motivating, mobilizing, and
guiding a group of people to act toward achieving a common goal
● Team Building – the ability to bring individuals together into a cohesive unit that is
working interdependently and cooperatively to accomplish a common goal
● Coaching – the ability to promote individual development in a supportive and challeng-
ing manner that equips and empowers by providing personalized training and guidance
● Conflict Management – the ability to identify and constructively resolve conflict
promptly, sensibly, fairly, and efficiently
● Trust Building – establishing credibility and building trust to develop positive, productive,
and efficient working relationships with team members, leadership, and stakeholders
● Negotiation – the ability to effectively work with others to compromise and resolve dif-
ferences in a way that reaches a mutual agreement or finalizes a deal
11.2 Characteristics of a Successful PM 245
● Emotional Intelligence – the ability to monitor and discern others’ and one’s own emo-
tions, and then use this information to guide your thinking and behavior
● Political and Cultural Awareness – understanding political realities and cultural differ-
ences such that your future actions consider and leverage these constraints, traditions,
and opportunities
● Decision Making – the ability to evaluate options and wisely choose solutions that for-
ward project, program, and organization objectives
● Influencing – the power to be persuasive and have a meaningful impact on someone’s
decisions or actions, or the outcome of a process
● Communication – the ability to actively listen and effectively convey ideas and
information to others in written and verbal formats
● Motivation – the ability to instill and sustain in yourself and others the desire to act in
service of a goal
It is important to recognize no one is as skilled and proficient as they would like in all these
areas. However, this does not diminish the importance of each essential soft skill. As dis-
cussed later in this chapter, our individual professional development should be intention-
ally focused on these critical skills.
11.2 Characteristics of a Successful PM
“What you do speaks so loudly that I cannot hear what you say.”
– Ralph Waldo Emerson
The PM is a critical and visible position for project development and program delivery.
Your team, leadership, and stakeholders are watching. Consistency and dependability are
paramount. Exceptional PMs realize there is more to this role than satisfying the project
criteria. While developing and delivery of your project is fundamental, how you do things
can be just as important as what you do. If you deliver your project on time and on budget
but lose your team and burn every relationship bridge in the process, you will likely struggle
with long-term, sustained success. It is a career-crippling mistake to assume you need to
sacrifice one to achieve the other.
Throughout a project, the PM may fill a variety of roles. From task master to cheerleader.
From delegator to party planner. From accountant to engineer. From planner to firefighter.
From strategist to micromanager. From negotiator to mediator. From spokesman to scribe.
From coach to mentee. From instigator to peacekeeper. From decision maker to seeing
which way the wind is blowing. In one meeting you may feel like the General issuing
orders to the troops, in the next you may feel more like a Private taking orders they don’t
yet fully understand. It is an exciting and challenging role.
A successful PM is able to seamlessly shift between the three critically important roles of
Leader, Manager, and Entrepreneur. A leader ensures the organization is doing the right
things. A manager ensures the organization is doing things the right way. An entrepreneur
ensures the organization is innovative and able to do old things in new and more efficient
ways. Pending the audience or situation, a PM should provide the role that is needed to best
forward the project at any given time. Figure 11.1 lists core competencies for each of these
roles, in no particular order.
Core Competencies
Leader Manager Entrepreneur
Integrity/Honesty Dependable/Predictable Creative Thinker
Accountable Involves Others/Develops Persistence/Determination
Staff
Decisive/Courageous Communication Skills Assertive
Political Savvy Builds Trust/Respect Problem Solver
Inspires/Empowers Others Prioritizes Innovative
Focused Vision/Deliberate Sets Realistic Goals Commitment
Communication Skills Follow Through Initiative/Opportunity
Seeking
Shows Respect for Others Resolves Conflict Follow Through
Strategic Thinker Manages Time/Workload Resourceful
Relationship Builder Technically Proficient Self-Aware
Resilient Helps Others Succeed Charismatic/Persuasive
Effective Anticipates Future Needs Self-Confident
Negotiator/Influencer
Adaptable Organized Communication Skills
Maintains Balance Emotional Intelligence Situational Awareness
Effective Change Agent Goal Oriented Risk Tolerant
Figure 11.1 Core competencies.
While there are stark differences between these three roles, there are also commonal-
ities. Common threads of integrity, honesty, interpersonal skills, communication skills,
follow through, and an inner public service motivation run through each of them. Use
these as a solid foundation to successfully transition between them.
Long-term PM success and sanity requires being able to efficiently transition from one
role to another. This begins with accepting the reality. You may not like it, but success
demands it. Filling these roles spans a wide range of characteristics, skills, and abilities. You
won’t have them all, and you don’t necessarily need to in order to experience success. Spend
the time and energy to be self-aware. Various personality assessments are discussed in
Chapter 7 of this book. Take them. Know your own strengths, weaknesses, and motivations,
as well as those for key team members. Leverage your strengths. Manage your weaknesses.
It is important to realize a PM has very different success criteria based upon the view-
point. A project’s budget, scope, and schedule are absolutely critical, but there is more.
Leadership considers a PM’s ability to lead a team, and organizational loyalty. Past
performance is valued, along with technical expertise, process knowledge, and a good
business and political senses. Charisma, stakeholder acumen, and availability also matter.
11.3 Meetings 247
As does a PM’s ability to think on their feet and present polished verbal and written com-
munications. A project’s team members may have very different hopes for the PM.
Typically, they want a technically competent leader who is forthright, follows-through, and
is respectful of their subject matter expertise. They value a constructive, as opposed to
destructive, communicator who praises in public, criticizes in private, and defends the
staff. They want to know they are being heard and their concerns are being considered, and
that a timely decision will be made.
Much like your projects, you are a work in progress. You should be a different PM five
years from now than you are now. If you aren’t, that’s a problem. Never stop learning.
Never stop growing. Be intentional in your professional development. Concentrate on
refining your strengths and improving your weaknesses. Learn something new every day.
Allow yourself the freedom to extend beyond your comfort zone so that you struggle or fail.
Learn from your mistakes. Find a trusted mentor. Share your experiences with others who
can benefit from your wisdom. Foster positive and productive working relationships that
are built on trust, respect, and productivity. Appreciate the different styles and skill sets
that generate results. Be thankful for your natural skills and abilities. Embrace every day
with joy and determination.
11.3 Meetings
“People who enjoy meeting should not be in charge of anything.”
– Thomas Sowell
Experienced PMs know not to confuse meetings with progress. While effective meetings
can be one of your greatest tools to advance a project, ineffective meetings can be an enor-
mous time sink that casts your project and team into a quagmire of unfocused, demoralized
disarray. So, what’s the difference?
As a PM progresses in their career and completes more complex projects, two truths
become self-evident. First, your most valuable commodity is time. Second, your most
valuable assets are your knowledge, experience, and relationships. Exceptional PMs use
meetings to strategically leverage their time to learn and disseminate critical knowledge
that forwards project and program objectives.
Every meeting should have a purpose. As PM you are the captain of the ship, and it is not
acceptable to wander about rudderless or float wherever the tides and winds take you. A
PM uses the project’s Budget-Scope-Schedule as the North Star to proactively chart to suc-
cess, and then strategically reacts to real-time challenges to stay the course. Meetings play
a critical role in both proactive navigation and responding to stay the course. This is espe-
cially true as you work with your team to deliver the project. As Warren Buffet said, “You
will never see eye-to-eye if you never meet face-to-face.”
As you formulate the meeting’s purpose, it can be helpful if you also consider the meet-
ing’s intent, the meeting format, the expected participants, and the desired results. Bear in
mind that every meeting should have both human connection and work product compo-
nents. Intentionally considering and strategically selecting these aspects of meetings will
increase team morale while driving your productivity.
11.3.1 Types of Meetings

There are generally five types of meetings a PM plans, leads, or attends. Each serves a
specific function, and has its own unique strengths and limitations. Differentiating these
will enable you to better approach the conversation and accomplish more in less time.
While most meetings may contain aspects of more than one meeting type, at their core,
each meeting should fall into one of these categories.
1) Status Update Meetings
Regularly scheduled status update meetings are an essential part of most every PM’s work
life. They often take two forms. One is to keep the PM up to speed on the team’s progress.
The other is for the PM to keep those above them informed. As the PM, it is imperative you
establish both team meetings and executive briefings. Team status updates are often held
on a daily, weekly, or monthly schedule. Executive briefings are often held on a monthly or
quarterly basis. In both instances, strive to keep the meetings short and focused. A standing
agenda can be helpful. It often consists of what has been accomplished in the last time
interval, what is to be accomplished in the upcoming time interval, upcoming major mile-
stones, review of project risks, and outstanding decisions.
2) Information Sharing Meetings
There are meetings when the purpose is to share information. Be it to the public, to your team
members, to coworkers, to executive leadership, to industry, or others. In these instances, be
intentional about the chosen visual aids and level of detail you present. Speak to the audience.
The goal is not to demonstrate how much you know. Remain focused on the information
they need to know, and then present it at an appropriate and meaningful level of detail. These
meetings also provide tremendous opportunities to listen.
3) Decision-Making Meetings
Decision-Making meetings are the forks in the road, and should be laser-focused on either
making a decision or securing a needed commitment toward progress. A commitment to move
forward may take a variety of forms, including agreement on the process by which a decision
will be made. These are incredibly important meetings as aspects of the project, or the entire
project, may slow or come to a screeching halt until a key decision is made or commitment is
secured. Situations such as these pose enormous schedule risk. An experienced PM can almost
hear the proverbial time sucking sound, so they should be promptly scheduled and prioritized
accordingly. Focused Decision-Making meetings can be extremely effective in mitigating this
slowdown and jumpstarting action before bureaucratic inertia takes hold. The biggest factor in
a successful Decision-Making meeting is ensuring the decision makers are actually in the room.
This may be harder than it sounds. As a result, the timing, format, and setting of the meeting
should accommodate their schedules.
4) Problem-Solving Meetings
Unexpected challenges are a part of most every project. These can range from inconvenient
to crisis. There are times when the PM must gather the right Subject Matter Experts (SMEs)
in a room and figure it out. Remember, this is why many of us became engineers, to solve
problems. These Problem-Solving meetings may be rushed and often take a work session
11.3 Meetings 249
format. It is not uncommon for them to be overshadowed with stress of budget, scope, or
schedule constraints or anticipated busts. In these instances, it is imperative you remain
calm, focused, and actively maintain communications to effectively manage expectations.
5) Team-Building Meetings
Transportation project development and delivery is a team sport. Over the life of a project,
the PM may play the role of coach, team captain, quarterback, equipment manager, and
water boy. Through it all, an effective PM values that a cohesive, competent, and coop-
erating team will produce results. Team-Building meetings can be an invaluable tool to
create and maintain strong project teams. These meetings can assume a variety of forms,
ranging from one-on-one lunches, to retrospectives, to retreats, to team-building exercises,
to happy hours, to dinners or events to celebrate milestones or specific project successes.
Team-Building meetings should fortify your team, strengthen relationships, facilitate
understanding, build trust, and encourage collaboration. As with most things of value in
life, they must be earned. Collaborative success, consensus building, and realizing shared
goals are powerful ways to strengthen relationships and increase trust. A cohesive and
unified team is a remarkably powerful force to establishing and maintaining a sustained,
successful Transportation development and delivery program.
A PM rarely gets to choose his own team. Team-building activities can be especially
important when the team is dysfunctional or newly formed. If the dysfunction is concen-
trated to select individuals, it is imperative you reach out to them. You should strive to
identify the core issue(s), eliminate the dysfunction, remove the isolation, and bring them
back into the fold. This will likely also include reaching out the rest of the team to encourage
a welcoming environment. Proactive team building is especially critical when a new team
is being formed. One effective tactic can be to have everyone share some personal
information (e.g., where they grew up, how many siblings, how many children, pets, etc.),
their life priorities outside of work (e.g., family, travel, working out, etc.), work values (e.g.,
honesty, timeliness, professionalism, respect, etc.), and project goals (e.g., on-time, on-bud-
get, satisfy scope, etc.). This can be a powerful way to quickly lay the foundations of trust
as the team realizes their common life priorities, work values, and project goals.
11.3.2 Meeting Formats/Styles

Different formats and styles better serve different meeting types. Location, setting, resources,
corporate culture, tradition, and characteristics of anticipated attendees can all directly or
indirectly influence the formal or informal nature of meetings. Another major factor is often
participant perception of social anxiety or professional risk. Most meetings fall somewhere
between the formal Board meetings that strictly follows Robert’s Rules of Order and the
informal stand-up meeting with a team member on the way back to their desk from the
coffee machine. When considering the proper format and style of a meeting, you may wish
to consider the strength of governing rules and rituals, as well as the tolerance for surprise.
In general, strive to limit the number of attendees. If someone isn’t a decision maker or a
contributing Subject Matter Expert (SME), do they really need to be there? Many experts
advocate that meetings are generally most productive if attendance is limited to five or less.
While this may be a good rule-of-thumb for certain meeting types, others require
significantly larger attendance in order to accomplish the objectives. Be intentional with

the invite list so that it can enhance, and not detract, from the purpose of the meeting.
It is worth noting that virtual meetings are becoming far more common with decentral-
ized teams. In these instances, it is even more critical that you actively manage the
conversation. Without the full benefit of nonverbal communications combined with the
potential delay of talking over each other, it is beneficial for the meeting leader to clearly
recap key discussion points, action items, and responsible parties.
11.3.3 Characteristics of Successful Meetings

The best way to start any meeting is by stating the objectives. This forthright approach
focuses the attendees on goals, deliverables, and decisions that should be achieved. It also
can curb tangential discussion, and provides an easy mechanism by which the meeting
leader can refocus errant discussions toward the purpose of the gathering.
The content should drive most meetings. Beware overusing carefully crafted presenta-
tions. While 3D models and glossy finished visual aids may be appropriate at a Public
Hearing, a generic-looking agenda attached to the emailed invitation may be all that is
necessary for a remote daily status update meeting. A smart PM strategically chooses the
visual and digital technology that is appropriate for the meeting and intended audience. As
a general rule, visual aids are a tool to be used when it can add value to the discussion.
There are certainly settings where the message must be carefully crafted and skillfully pre-
sented in a polished and professional way, but these aren’t most meetings. For most project
meetings, the content, not the presentation, should drive the discussion. Do not rely on
PowerPoint; focus on the issue at hand. While PowerPoint can be an incredibly valuable
presentation aid, overreliance can quickly disengage the participants as they stare at a
screen and decreasingly pay attention. I have found a group of engineers huddled over a
paper roll-plot stretched out on a conference room table can do more to stimulate thinking,
and generate innovative solutions than any PowerPoint.
It is said, “If you didn’t write it down, it never happened.” PMs must prioritize meeting
documentation. Every scheduled meeting should have an agenda. If at all possible, that
agenda should be distributed to all meeting participants far enough ahead of time so that
all may be adequately prepared. This demonstrates you value their time, and better enables
productive discussion.
The agenda should list the meeting time and place, the purpose of the meeting, anticipated
attendees, discussion topics, and desired outcomes. Meeting notes document the discussion
and decisions should be created and distributed to all attendees. In larger meetings, the PM
should assign a scribe to create official meeting minutes. It is not reasonable to assume a PM
can effectively run a meeting and take meeting notes. Neither will be done well. The PM
should use common sense or organizational standards to tailor the level of formality and
completeness for the agenda and meeting notes. But both should be done for all meetings.
Corporate cultures can vary widely. My own opinion is that meetings should start and
end on time. This demonstrates responsibility, conveys you value the time of the meeting
attendees, and encourages a culture of delivering on your commitments. Another way to
demonstrate you value others’ time is to limit meetings to the duration that is necessary.
Generally speaking, most meetings lasting more than an hour experience diminishing
return in productivity.
If applicable, always end meetings with recapping any action items for the groups. Action
Items are to-do list items that are only complete if they include:
1) What needs to be done?
2) Who is going to do it?
3) By when?
11.3.4 Characteristics of Successful Meeting Leaders

Every successful meeting has a leader. Pending the type, format, and intention of the meet-
ing, this may necessitate the leader to assume four very different roles: Facilitator,
Negotiator, Task Master, and Team Builder/Cheerleader. Each of these roles can be critical
to moving a meeting or project forward. Leading a meeting is vastly different than being an
attendee, and it is rare for someone to naturally feel comfortable in all of these roles. But a
PM will assume each of these roles, sometimes within the same meeting.
When leading a meeting, there are a few general guidelines that will help you be effec-
tive. Stay focused and engaged. Don’t daydream or multitask by checking email, being on
your phone, or doing other work. The meeting deserves your attention, or you shouldn’t be
there. Remain aware of what is being discussed, be it the issue at hand or positioning for
other projects or initiatives. An effective PM recognizes these power plays and refocuses
the discussion to the project at hand. They also recognize when to let the conversation run
its course, and when tangents are headed down a rabbit hole and need to be refocused.
Effective meeting leaders also curtail too much participation from any individuals, while
encouraging participation by all. Praise in public. Criticize in private. Use soft words and
hard arguments. Seek first to understand, then to be understood. Know and embrace your
own style of leadership. Leverage your skills and abilities, and trust your gut. Remain
professional and in control. As Thomas Jefferson said, “Nothing gives one person so much
advantage over another as to remain cool and unruffled under all circumstances.” And as
Desmond Tutu said, “Don’t raise your voice, improve your argument.”
11.4 Time Management
“Time is our scarcest resource and unless it is managed nothing else can be managed.”
– Peter Druker
Time management is an intensely personal issue. Project schedules should be well-known

and transparent. Team schedules should be collaborative with clear milestones and shared
expectations. How you keep and manage your own work schedule may be a completely
different dynamic. There are no one-size-fits-all silver bullets. Everyone’s own personality,
skills, strengths, weaknesses, and preferences impact how we each manage our own time.
You need to find the right fit of what works for you. But it is imperative you find it. Your,
and your projects’, success depends on you being efficient and productive with your time.
Below are some business and project management concepts and tools that may help you
refine your own style to be even more efficient and productive.
11.4.1 The Triple Constraint

A PM’s primary responsibility is to develop and deliver their project within the established
budget, scope, and schedule. You cannot do this effectively if you do not know the budget,
scope, and schedule. These must be actively managed on all of your projects. If you don’t
know your projects’ triple constraints, you will waste time responding to issues as they arise.
Dale Carnegie said, “Knowledge isn’t power until it’s applied.” You cannot capture and
leverage the power of your project’s budget, scope, and schedule unless you apply it. And
you can’t apply it unless you know it. Spend time in your projects’ budgets, scopes, and
schedules. That is your domain. That is your responsibility. Position yourself so you can
quickly identify what can be accommodated within the triple constraint and when change
management is appropriate. Position yourself to readily and accurately evaluate risks.
Position yourself to more effectively identify and exploit opportunities. Position yourself to
more strategically manage your team. Invest your time in your projects’ triple constraints
so you can position yourself and your project for success.
11.4.2 The Eisenhower Matrix

Dwight D. Eisenhower was an amazingly productive man. In World War II, this five-star
General served as Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in Europe. As America’s 34th
President he spearheaded the construction of the Interstate Highway System, created
NASA, ended the Korean War, signed into law the first major Civil Rights legislation since
the end of the Civil War, and oversaw Alaska and Hawaii becoming the 49th and 50th
states. He famously said, “What is important is seldom urgent, and what is urgent is seldom
important.” This idea has been expanded to a time management mainstay that now bears
his name, the Eisenhower Matrix, as shown in Figure 11.2.
When evaluating your schedule and issues of the day, this matrix can be helpful. Important
tasks are those that contribute to your long-term goals and add value to your life, mission,
or objectives. Urgent tasks are time sensitive and demand your immediate attention. These
are qualitative measures, but each task should fall into only one of the four quadrants.
Quadrant 1 represents those tasks
Schedule Do It Now
●
High
deemed important and urgent. These add

2 Important, non- Prioritize urgent
value, are consistent with your long-term
Import ance
urgent tasks and important

schedule for later tasks
1 goals, and are time-sensitive. These tasks
should be your first priority.
Eliminate Delegate ● Quadrant 2 represents those tasks
Non-important, Assign urgent, non-
4 non-urgent tasks important tasks to that are important, but not urgent. You
should be deleted someone else should schedule time on your calendar to
3
ensure progress continues on these tasks
Low
that add value and are consistent with

Low Urgency High your long-term goals.
Figure 11.2 Eisenhower matrix.
● Quadrant 3 represents tasks that are time sensitive but they do not advance your
long-term goals. Where possible, these tasks should be delegated to others so you can
focus on more important tasks.
● Quadrant 4 represents tasks that are neither urgent nor important. Avoid doing these
tasks as they are likely not worth your time.
When determining which tasks to keep, and which tasks to delegate, this general rule may be
helpful. Delegate repetitive tasks that take time, keep tasks that require seasoned judgment.
11.4.3 The Pareto Principle (80/20 Rule)

Joseph M. Juran proposed the 80/20 rule in 1896, and named it after the Italian economist
Vilfredo Pareto. This business management axiom asserts that in many systems 20% of the
input produces 80% of the output. This means 20% of the work will produce 80% of the
results, as shown in Figure 11.3. While this 80/20 ratio may not always apply in transporta-
tion project management, it is clear that some tasks are more impactful than others. You
can use this approach to help determine which tasks are important and should be priori-
tized. Focus on that 20%.
11.4.4 Common Sense and Lessons Learned

Be intentional with your time. Strategically manage your calendar. Start each day focusing
on your short-term and long-term goals. Minimize interruptions. Time is most often wasted
in minutes, not hours. Don’t overbook your schedule. Schedule blocks of time when you
can be uninterrupted to tackle larger tasks. Schedule times to return emails and voicemails.
Plan to succeed.
Create and maintain an effective To-Do list. At the end of each workday, make your list
for the following day. You may benefit from different categories or designations, but have
one calendar and one To-Do list. While calendars are often dictated by the organization,
find the To-Do list system, tools, or app that works for you.
Be strategic with meetings. Leverage status update meetings to also focus on issue reso-
lution, risks, and opportunities. Adhere to meeting agendas and scheduled timeframes.
Concentrate on those with whom you are meeting, granting them the respect of your full
attention. This will more quickly build and strengthen relationships, and enable more pro-
ductive discussions and decisions. As PM, you need to understand the issues and implica-
tions. You can’t effectively lead or contribute to a discussion to evaluate risks if you are not
fully engaged to access the intended and
Effort results unintended consequences.
Trust and rely on your team. Delegate
20% 20% appropriate tasks. Don’t micromanage. Avoid
doing others’ work. Consider interpersonal
80% 80% and organizational dynamics. Understand
and leverage task dependencies. If helpful,
Important Not Important decompose larger tasks into more manageable
interim steps. It doesn’t have to be formalized,
Figure 11.3 Pareto principle (80/20 rule).
but crafting a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) can provide clarity of direction. If possible,
touch each issue only once and then move on to the next one.
Find and refine your own personal time management style, approach, and tools. Strive to
ensure your actions are adding value to your projects, your team, and your organization.
Busy can be the enemy of achievement. Ensure you are being productive, not just active.
Maintain a healthy work-life balance. Take care of yourself, physically, emotionally, and
spiritually. Stay true to your morals, ethics, objectives, and expectations. Spend time with
your family. Eat healthy. Exercise regularly. Get plenty of sleep. There is no softer pillow
than a clear conscious. A life in harmony can be exceptional.
11.5 Influence Management
“Diplomacy is the art of letting someone else have your way.”

– American Proverb
Project Management Institute’s (PMI) Project Management Book of Knowledge (PMBOK)

estimates a PM spends 75%–90% of their time communicating. This is staggering, and per-
haps intimidating to the stereotypical introverted engineer. However, there is no avoiding
this reality. Successful PMs must practice consistent and effective communications with a
variety of stakeholders. Much of this communication is to shape others’ perceptions and
realities. An essential skill set of an exceptional PM’s is Influence Management.
Be it in a conference room, at a public hearing, sitting in a living room for an HOA meet-
ing, standing in a citizen’s front yard, leaning over an engineering workstation, or discuss-
ing a plan spread out on the tailgate of a truck, PMs commonly must practice influence
management in order to advance project objectives.
There are an abundance of available resources on how to influence others. Many of them
provide a magic bullet formula. While these can provide valuable information on tools and
tactics, influence management is an acquired skill that often requires time to observe
others who do it well, and patience to find and refine your own style. We each have our own
unique personality, communication skills, risk tolerance, and comfort with conflict. It is
essential that you find your own style, using as your guide the simple test of what works
while being consistent with your values.
The product of influence management is often consensus or compliance. It is important
to distinguish that consensus does not necessitate agreement. Informed consent is real. You
may not need someone to agree with the idea. They don’t even have to like the idea. It may
be just as good if they can live with the idea. Often the goal is to avoid a thumbs-down
response, which means a thumbs-sideways or shoulder shrug may be as good as a
thumbs-up.
Transportation project management success depends more upon influence than control.
This includes your abilities to persuade others, as well as refute alternative positions that
would adversely impact the project’s budget, scope, or schedule. This chapter describes
some basic principles of effective debate, along with less sophisticated, but still very effec-
tive tactics to influence others and refute opposing arguments. This will provide a powerful
set of persuasion weapons from which you can choose to arm your influencing arsenal, as
well as the knowledge to recognize what tactic is being used against you, and how best to
counter it.
11.5.1 There Is Nothing New under the Sun

It is said that good leaders guide the willing and persuade the stubborn. This is not a new
insight. Aristotle divided the strategies of persuasion into three separate spheres: Ethos,
Pathos, and Logos. Each of these focuses on different parts of the human experience.
Aristotle knew there was not a single tactic to persuade everyone, so he would shift bet-
ween these three approaches depending upon which one best resonated with the audience.
Experienced PMs often work in aspects of each of these areas when talking with stake-
holder, team members, or leadership.
Ethos uses character, credibility, and ethics to persuade. The purpose of ethos is to get
another to trust you by establishing your personal credentials. Ethos appeals to your own
believability, qualifications, and character. This is often accomplished by emphasizing
your authority, expertise, or experience. You want the other to believe you are trustworthy,
knowledgeable, a good person, and that you genuinely care. Ethos is all about the public
persona you present. As such, reliable techniques include personal branding, citing cred-
ible or authoritative sources, success stories, titles, reputations, and personal anecdotes
that illustrate why you are uniquely positioned to help. Confidence in delivery is also criti-
cal to ethos. Maintain eye contact, use positive and engaging body language, vary your
vocal delivery, practice empathy, all while being polished and poised.
Pathos uses emotions, values, and passion to persuade. The purpose of pathos is to get
another to feel by inspiring an emotional response. Pathos appeals to another’s heart and
emotions. Often this involves stories, inspirational quotes, and vivid and compelling lan-
guage. To varying degrees, humans are emotional beings. Tapping into this innate reservoir
can be a powerful way to motivate and sway others. Pathos is all about the emotions you
stir in your audience. As such, reliable techniques include positive and negative stories that
evoke strong emotions, your own thoughts and feelings, heart-tugging anecdotes, sweep-
ing idyllic visions and dreams, appealing to all five senses, reliving dialog in your stories,
and painting vivid mental pictures with your words. Coherence in delivery is critical to
pathos. Your voice and body language should complement the story, while supporting and
accentuating the emotions you are stirring in others.
Logos uses logical reasoning, truth, and evidence to persuade. The purpose of logos is to
get another to think by arguing based on reason and facts. Logos appeals to another’s mind
and intellect. Often this involves a structured presentation flow, references to studies or
statistics, and other reasoning methods such as comparisons, analogies, and metaphors.
You want others to decide your aims, objectives, and conclusions are not only reasonable,
but are the correct ones to pursue. Logos is all about facts, logic, and the resulting conclu-
sions of what is presented. As such, reliable techniques include facts, figures, numbers,
data, schematics, statistics, scientific research, processes, and collaborating and supporting
evidence. You are leading the audience to a specific conclusion based on the evidence.
Inserting some logos can be a very effective way to enhance ethos.
11.5.2 Seven Pillars of Influence Management

There are many ways leaders influence their teams and others. Some find success through
fear and intimidation. Others rely on the transactional reciprocity of favors. Still others are
skilled manipulators where you want to do thing for them, but somehow you don’t feel
good about it. Others have perfected the carrot of rewards and sticks of retribution.
The most effective form of influence management is when others have a choice and will-
ingly act on your behalf or in your best interest. As football coach Mike Tomlin said, “we
prefer volunteers, not hostages.” A PM has tremendous power when others accept your ideas
and act as you ask because they want to be supportive of your efforts and are vested in your
success. Often when others feel this loyalty to a colleague, they will do even more than
what was asked. This approach to influence management is based upon the following
seven pillars, all built upon a foundation of humility, as shown in Figure 11.4.
11.5.3 Foundation of Humility

The goal of Influence Management is to influence others, not manipulate them. Most peo-
ple are perceptive enough to eventually discern the difference. Effective leaders are clear
and consistent in their motivations. True influence doesn’t come from an impassioned
speech or grand gesture; it is earned by your day-to-day interactions, attitudes, and actions.
Integrity is not a switch you turn on and off given the circumstance. As C.S. Lewis said,
“Integrity is doing the right thing, even when no one is watching.” Consistency matters. When
thinking about being strategic in influence management, starting from a place of humility
best ensures authenticity that will lead to success with your team and networks.
True humility means respecting others and valuing their contributions. Allow others to
have the spotlight. Listen to their thoughts with your full and undivided attention. Use
active listening skills. Encourage constructive discussion. Say thank you…often! A leader
who continually practices true gratitude and humility with his team will inspire others.
In the book The Servant Leader, the authors Ken Blanchard and Phil Hodges describe
how when our head, heart, hands, and habits are in alignment it produces trust, loyalty,
and productivity. Underlying all of this is a proper perspective of humility. As C.S. Lewis
said, “Humility is not thinking less of yourself, it is thinking of yourself less.”
11.5.3.1 Pillar 1 – Builds Trust

A PM can have extraordinary talents, be a
Influence Management charismatic leader and compelling
speaker, but if others don’t trust you, they
Situational Awareness
Leverages Networks
Technically Reliable
Creates Alignment
won’t follow you. Trust cannot be dictated

Team Promotion
Builds Trust
Balanced
or assigned; it is earned. Trust is a bridge

that connects you to others in cooperative
ways that can span turbulent waters. This
is why trust comes first. Especially when
navigating difficult times or challenging
Foundation of Humility
situations, trust is essential. Without it,
Figure 11.4 Influence management. your influence is inherently constrained.
You may be able to force compliance, but the power of

true commitment only comes with trust.
Integrity
Trust is not a skill or ability; it is a feeling of confidence
and assurance that you instill in others. Figure 11.5
shows how trust is composed of three main compo-
nents that all intersect to engender trust in others: TRUST
integrity, dependability, and benevolence. Dependability Benevolence
Integrity is consistently doing the right things at the
right times for the right reasons. It is a moral compass
that guides your decisions and actions. Dependability is
Figure 11.5 Trust components.
predictable and consistent reliability. Benevolence is a
well-meaning kindness that genuinely cares for others
and wants to selflessly assist in pursuits for their best interests.
As PM you have enormous power to create a team atmosphere that promotes or discour-
ages trust. Listen. Validate and value all contributions. Be courteous, respectful, and
professional. Be generous, fair, and loyal. Be tenacious, but supportive and polite. Be
focused, but adaptable and resilient. Another key aspect of trust is the willing relinquish-
ment of control. Trust involves letting go of micromanaging people and processes, and
being supportive and open to the freedom of their creative results.
11.5.3.2 Pillar 2 – Creates Alignment

Effective influence managers find ways to create alignment between individuals, divisions,
and organizations. In projects and organizations, everyone may be generally moving
toward their objectives, but often they are drifting in different directions. There is tremen-
dous power in finding and implementing win-win solutions. Creating alignment can trans-
form a contentious situation, improve morale, and generate positive momentum. Everyone
wants to be a part of a positive solution. Momentum is a powerful tool that attracts others.
Pursue it and strategically leverage it.
There are significant differences between cooperation and collaboration. Cooperation is
interacting in a helpful and supportive manner. Collaboration is working together to
achieve common goals. Cooperation is working together and providing assistance from
your independent roles. Collaboration recognizes your inherent interdependencies and
shared objectives. Cooperation relies on mutual respect and transparency. Collaboration
relies on mutual trust and vulnerability. Cooperation retains individual accountability.
Collaboration embraces group accountability. Cooperation is a low risk, low reward prop-
osition. Collaboration can be a high-risk, high-reward proposition.
Creating alignment involves finding ways to cooperate and collaborate with others.
Creating alignment is a mindset that is constantly searching for mutual benefit in all human
interactions. It is the conscious decision to see challenges in your projects as cooperative
opportunities, not competitive games to be won. This approach transforms your actions
and others’ perceptions. Persuasion and negotiations are not manipulative, but construc-
tive. Challenging individuals become peers, not targets. Short-term transactional interac-
tions transform into the basis for building longer term productive working relationships.
Steven Covey said, “Win-win is a belief in the third alternative. It’s not your way or my way;
it’s a better way, a higher way.” This approach takes time and work, and is easy to sacrifice
if we let ourselves be overly competitive or singularly focused. But this is an investment

that will pay dividends. Finding win-win solutions is a solid foundation for a long-term
relationship. This is fundamentally different than reciprocity, which is transactional and
relies on both parties having something the other needs or wants. This approach focuses on
the relationships and shared goals. PMs are uniquely positioned to facilitate these solutions
on projects as they can be working with multiple disciplines to resolve an issue, all needing
to stay within the larger contextual constraints of project budget, scope, and schedule.
In order to find win-win solutions during conflict, you need to listen. Separate people
from the problem. Empathetically listen to separate out their perceptions, emotions, and
motivations. Focus on interests not positions, and define the needs and wants. This will
help shape the framework for potential solutions with mutual gain. It is important you
emphasize this is a mutual problem we need to collectively solve. Use “we,” not “I.” Be flex-
ible and maintain an open mind. Don’t be overly attached to your own preferred solution.
Recognize you may not own the entirety of the problem. Have the courage to identify and
address personal feelings and emotions. Reach agreement on the objectives a solution
should satisfy and then seek the detailed solution that meets the agreed criteria. Even if the
final solution is no one’s first choice, if it satisfies the agreed criteria needs, then the group
can feel successful and the experience can strengthen these relationships. Synergistic solu-
tions are like the rising tide that lifts all boats.
11.5.3.3 Pillar 3 – Team Promotion

Quarterback is the most important and impactful position in all of team sport. Think about
the hall of fame quarterbacks we admire as great leaders and what they say in interviews
after the game. When their team wins, they deflect the attention and accolades. They are
quick to credit their coaches for an effective game plan. They praise the offensive line for
an outstanding effort. They single out receivers or running backs that had a great game.
They even praise the defense for putting them in a position to win. When their team loses,
they talk about themselves not playing as well as they needed to win, never calling out
anyone or blaming others. These public displays of leadership build loyalty, and are as
effective in the work world as they are in the sports world.
Self-promotion is often viewed as selfish and shallow, quickly spreading discord among
the team. It is rarely received well. By contrast, team promotion is so much more than a
thinly veiled attempt to advance one’s own career. It can produce pride, ignite motivation,
create opportunities, and encourage collaboration.
Team promotion fundamentally relies on your ability to strategically and actively promote
your progress and success. Find ways to cut through the chaotic daily noise to authentically
and credibly promote your projects and achievements. You may be doing amazing things,
but unless you tell your story, others may never know. You must intentionally gather and
find audiences. This may require you to reach beyond your comfort zone. Find or create
ways to tell your story, be it in person, to groups, at events, or in print. These acts may strike
you as bragging, but the motivations should reach far beyond petty, self-serving objectives.
As PM you are in a unique position to praise others and lead the celebration of project suc-
cesses. You set the tone. Make it fun. Make it productive. Make it supportive. Create a space
where team members know their successes will be celebrated and appreciated. It is demoral-
izing to work hard on a task only to have it ignored, or watch another take credit for it and
claim it as their own. Conversely, it is invigorating to have your work recognized. Gratitude
is a powerful action that is both free and priceless. Create a visible platform where your team
feels safe and confident in driving innovation and productivity. Be a champion for your team
and team members. This simple act can ignite motivation and build fierce loyalty.
11.5.3.4 Pillar 4 – Balanced

Project and work demands can be stressful. Unexpected challenges can incite the fight or
flight emotions in the most reasonable of people. Effective influence managers remain bal-
anced in turbulent times. They find a way to maintain composure. The more emotions
erupt in the room, the calmer they become. They speak respectfully, thoughtfully, and with
a measured perspective. They approach conflict with humble confidence and courage.
Experience grants the wisdom to know when to lead from the front and when to tempo-
rarily step back.
A predictable, steady demeanor engenders trust. Influence management is long-term
game. Consistency matters. Deliver what you promise. Do the right things in the right
ways. Having, living, and exuding the perspective that the highs should be celebrated and
the lows will pass, builds an enviable reputation. There are inherent interpersonal and
professional risks in trusting others. A balanced demeanor and track record of depend-
ability makes you approachable, predictable, and reliable. It is hard to trust a loose cannon.
Influence management is built on long-term relationships that encourage clarity, leverage
strengths, and emphasize mutually beneficial interactions. Be the consistent anchor of a
balanced temperament, healthy perspective, and reasoned thought that others seek out
and rely on to navigate difficult situations.
11.5.3.5 Pillar 5 – Technically Reliable

In engineering, there are fewer professional stains that are harder to cover up than the rep-
utation of a fool. The fake-it-till-you-make-it approach may work in certain fields, but more
experienced engineers have a pretty accurate Bullshit-meter. As PM you don’t need to have
all the technical answers, but you do need to be able to understand the issues and reason-
ably discuss possible solutions. Don’t pretend you know more than you do. Don’t make
assumptions. Don’t throw around standards, acronyms, or units if you don’t understand
them. If your team members conclude you don’t know or can’t understand the technical
aspects of a situation, you’ve lost them.
The reality is the PM will likely not, and probably should not, know as much about any
one technical aspect of their project as the technical lead or Subject Matter Expert (SME).
It matters how you handle these situations. When the SME presents you with a problem,
monopolize the listening. Validate their concerns. Ask questions. Figure out why this is
important and who else needs to be involved in the solution. What are the impacts to the
project’s budget, scope, and schedule. Stay in your lane. Rely on the expertise of your SME,
but ensure the overall objectives of the project are being honored and pursued.
The PM doesn’t have to know everything in order to build trust and influence engineers,
but they do need to understand the big picture. They need to be able to comprehend the
intended and unintended consequences of possible solutions. They need to appreciate the
complexities and intertwined nature of issues that arise. They need to involve the right dis-
ciplines at the right time in the solution. These situations are tremendous opportunities for
the PM to work more closely with team members and gain great stories to share with others.
11.5.3.6 Pillar 6 – Leverages Networks

Networks are a force multiplier that can amplify your influence and impact. Influential
leaders intentionally cultivate their personal and professional networks. Organizations,
industries, and careers are dynamic. Likewise, our networks are ever-changing and require
attention to strengthen and grow.
Some people know a lot of people. This mile-wide, six-inches deep approach can be effec-
tive for distributing information, but the relationships remain shallow. For impactful
influence management during challenging times, quality trumps quantity. However, your
networks will naturally have circles of contacts that are at different levels of maturity. This
is normal, and healthy. Networking builds professional and social capital. It is an investment
that will continue to pay increasing dividends as your career advances. As such, concentrate
on making connections at your current level. Then as you and your peers advance, you will
have more mature relationships upon which you can depend when you and they are in
higher positions.
Effective networking is easy for some, and less so for others. It is important you know
your social strengths and weaknesses. Not everyone is comfortably in their element at a
corporate happy hour or conference networking reception. While many introverted engi-
neers struggle with these larger events, they can still have extremely broad and effective
networks. Influence management relies on relationships built on trust. Larger receptions
or industry events are perfect opportunities to make initial connections and reconnect with
existing contacts. Strengthening relationships is a more personal experience. It could be
having dinner together in a smaller group, working together on a task force or cross-divi-
sional committee, or talking on the sidelines as your kids play together in a sports league.
These relationships are made one-on-one, and are often based on sincerity and authen-
ticity. These are qualities that most effective PMs do very well. If you are not gifted in this
area, find those who are portals to others. Find individuals who know other key individuals
and can arrange introductions. Volunteer for roles outside of your comfort zone. Become
involved in industry organizations. Have lunch with your coworkers and those in other
divisions. Attend conferences, seminars, and holiday events. View networking opportu-
nities as opportunities and not obligations. Remember names, their spouse’s names, and
their children’s activities. Discover their priorities, passions, and values. Take notes after
the event if it helps. Create a spreadsheet that keeps track of when you met who and their
role. Find a system that works for you. Make a plan and then execute it.
Your professional networks are your responsibility. You are solely responsible for building
and maintaining them. And you are solely responsible for knowing how and when to stra-
tegically access and leverage your network assets. You are also solely responsible for the
positive benefits and results you realize from your network. Building and maintaining an
effective professional network is a long-term commitment. It takes time and patience. You
may not know how one connection will benefit either of you, but as our career advances
our professional network webs become increasingly intertwined. You are laying the foun-
dational framework for future success. The dividends from your investments may not be
realized for some time, but they can also position you to help others and do amazing things
that you could never accomplish on your own.
11.5.3.7 Pillar 7 – Situational Awareness

The Roman philosopher Seneca said, “Luck is what happens when preparation meets oppor-
tunity.” A PM skilled in organization intelligence and situational awareness can make
accomplishments look easy. Maybe they just have good timing, good luck, or good karma?
More likely they were prepared and then identified and seized the opportunity.
Organizational intelligence and situational awareness are understanding how to get
things done. It is grasping organizations’ realities, strengths, and limitations. All organiza-
tions have a formal org chart and informal channels. Astute PMs understand positional
and hierarchical authority, but are also well connected to the organizational influencers.
They understand both how things are supposed to get done, and how they really work.
Situational awareness is both a mindset and a skill set. You should view challenges
through your situational awareness glasses. Is there more to the story or this issue at hand?
Why are they asserting that position now? Why is this manager always negative in the
afternoons but more receptive to ideas in the morning? Situational awareness begins with
being curious and observant. Think before you speak. Pay attention to nonverbal clues and
communications. Listen and seek to understand. Don’t win the battle only to lose the war.
It is the ability to read a situation, know the cultural and political pulse, and discern the
real issues at play. It is introducing an initiative at the right time to the right people in the
right context. It is advancing solutions that solve the immediate problem and the one loom-
ing on the horizon. It is proactively taking care of your team members. This mindset and
knowledge will sharpen your intuition that will allow you to more strategically and effec-
tively advance your projects and initiatives.
PMs with great situational awareness attract attention. They leverage these insights to
build and maintain that all important project momentum. There may be nothing more
damaging to a public transportation project’s budget, scope, and schedule than bureaucratic
inertia. However, even in challenging situations, PMs with situational awareness find ways
to make critical contributions that add value to the projects, processes, and organization.
This reality and reputation can unlock tremendous opportunities in influence management.
11.6 Advancing and Refuting Arguments
“Persuasion is not a science, but an art.”

– William Bernbach
Have you noticed that being right is often not enough to persuade another? Maybe they refuse
the truth? Or maybe they refuse to acknowledge the truth from you? Or maybe there is more
going on? Analytic reasoning is a starting point for effective persuasion, but it doesn’t end there.
11.6.1 Propositions
Before you can effectively assert or refute arguments, it is beneficial to understand the
three general types of propositions, or assertions.
Propositions of fact assert a truth or falsity of some matter. The intention is to convince you
to accept a premise as factually true or false. “Traffic is worse in our subdivision now that it was
five years ago.” When advocating or refuting a proposition of fact, it is critical to understand
definitions. What defines “worse” – peak traffic flow, total traffic volume, more through
traffic, more truck traffic, etc.? Are these definitions industry standards, personal experience,
historic precedence, by comparison with other areas, by a recognized expert, or some other
foundation? Pay attention. He who controls the definitions controls the argument.
Propositions of value are aimed to make an evaluative judgment as to whether a matter

is morally good or bad. These propositions rely on a calculated or perceived value, and
often compare two alternatives and then ask which is right and which is wrong. “How can
you not put a sidewalk along this roadway? You are intentionally forcing our children to ride
their bikes on this busy street which isn’t responsible or safe.” When advocating or refuting
propositions of value, it is important to apply criteria to establish worth, and study the tools
and tactics presented later in this chapter.
Propositions of policy advocate a specific course of action. These often take the form of a
policy endorsement or commitment to a specific desired future that could be achieved if
everyone travels down their desired path. “I think it essential that prior to construction your
organization meets with our home owner’s association to discuss potential impacts so we can
reach mutually agreeable hours of construction.”
Discussions can naturally expand from a single issue to an unusual collection of issues.
If possible, focus and resolve issues one at a time. When that is not possible conversations
risk quickly devolving and becoming confusing and aimless. In these instances, discover
how the issues interrelate so you can strategically group and prioritize them in a way that
strengthens you position. Some common groupings include:
● Chronological – This approach organizes in time sequence.
● Spatial – This approach spatially organizes the issues, often in a linear order of
workflow.
● Topical – This approach organizes by categories that lead from one to the next, think
Venn diagrams.
● Psychological – This approach focuses on the strongest issues first, with other issues
inherently being relegated to be less important.
● Logical – This strategic approach builds a structured argument that is carefully crafted so
subsequent issues emphasize previous issues and conclusions, thus strengthening the
overarching position.
11.6.2 Deductive vs. Inductive Reasoning

It is important to recognize and understand the difference between deductive and induc-
tive reasoning, as shown in Figure 11.6.
Deductive reasoning starts with a general premise and asserts it must apply to all specific sit-
uations. This thinking follows the formulaic format of major premise, logic, and conclusion.
For example, roundabouts are safer than traffic lights…this intersection has a high accident rate…
this intersection should be converted to a roundabout. Deductive reasoning is excellent for assert-
ing propositions of value, past fact, and future
possibilities. This method can be especially Deductive Reasoning
effective to analytical, math-minded thinkers.
The logic can be enticing, hard to refute, and
easy to defend. It is also a terrific choice for General Specific
speeches or when addressing larger groups.
The validity of a deductive reasoning relies
Inductive Reasoning
on the credibility of the general premise(s)
and the accuracy of the logic to leap from the Figure 11.6 Deductive vs. Inductive reasoning.
general to the particular. Deductive arguments have two areas of weakness to guard against,
or attack. If one agrees with the premise and cannot find fault with the logic, then they must
agree with the conclusion. Conversely, the conclusions are only as strong as the premise and
logic. Often the premise involves definitions or industry standards, which makes the logic
especially critical to the validity of the conclusion. Beware using an inductive conclusion as
the premise in your deductive argument. Also beware deductive arguments based on emo-
tional premise or upon personal feelings or experiences. You must first address the implied
emotion before you can reasonably disagree.
Inductive reasoning starts with specific observations and then infers general conclusions
for all circumstances. For instance, an adjacent property owner may say, “Your organiza-
tion completely botched right-of-way negotiations with me. I’m sure you did with everyone else
too. How do we even know the proposed traffic signal design will work?” The strength and
weakness of this approach is whether the particular examples can logically scale to be evi-
dence of the overarching assertions.
This approach can be an especially persuasive if one pairs historical data with anecdotal
experiences. The noted preacher Henry Ward Beecher said, “An illustration is a window in
an argument that lets in light.” A well-crafted personal anecdote can vividly awake emo-
tions and create a remarkable loyalty to a specific position. This is a powerful tool of per-
suasion, particularly when combined with the authoritative credibility of historic statistics.
The primary weakness of inductive reasoning is when the conclusion goes beyond what
the example supports, thus making the conclusion conjecture. When refuting inductive
positions, consider the following. The example must be factual. It can’t be hypothetical. Is
it based on emotions? Is the example applicable to the issue at hand? Is the example a typ-
ical representation of reality, or is it an outlier? As the saying goes, hard cases make bad
law. Are there exceptions? Remember, it only takes one exception to disprove the logic leap
from the specific to the general. Are the historical data and statistics accurate, timely, and
applicable? Is the generalized conclusion logical, or is it slanted to advance an agenda? Is
the asserted conclusion relevant and worthwhile?
11.6.3 Influencing through Evidence

Presenting evidence can be an extremely effective way to influence others. Below are three
common types of evidence, and some thoughts on how to validate or refute what is presented:
● Factual Examples – Is it a reliable source? Is the information current and applicable to
the situation? Are the definitions and assumptions accurate and applicable?
● Statistics – Are the units defined? Do the units provide an accurate index of what we
want to know? Are the units comparable, for example you can’t accurately compare
rates? Do the statistics support another reasonable conclusion? Are the statistical
assumptions valid? Is the sample set realistic and appropriately representative? Are there
other studies that contradict the asserted conclusions?
● Authoritative Opinions – Is the endorsement relevant? Is the authority a credible expert?
Is the endorsement supported by evidence, or is it an opinion? Are they free from preju-
dice and exaggeration? Are their opinions consistent? Are there conflicting opinions
from other authorities?
11.6.4 Cause and Effect

Cause-and-Effect and Chain-Reaction arguments can be extremely powerful tactics, particularly
when asserting that present policies should be changed, or a course of action altered. It can show
a new solution will not only remove existing shortcomings, but realize additional benefits.
Whether advancing or refuting this line of thinking, there are some key points to con-
sider. The logic flow between the cause and effect is paramount. Does the cited cause have
the power or influence to produce the desired effect? Are there other causes that drive the
effect? Is the cause significant? Is the cause original, or is it just contributing? Are there
counteracting causes? Will new counteracting causes be created with the proposed solu-
tion? Beware assuming a cause is valid just because of timing or coincidence. If the cause
and effect is being cited from a similar situation elsewhere, ensure the underlying assump-
tions and framework are transferrable.
11.6.5 Refuting Other’s Positions

Just as important as being able to advance your own position is the ability to refute another.
Some methods can be applied at any time. Question definitions. Are they using words with
multiple definitions? Challenge assumptions. Challenge analysis. Minimize the issue.
Contest the evidence. Be contrarian and demonstrate the opposite conclusions can, and
should, be drawn from their argument. Use precedents, traditions, and accepted practices
to frame the assertion as a fringe idea. Leverage the others’ lack of knowledge and assert a
truth they cannot refute. Ask a fallacious question, with loaded assumptions where either
answer impugns. And never forget your most powerful weapon, common sense.
More effective methods require strong active listening skills to discern vulnerabilities. Expose
reasoning or logic flaws. Attack circular arguments, where two unproven or questionable asser-
tions are used to support each other. Expose inconsistencies. Shift the conversation to a more
general truth which incorporates the point at issue. Shift premises. Identify irrelevant points
that do not support or apply to the issue at hand. Hijack their logic to support your position.
Demonstrate their assertion would result in a finite number of solutions, all of which are unten-
able. List the possible solutions along with the advantages and disadvantages of each. This can
be very effective to focus the conversation and gain consensus in a group. Reduce their argument
to an absurdity by applying it to a specific case to make it look ridiculous. This can be extremely
powerful once mastered. Ben Franklin famously used this tactic to refute that one must own
property to vote by asserting, “You say I should own property in order to vote; suppose I own a
jackass, I then own property and thus I can vote. But suppose I sell the jackass; I no longer own
property, and therefore I cannot vote. Thus, the vote represents not me, but the jackass.”
11.6.6 Negative Thinkers

Negative thinkers can provide unique challenges to a PM whose objectives include finding
solutions and securing results. Four common types of negative thinkers are egotists, perfec-
tionists, procrastinators, and distractors. Egotists sometimes tend to be argumentative, and
may easily insult others. The motivation of this behavior is often to elevate their own posi-
tion by lowering that of others. Perfectionists often see the world in absolute, black-and-white,
terms. This approach often encourages them to go to extremes to pursue perfection while
readily dismissing the reality that most decisions are compromises that may both positively
and negatively impact the projects’ budget, scope, and schedule. Procrastinators may lack
follow-through or simply enjoy the adrenaline of pressing toward stress-filled deadlines.
This can also be a tactic to create conflict or assert one’s own importance by forcing issues
to become critical path tasks or be addressed by a larger group. Distractors are those who
pursue tangential ideas at the expense of the focused objectives.
When dealing with negative thinkers, it can be beneficial to try to ascertain the motivation
behind the negativity, and then utilize previously mentioned tactics to combat them. It
should be noted that this is best approached as a process, and not hoping for a single
eye-opening realization. One’s pessimism may be rooted in deeper psychological and personal
webs than just the project at hand. Conversion from pessimism takes time and trust.
11.6.7 Persuasion Tactics

Leverage your expertise and credibility. We trust doctors because they are experts in med-
ical knowledge. In the world of transportation project management, as PM, that is you. You
have the battle scars and war stories of success against overwhelming odds. You know the
SMEs and all the key team players. When viewed collectively, you should have a massive
level of credibility. Use this as an assurance to others to strengthen your position.
Use the bandwagon approach to marginalize the opposition. It isolates the outlier. Nine
out of ten dentists recommend something. Most people naturally want to be part of the
majority. Draw a clear distinction between the majority opinion and the minority fringe
outliers. This plays on the insecure who seek acceptance and validation through others.
Most people will follow a leader. For many, the destination is less important than safe
passage. A powerful and decisive presence of control may naturally encourage agreement
or compliance.
The Slippery Slope tactic presupposes an event may likely push the entire project or pro-
cess down a slippery slope, resulting in a chain reaction of negative consequences that are
out of your control, and cannot be stopped. The power of this is that while the immediate
action may be tenable, the end result is unacceptable. This can be an effective way to bring
a discussion back on point.
The False Dilemma frames the problem with a clear choice of fixed solutions, usually
two; when in actuality there may be many more possible resolutions. This can be an effec-
tive way to lead a conversation toward your intended conclusion.
Glittering generalities avoid specifics while making broad generalities that appear unas-
sailable. These often convey emotion, and can be extremely effective in setting acceptable,
and unacceptable, parameters for the discussion.
People want to feel informed, smart, and understood. There may be no faster way to lose
a crowd in a public involvement forum than to use technical jargon and acronyms, or to
speak in a condescending manner conveying they surely can’t understand. Make them feel
smart. Others won’t trust you if they don’t understand you. Use simple illustrations and
analogies. Talk in their vernacular to address their issues.
People rarely make their choices based on facts and logic. Most make emotional decisions
and then search for the logic to justify their choice. Psychological and emotional appeals
can be very powerful. When employing this approach, it is critical you capture and hold
others’ attention. You can appeal to their basic wants, their sentimental heartstrings, or
their blocked desire, i.e. – the town needs an enema. You can appeal to beloved symbols or
sentiments, using stories and emotionally loaded vocabulary. You can also appeal to their
wants, fears, angers, or compassion to properly frame the context of the conversation.
You may choose to rely on the persuasiveness of the speaker. Positional authority and a
respected reputation can be leveraged. Being genuine, sincere, and kind can go a long way
to establishing credibility. An appropriate sense of humor can be disarming and engaging.
A strong and pleasing voice with an interesting pitch, rate, volume, and cadence helps.
Active listening body language, consistent eye contact, good posture, reasonable hand and
body movement all add to your message. These can be powerful tools when combined with
a sincere and enthusiastic desire to obtain a response.
Your style of speech also matters. Choose effective, image-bearing words. Use names and
personal pronouns. Use simple words, avoid acronyms, and choose action verbs. Use
simple, balanced sentence structures. Avoid sentences where the meaning is not clear until
the end. When listing things, try to limit it to three. Strategically work in rhetorical devices
like the direct question, figures of speech, applicable quotes, comparisons, rhetorical ques-
tions, and human-interest stories. Never underestimate the power of repetition. Tell them
what you are going to say, say it, and then tell them what you told them.
11.7 Professional Development
“The best investment you can make is in yourself.”

– Warren Buffet
You are responsible for your own career. You are responsible for your own professional
development. Employers and industry organizations can provide tremendous resources
and guidance, but you are charting your own course. If you are not advancing or devel-
oping as you would like, look in the mirror.
If you are an engineer, earning the licensure of being a registered Professional Engineer
(PE) will likely open professional doors for you. The contrary is perhaps even more true;
you may find not having your PE will eventually limit your career advancement. If you are
a PM, earning a Project Management Institute (PMI) certification may present you with
additional opportunities. For instance, becoming a certified Project Management
Professional (PMP) adds an industry-recognized credential that increases your market-
ability. It is also likely the process of becoming registered or certified will increase your
knowledge, skills, and abilities that will enable you to be more productive and efficient in
your work. Licensures and Certifications are important steps in your career, but they are
not the end goal. They form a solid foundation upon which you can build your career.
Most licenses and certifications require some ongoing Professional Development Hours
(PDH) or Continuing Education Units (CEU) to remain in good standing with the issuing
body. Choose to make these much more than just obligations you seek to most expedi-
tiously satisfy. Eagerly pursue knowledge for the sake of knowledge. Make a plan for your
own personal development, and then be intentional in achieving it. You are solely respon-
sible for your own personal development.
11.7 Professional Development 267
The first step in effective self-improvement and professional development is to be

self-aware. Many tend to minimize their weaknesses with excuses or blaming others, while
overestimating their strengths. Others tend to not appreciate their strengths and focus on
their weaknesses. And most everyone has blind spots that they just don’t realize. Like all
planning, you can’t get to where you want to go if you don’t know where you are, or what
the path is to get there. Take the personality tests described in Chapter 7 of this book.
Participate in 360-degree feedback evaluations. Then purposefully work to refine your
strengths and enhance your weaknesses. Decide what you want, and then go get it.
There are also many ways to increase your knowledge and improve your skills outside of
organized classes and instruction. Be well read. Read trade journals. Be aware of industry
trends. Be curious. Ask why, often. Schedule time each day just to think. This may be your most
important appointment. Read business and industry books. Listen to lectures. Never stop
learning. Attend conferences. Find a mentor. Have lunch with a wise man or woman. As Henry
Wadsworth Longfellow said, “A single conversation across a table with a wise man is better than
ten years mere study of books.” Explore your tangential ponderings. Volunteer at your church or
with community organizations in ways that push you out of your comfort zone and stretch your
skills. What you gain in one area of your life is likely transferable to others. Keep the self-im-
provement momentum moving forward. Improve your verbal and written language skills.
It is a professional reality for many that the higher we professionally progress the less we
accomplish by ourselves, and the more we accomplish through others. We may spend less
time on technical work, replacing it with increased management, and eventually leadership,
responsibilities. As such, it is imperative that we continue to develop our softs skills. This
includes learning how to collaborate, how to build and direct teams, and how to delegate.
Remember that with the exception of licenses or some certifications, most professional
development is cumulative in nature. There often are no immediate or foreseeable returns
on your investment of time and energy. And much of this effort will be time after work that
you can easily choose to spend in other ways. That is your choice, but then readily accept
the consequences of your actions. Don’t complain you are not advancing if you aren’t
working to improve yourself.
Think about your own motivations and discover your own internal “WHY” you do things.
Why do you work? Why do you work where you work? Why did you choose your profes-
sion? Why did you apply to be in your current role? We only have so many years on earth,
and you have chosen to spend your workdays where you are, doing what you are doing.
Why? Don’t waste this time or watch the clock slowly tick to the end of day. Know why you
are where you are, doing what you are doing; then embrace it. Grow where you are planted.
Make a difference. Feel good about your positive contribution. Define your passions and
then find fulfillment in cultivating your passions. As you pursue your career goals and
professional development, remember work-life balance is critical to your joy, contentment,
and long-term personal and professional satisfaction in life.
269
12
Real-World Challenges
“Life is what we make it, always has been, always will be.”
– Grandma Moses
12.1 Ethics
“Relativity applies to physics, not ethics.”

– Albert Einstein
Nurses, doctors, and pharmacists consistently rank as the most trusted and ethical profes-
sions, followed closely by civil engineers. I suspect healthcare professions top these lists
because we want to believe those who are directly caring for our health are altruistically
acting in our best interests. But then civil engineers? Why is this the public perception? Is
it warranted? Do we live up to these expectations?
Ethics are the values and moral principles that guide our decisions and govern our
behavior. They are the parameters within which we operate. Our character should reliably
reveal our personal ethics. Malcolm Forbes said, “You can easily judge the character of
others by how they treat those who they think can do nothing for them.” My favorite definition
of character is that it is who you are when no one but God is watching. Consistency is par-
amount. As Vince Lombardi said, “Watch your actions, they become your habits. Watch your
habits, they become your character.” Hypocrisy should be abhorred, both privately and pro-
fessionally. Lombardi also said, “Practice does not make perfect. Only perfect practice makes
perfect.”
Our personal ethics are the foundation upon which our professional ethics should be
built. While there are certainly professional situations and decisions where right and wrong
are clearly evident, others live within the vast shades of gray. It is here where one’s character
and ethics become invaluable, serving as the North Star to safely navigate the seas of
ambiguity.
Public transportation projects have a direct and substantial impact on the community’s
quality of life. In the development and delivery of transportation projects, we serve as

270 12 Real-World Challenges
public agents and responsible stewards of public funds. As such, PMs and engineers should
hold themselves to the highest of standards, fiercely guarding and protecting the public
trust. This is especially true if they are licensed Professional Engineers (PE). In addition to
the many business and legal reasons, it is the right thing to do. Or as Mark Twain said,
“Always do the right thing – this will gratify some and astonish the rest.”
A civil engineer’s ethical obligation is first to the public, then to their employer and
client, and finally to other professionals. The National Society of Professional Engineers
(NSPE) has identified six fundamental canons of their Code of Ethics that impact each
obligation.
1) Engineers should recognize that the general public’s quality of life is directly dependent
upon their designs, decisions, and engineering judgments. As such it is imperative engi-
neers hold paramount public safety, health, and welfare.
2) Engineers should practice professional competence by preparing, performing, sealing,
and overseeing work only in areas for which they are qualified.
3) Engineers should maintain objectivity and truth in all professional services including
design, reports, statements, and testimony. All relevant and pertinent information
should be considered so that a sound technical decision can be made based upon
technical expertise, relevant experience, and honest conviction.
4) Engineers should be a faithful agent or trustee for their employer and client, and avoid
all potential conflicts of interest.
5) Engineers’ words and actions should be professional and remain above reproach by pre-
serving confidentiality and even the appearance of impropriety. Engineers should build
their professional reputation on the demonstrated merit of their expertise and provided
services.
6) Engineers should act in an honest, forthright, and responsible manner that enhances
and advances our noble profession
In ethical matters, do the right thing, all the time. Public transportation projects are by
definition, public projects. Assume all of your actions and decisions may be questioned or
investigated in the local news. The ends do not justify the means. PMs and PEs must
fiercely guard their credibility. As Abraham Lincoln said, “Be sure you put your feet in the
right place, then stand firm.”
12.2 Project Continuity
“Strategy must have continuity. It can’t be constantly reinvented.”

– Michael Porter
Public Transportation Projects can take a while to develop and deliver. Boston’s Big Dig
began in 1982 and was completed in 2007. There are plenty of other high-profile, and more
local, examples of projects that take decades to complete. These legacy projects are not typ-
ical, but also not uncommon. Pending the complexity, even newer, fast-tracked projects
will take years to complete. While there are many valid reasons for these durations, one
reason for delay that is not often discussed is staff turnover.
12.2 Project Continuity 271
Pending the organization, there can be significant turnover in the PM positions. A

challenge for new PMs is that it may take years for a project to progress from initiation to
construction. During this time the new PM is still learning and experiencing tasks, mile-
stones, and unexpected challenges for the first time. This learning curve can be accelerated
if they manage multiple projects, but it will likely still take many years to tie it all together
and find their own style. It will likely take many more years for their experiences to mature
their abilities and perceptions. With staff turnover, the project often suffers. While the
budget, scope, and schedule remain unchanged, most everything else may change. The
focused direction. The team’s culture, communications, and morale. Leadership and stake-
holder’s expectations. They can all change. Meanwhile, entropy is real. If left to their own
devices, transportation projects will naturally evolve to higher states of disorder.
Bureaucratic inertia can quickly take hold, particularly if the project is temporarily
orphaned without an active PM or during the transition period to a new PM when they are
working to get up to speed on project details, goals, expectations, risks, team members, and
outstanding issues. The reality is, it is not uncommon for larger transportation projects to
have multiple PMs over its lifespan.
Most DOTs and many localities have taken steps to minimize project disruption during
staff turnover by creating an abundance of policies, Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs),
and project management systems. These can be hugely helpful. But Transportation Project
Management is not exactly a factory-like process where similar results can be produced
with interchangeable parts. Employees have different strengths, weaknesses, interests, and
limitations they will leverage in their jobs. Different PMs will run their projects differently.
And that is okay. Different styles can be exceedingly successful.
The value in the policies, SOPs, and PM systems is they create an organizational and
operational structure within which the project is developed and delivered. A well-defined
PDP can make it much easier to pick up a project because once you discern where you are
in the process, you should know what has been done and what is left to do. A detailed CPM
schedule may be your best friend, and it should show you which tasks have been completed
and by whom, which tasks are next, who is the responsible task manager, and when they
are due. Established policies or PM-specific job aids can provide consistent and reliable
guidance on how to accomplish that which remains. Scheduled project status updates may
provide a detailed history of what has been done during these intervals, what is upcoming,
project risks, and action items with responsible parties. A formal electronic documentation
management system can be invaluable in quickly finding agreements, authorizations, per-
mits, the scoping report, required forms, decision documents, meeting notes and minutes,
public hearing transcripts, design exceptions or waivers, approved change management
submissions and decisions, cost estimates, plans, and other essential project documenta-
tion. If your organization does not have these institutional assets, you are putting your
projects at increased risk during your inevitable staff turnover.
On larger projects some organizations will assign a Deputy PM. This idea of an entrenched
backup PM is sometimes also used by consultants in turn-key designs. But it is far more
common that there is a single PM for each project that is responsible to know all the spe-
cifics and to develop and deliver the project on-time and on-budget.
So, what do you do when you are the PM taking over an ongoing project? Jump right in.
There may be a honeymoon period, but if your name is on the project, then it is your
responsibility. Leverage your organization’s policies, SOPs, and project management
systems. Move to quickly understand the project goals, its challenges, influential stake-
holders, expectations, and risks. Get to know your team. Work to build relationships and
learn their strengths and weaknesses. Keep the project momentum by focusing on the next
immediate milestones. Unless a decision requires immediate action, don’t rush to judg-
ments. The notable exception to this is if the project is running late or over budget. If you
are “righting the ship,” then you need to establish clear command control early on. This
does not necessarily translate into arbitrary assertions of positional power, but it does mean
you may need to immediately address the culture and prioritization of project tasks.
Pending project goals and expectations, you may need to do that which is necessary to put
the project back on track. This can be difficult to do without alienating the team. In these
instances, creating unified buy-in on shared goals and celebrating team successes can be
powerful instruments to propel the project forward.
12.3 Managing Chaos
“The chaos doesn’t end, you kinda’ just become the calm.”
– Nikki Rowe
As mentioned in Chapter 1, my favorite definition of a PM is an organizational leader ded-

icated to the imposition of order upon chaos, even if chaos is perfectly happy with the
status quo. Transportation projects are inherently complex. Stakeholders are diverse and
unpredictable. Applicable legislation and standards are ever evolving. Complicated solu-
tions intertwine a myriad of engineering disciplines. Then, most often it is all constructed
under traffic with the added challenge of maintaining acceptable traffic operations.
Transportation projects can have an abundance of moving parts, many of which you do not
directly control. Chaos can seem the order of the day. This can be especially true when a
PM is balancing multiple projects. Each can be at a different stage of development. Each
requiring different levels of attention in different ways with different stakeholders and
team members.
A PM should bring clarity, order, and calmness to the project chaos. Some days, a bigger
challenge is juggling conflicting priorities and bringing order to your daily schedule and
responsibilities. The PM’s daily to-do list can be varied, unpredictable, and ever changing.
Some days are so busy may feel like you don’t even have time to make a to-do list. On any
given day you may review public-hearing schematics with the lead designer for one project,
meet with a stakeholder to discuss potential noise wall impacts with a key stakeholder on
another project, meet with your consultant and team members to solve a hydraulic design
challenge on another project, talk with your programming folks to manage funding alloca-
tions on another project, review a draft interchange justification report on another project,
work with the geotechnical engineer and surveyors to schedule additional borings on
another project, do a forensic schedule analysis on a languishing project for your boss on
another project, work with construction to determine if there really is enough room to
place a crane in the shown easements on another project, provide webpage project updates
on another project, attend an evening meeting with an influential stakeholder group on
another project, and a million other things PMs do during their work to juggle many pro-
jects while striving to develop them all on time and on budget.
12.3 Managing Chaos 273
If before your work day is ended you make a daily to-do list for the next day (a practice I
would highly encourage), it is not uncommon that halfway through the next day you will
not have accomplished much on your prepared list. The work life of a PM is dynamic.
Flexibility, focus, and perspective are keys to success. Remain flexible in approach, but
maintain a laser-like focus on your objectives. It is not uncommon to, in real-time, priori-
tize urgent matters on different projects, all of which have to be done within a timeframe
that dictates not all will get done. Effective PMs know how to manage chaos.
Time is a PM’s most precious resource. Use it wisely. The temptation is to work to reduce
the number of items on your list of action items, perhaps even starting with the easiest ones
to expedite achievement. While this may be productive to a point, it is more important that
you are strategic. Be intentional with your time. You control your day, not the other way
around. As Coach John Wooden said, “Never mistake activity for achievement.”
Experience brings perspective, which is a wonderful tool to assist in prioritizing tasks.
Wisdom is knowing which fires of the day are truly important. Don’t do the most things
you can do in a day; do the most impactful things you can do in a day. This means some
days you may only work on one thing, but if it the most important, then that is what you
should do. Filter out the static to concentrate on what really matters.
One important function of a PM is to make decisions. In addition to making a wise
decision, a strong PM predicts and prepares for the intended and unintended consequences
of the decision. They think about what other disciplines, team members, and stakeholders
will be impacted. What will be the impacts to the project’s budget, scope, and schedule?
How will this impact resources availability?
While making wise decisions can be critical to success, indecision can kill it. As the
saying goes, “Be decisive. Right or wrong, make a decision. The road of life is paved with flat
squirrels who couldn’t make a decision.” Sometimes you need to make a decision. Often this
is in the midst of chaos where ambiguity is rampant. You may not know all the information
you want or need to know. Especially in these circumstances, remember indecision is a
decision. So be intentional and make a decision. Ask for advice. Defer to your organiza-
tion’s preferences or precedents. Consult key project documents. But make a decision. If
you are unclear how to proceed, remember your first priority is to guide the project to suc-
cess within the triple constraint of the established budget, scope, and schedule. If changes
need to be made, then follow applicable change management procedures. Evaluate unex-
pected developments through risk management glasses, and follow established risk
management procedures. Take care of your team. Do the right thing. And say Thank You to
those who helped.
Chaos is a relative term, really more of a feeling. It is a perceived lack of control or order.
A project can be progressing well, and then something changes. Momentum shifts. And
like a rising tide the team, stakeholders, leadership, or even the PM can suddenly feel like
the wheels are falling off even as you are racing downhill without trustworthy brakes.
Silence feeds the fear and speculations. Particularly when things aren’t going well and you
don’t know what to say, communication is imperative. There is a reason why citizens tune
in to hear their leaders address a national emergency in real-time. It is not so much that we
expect them to have all the answers, or even know all the questions. But it is reassuring to
know there is someone in charge. It is comforting to know they are aware of the issue and
working on a solution. Team members, executive leadership, and stakeholders are no dif-
ferent. The PM needs to exude reasonable and justified assurance that this too shall pass.
Make time out every day to think. Thinking is an undervalued and increasingly rare asset
in the workplace. In our rush to do more with less, we often don’t take the time to ask what
it is we should be doing and why. As PM, you are captaining your projects’ ships through
the sea of development. It is imperative you take time to think about the looming storms,
keep an eye on your outside threats, evaluate your crews’ strengths and weaknesses, take
inventory of your supplies and morale, review your shipping charter, and then chart a
course for your fleet to success. You can’t do this if you constantly reacting. You cannot
project stability and instill confidence to your team, your stakeholders, or your leadership
if you are constantly reacting. You need to think, plan, and execute.
When chaos rages as a tempest around you, be a steady hand. Be predictable in behavior.
Avoid extreme highs and lows. Be approachable. Lead by example. The PM sets the tone for
the team. Intentionally strive to convey a composed and calm demeanor. Be like a duck on
a pond. Even though your legs may be paddling like crazy under the water, others see you
calmly and gracefully gliding across the surface. Regardless of your schedule or remaining
action items, give your full attention to the issue at the moment. Listen, think, make a
decision, and move on. When things became more chaotic, you need to concentrate on
your stillness. When arguments become emotional and frenetic, you need to focus on solu-
tions. As Sun Tzu said, “In the midst of chaos, there is also opportunity.”
These same principles hold true when crisis occurs. In general, when crisis occurs, the
following game plan seems to provide some reasonable guidance.
● Safety first – Identify and take whatever actions are necessary for the safety of those who
may be immediately involved, and to ensure public safety
● Think – don’t react immediately or overreact
● Define the problem
● Identify alternatives
● Don’t access blame
● Take positive, authoritative action and pursue best solutions
● When the dust settles…evaluate the results and take corrective action, if necessary
● Communicate in all directions – up to leadership, down to staff and subject matter
experts, and out to stakeholders
12.4 Surviving an Audit
“In this world nothing is certain but death and taxes.”

In public agencies, audits can seem similarly inevitable.

Audits can be conducted by federal, state, local, or professional entities investigating your
finances, processes, protocols, and results. The focus of the audit can range from internal
financials to civil rights compliance to environmental permits and program compliance to
your business practices to your performance, and just about everything in between.
Regardless of the specifics, there are a few commonalities of all audits that you should rec-
ognize that will help you survive the scrutiny and come out cleanly on the other side.
12.4.1 Auditors – Who are They and How Do They Think?

Those being audited often feel they are the target of a modern-day witch hunt. While there
are certainly occasions where this is the case, in general that is not true. Auditors are simply
doing their job. In the cases where audits are required for recertification or as a condition
of oversight in administration of a program you are charged to administer, audits serve an
important role that ultimately may benefit your organization. The more you can help the
auditors complete their tasks, the better it will be, or at least the quicker it will be over.
With any audit it is important to set and maintain a proper perspective. Many auditors
are bright individuals who are quite passionate about ensuring compliance and improving
the world by improving your procedures. Some audits are extremely critical with results
that can carry extraordinary and damaging consequences. Most are not. You should take
every audit seriously, but as long as you are ethical, conscientious, and trying to do the
right thing, most audit results will not be overly earth-shattering, regardless of their
content. It is important to keep this perspective because no matter how prepared you may
be, they will find something. Their job is to look over your shoulder, examine how you
conduct a certain aspect of your business, and then write a report about it. They have to
write something.
It is important to understand the mindset of an auditor. Generally, they are compliance
minded regulators. Fundamentally, they think differently than an engineer or project man-
ager. Their task is to produce reports on those that produce tangible, real-world progress.
They are not driven to solve problems. Their job is to find problems. When they identify a
problem, identifying a solution is often not their concern or interest. Many do not have
experience, and may not even know how to solve the “real-world” problem. It is critical
that you understand that to most auditors, the process is paramount, and far more impor-
tant than the results. To many engineers and project managers, it can seem like common
sense is secondary to the mantra of compliance accomplished with an arbitrary form and
procedure that was surely created by someone who never actually built anything in their
entire lives. Whether this is the case or not is irrelevant. Audits are inevitable and it is your
job to safely guide your organization through them as painlessly and successfully as pos-
sible. Once you have acknowledged an auditor’s mindset, you can more effectively create
and execute your audit strategy. It is important to maintain this perspective when discuss-
ing the intended and unintended consequences of implementing any recommendations.
12.4.2 Preparing for the Audit

As with other aspects of life, there is no substitute for preparation. Auditors will generally
be with you for a very short time, and they will make broad assumptions on what you do
every day based upon the information presented and the impression they get from you dur-
ing those short hours or days. Consequently, it is advantageous that you plan an audit
strategy that includes having all needed documentation at your fingertips and choosing
effective spokesman to lead the discussions.
General and President Dwight D. Eisenhower said, “Plans are worthless. Planning is
essential.” Planning does not guarantee you favorable results, but lack of planning almost
always guarantees you unfavorable results. No one accidentally has a great audit.
In most cases, you will have ample advance notice to prepare for an upcoming audit. If
they do not provide one, request a list of suggested documents and records they will want
to review. You will also want to know a schedule of their visit and how many people will be
in their party. They may not provide you the list of names who be visiting, but they can
likely give you a sense of the areas of expertise that will be represented and requested. This
can be useful information in helping you determine the best space for the audit, and the
personnel you will want to have present or available.
When formulating an audit strategy, you should start with the list of documents and
records they will want to review. This will give you an indication of how wide a net they
will cast into your data archives. It can also provide insight as to the focus. Pending the
state of your records, their request can represent a significant effort. You need to plan so
you have the requested documentation available and organized. It can be helpful to estab-
lish a number or color-coded filing system to expedite easy access. This responsiveness can
go a long way to demonstrating you are taking the audit seriously, and is tangible evidence
you are conscientiously trying to do the right thing.
Pending the audit, just as important as their requested records are your documented Standard
Operating Procedures (SOPs). Auditors love SOPs. It allows them to easily examine your pro-
tocol and quickly have a feel for your workflow. SOPs allow them to easily check off the boxes
on their forms that you have a documented procedure. SOPs also provide a vehicle that can be
modified to easily incorporate their recommendations. If you do not have SOPs that you antic-
ipate they will want, you can quickly create them or find another way to demonstrate your
process is logical, consistent, and complies with the spirit and letter of the regulations.
As you prepare, it is appropriate to consider who will be involved in the audit. You need
to make available those individuals who have specific roles or responsibilities that are criti-
cal to supplying accurate insight of your procedures. You want to carefully choose individ-
uals who speak the auditors’ language. The classic example is ensuring your accountant
and controller are available to respond to financial questions. You also want to choose
representatives who are skilled and deliberate communicators who say what they mean,
mean what they say, and have the wisdom and discipline to practice discretion when
appropriate. Charisma can help, but is not the most desired characteristic. Most auditors
have little interest in establishing connections. The confidence and competency of your
audit response team’s lead spokesman can go a long way to providing a positive, forthright,
and cooperative impression in the auditors’ minds that can easily transfer to your program.
Many larger audits will have a multiple team approach. In this case, assign team leaders
and support staff well ahead of the audit. Ensure everyone knows their role and authority
during the audit. It is preferred that your organization speak with a single voice. The sec-
ond-best option is to speak as a single voice. So go over with your staff what they should
and should not discuss. Make sure each individual only speaks to their areas of direct
responsibility. This will minimize conflicting reports. These reminders are especially
important when auditors employ the method of attempting to separate staff on a team and
ask them all the same question to see if consistent answers are provided. This is a logical
tactic as they want to make sure the organization’s SOPs are being carried out by those who
actually do the work. So, if they ask the construction inspector about an accounting
question, it is the inspector’s responsibility to decline to answer and refer the auditor back
to the team leader so he can make sure the right person is responding to their inquiries.
12.4.3 During an Audit

Rule #1 is never lie…ever. Even if you don’t like the answer, it is always better to be truthful.
Do not guess or drift into hypothetical answers. Answer the question – no more – no less.
Beware of open-ended questions, or inquiries that seem to come from way out in right field
that may be intended to feel out areas of weakness. Don’t feel compelled to fill silence;
when you have answered the question, stop talking. Also be cautious if an auditing team
asks the same question in different ways. They may be fishing for a slightly contradictory
answer on a specific point of interest. So, if they ask you a question that sounds familiar,
you may say, “I think we covered that already. Was there an aspect of my previous answer you
would like me to clarify?”
As with most situations in life, your attitude can dramatically shape your experience.
Regardless of your initial instincts, make the conscious decision to approach the audit with
an open, honest, and positive attitude. Decide to view the audit as an opportunity to
improve your processes through an independent appraisal by those who see many other
organizations’ operations. And remember, unless it is critical; this too shall pass.
12.4.4 After an Audit

Cultures within organizations vary widely, from absolutely no documented policies to a
blind devotion to manuals. Each side of the spectrum has some benefits and potential pit-
falls. Organizations with no documented policies often tout flexibility and the ability to
nimbly address each situation on a case-by-case basis. In reality, each situation is unique
and there can certainly be benefit to the flexibility of seeking common sense solutions.
However, there is a high risk of making inconsistent and poor decisions, even as you open
your organization to accusations of favoritism or discrimination, be they real or perceived.
It is common that larger, government organizations are policy heavy. This eases onboard-
ing of new hires, and better facilitates continued operations during staff transitions; how-
ever, policies should not restrict sound business decisions. It can also be easier to track and
forecast workloads, expenses, and other managerial metrics for larger organizations.
However, it is very easy for such organizations to go overboard. This is especially prevalent
when those formulating the policies and protocol are detached from those actually doing
the work, or have never actually done the work. Very quickly, the workflow can become a
stiflingly documented process that cripples productivity while ensuring everyone has the
correctly completed form in their own Cover Your own Ass (CYA) file. Most organizations
are struggling to find their way somewhere in between. This is a constant battle as times,
technology, regulations, expectations, organizational, professional and elected leadership,
and personnel change. Most would agree that there are advantages to standardization
provided the processes increase efficiency and productivity. The point at which these addi-
tional SOPs do not add value to the process is the point at which you may want to trend
back on the flexibility side of the debate.
Audits can often bring this discussion and organizational struggle to the forefront as they
tend to promote rigid documentation of workflow. During discussions leading up to and
after the audit has concluded, it is important that a steady hand is guiding this ship who
will take and keep a healthy perspective and resist expedient and compulsive reactions.
Audits produce reports that typically include recommendations. Keeping an appropriate
perspective is critical as you decide what to do with these recommendations. You may use
your communication and political skills to shape the audit results and frame the recom-
mendations to your executive and political leaders. If appropriate, do not underestimate
the opportunities audit results and recommendations can present to be an impetus for
needed or desired change.
12.5 Scaling Project Approaches
“You must learn a new way to think before you can master a new way to be.”
– Marianne Williamson
Success breeds opportunity. The PMs on most larger projects were first granted that oppor-
tunity because of their success managing smaller projects. Not everyone can successfully
make this transition. One common reason for failure is that may PMs naively believe they
can scale up to larger projects by using the same processes, tools, and mindset that were
successful on smaller projects. They don’t fully appreciate the exponential increase in com-
plexity. This can be the significance of the unintended consequences of poor decisions and
missed deadlines, which can be crushing. The mounting avalanche of information and
decisions can quickly snowball and become overwhelming without previous experience,
strong procedures, and an experienced team. Successful large project PMs understand they
cannot run a large project like they did a small project, or they will fail.
So, what defines a small vs. large project? Most rely on cost (budget) thresholds. Some
rely on anticipated schedule durations. Others rely on the engineering complexity. More
advanced organizations select or assign the PM based upon a collection of factors. This may
include budget, schedule, and scope, but may also include considerations such as stake-
holder involvement, anticipated public opposition, risk control, political sensitivity or
indecision, team experience, utilities and right-of-way issues, presence of railroads, envi-
ronmental concerns, specialized construction challenges, problem and solution complexity
and communication demands.
Upscaling magnifies the bad and makes the good significantly harder to achieve. In order
to combat this immutable law of scaling, a PM should focus on the following ten areas that
should be intentionally addressed:
12.5.1 Budget
As a project budget grows, so do the financial complexities, oversight expectations, and
accounting scrutiny. Routine tasks like processing invoices and tracking the budget can
become far more complicated than expected. Additionally, as a project’s budget and com-
plexity increase, the estimation method may need to change. Be aware the level of effort to
secure an accurate estimate on a larger project may be significant. Quantitatively converting
qualitative risks to money, and then forecasting appropriate contingencies, reserves, and
inflation rates can be as much art as science. Established financial systems, practiced pro-
cedures, proven policies, and experienced administrative support are critical to creating
and maintaining the essential documentation needed to successfully execute the project
and satisfy all contractual and funding obligations.
12.5 Scaling Project Approaches 279
12.5.2 Scope
Fluidity and flexibility are essential to success of small projects. Larger projects require a
very different administrative structure. The complexities and nuances of a large project
scope can be significant. This can often result in a voluminous scoping document that the
PM must vigilantly protect. Scope creep is real. On larger projects, it is imperative the PM
rely on established change management procedures to document any changes, and inte-
grate them into the workflow while minimizing impact to the critical path.
12.5.3 Schedule
Microsoft Excel can only carry you so far. Larger projects can become exceedingly complex.
The number and interconnectivity of tasks require something more robust. Making,
tracking, and maintaining schedules should be done in programs with dynamic, critical
path method schedule engines such as MS Project, Project Web Application, or Primavera.
These programs allow you to manage the project, and properly evaluate schedule impacts
when performing risk analysis. These programs are also powerful enough to track and
manage resources and costs, if desired.
12.5.4 Teams
PMs can have tremendous success managing small projects with streamlined, nimble
teams that share common goals and a history of trust of productivity. There is a tipping
point where the critical mass of larger projects requires a completely different para-
digm. The size and the makeup of a large project team often includes hierarchical layers
with new and changing faces. Building and maintaining a high performing team on a
large project is a critical and significant accomplishment in its own right. A PM should
expect turnover in staff and key team positions throughout the life of a larger project.
Integrating new team members into the tasks, expectations, and culture of the project is
critical to success.
12.5.5 Communications
It is simple math. A team of two people have one communication link. A team of three has three
links. A team of four has six links. A team of five has ten possible communication links. As the
size of the project team and number of stakeholders increases, so does the time a PM must dedi-
cate to communication. Status reports, engineering summaries, meeting minutes, official
letters, requests, approvals, press releases, emails, public involvement documentation, and so
much more must all be carefully crafted, distributed, and stored. Perhaps nothing is more dis-
ruptive and demoralizing to a team than an open-ended Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
request on a large project where a comprehensive document management approach is nonexis-
tent. A PM must control the message, and strive to keep communications among the team, and
to the stakeholders, effective and accurate to efficiently forward progress while minimizing inac-
curate assumptions, misconceptions rumors, and innuendos.
12.5.6 Project Complexities

PMs often rely on personal strengths and intuition to navigate ambiguity and successfully
complete smaller projects. Larger projects can be exponentially more complex than smaller
projects in intended and unintended ways. This often elevates the many Subject Matter
Expert (SME) roles, and emphasizes the importance of their strategic, timely, and syner-
gistic collaboration. Larger, more complex, projects must rely on established methodol-
ogies, appropriate tools, and proven procedures. Trying to scale up the flexibility of smaller
projects can have disastrous results on larger projects.
12.5.7 Risks
Risks on smaller projects tend to be less in numbers, intensity, and complexity. Consequently,
a small project PM can often very successfully identify, evaluate, and resolve risks as they arise
in a rather informal manner. On larger projects, this is a recipe for disaster. Established risk
tools (e.g., risk analysis, risk log, etc.) should be leveraged within a proven risk management
environment. A PM must be vigilant in encouraging his team to identify, and appropriately
elevate, risks so they may be properly evaluated and addressed. Risk resolution should follow
established change management procedures that evaluate actions based upon resultant effects
on budgets, scope, and schedule. Additionally, there may be management actions to accom-
modate risks (e.g., adjusting contingencies, updating schedule and then budget, etc.). The
larger and more complex a project is, the more time the PM will spend on risk management.
12.5.8 Performance Metrics

Unless already in place on a program-wide basis, smaller projects rarely emphasize or uti-
lize performance metrics. Conversely, performance metrics are fundamental to most larger
projects. They can be an essential and authoritative tool to transparently communicate
progress to stakeholders, the media, and the public. If properly chosen, performance met-
rics are also a powerful tool the PM should leverage to monitor progress, prioritize focuses,
and drive productivity. Bottom line is what gets measured gets done.
12.5.9 PMs Project Organization

The day-to-day administrative challenges of a large project can be overwhelming. An orga-
nized document management system and communication plan are critical and founda-
tional elements of success. Likewise, organizational policies and procedures are essential
to direct and manage a larger project.
12.5.10 Stakeholder Involvement

Larger projects can galvanize a surprising number of local, regional, and even national
stakeholder groups. The intensity, organization, persistence, creativity, and influence of an
active Home Owner Association, local school’s PTA, local business association, a church or
synagogue, an environmental protection minded entity, a bike and pedestrian advocacy
group, or a single-minded individual can be astounding. An experienced, large project PM
12.6 Guidance Pyramid 281
proactively seeks out key stakeholders and involves them in the project and process. The
time and effort to meet with them, listen to their evolving concerns, and keep them
informed should not be underestimated.
12.6 Guidance Pyramid
“Good governance is less about structure and rules than being focused, effective, and
accountable.”
– Pearl Zhu
Managing a transportation project can be a delicate dance to satisfy a myriad of success

criteria. In addition to the project’s purpose and need, leadership and stakeholder expecta-
tions, engineering and economic realities, a PM must successfully navigate the project ship
within its organization’s applicable rules and regulations. Engineers often immediately
revert to various federal, state, and local design standards. While these are tremendously
important, standards only tell part of the story.
Governance is the structure by which roles and relationships between project team mem-
bers and an organization’s high-level decision makers are defined. The Guidance Hierarchy
should consist of four levels, each conveying a critical aspect of the organization’s governance
strategy, as shown in Figure 12.1. Together they reflect and shape the organization’s approach,
culture, and expectations. Understanding the purpose of, and relationship between, Policies,
Standards, Procedures, and Guidelines will better enable a PM to discern how to apply the
various guidance documents to most efficiently manage and deliver their projects.
Guideline
Applicability
Who, How, and When Procedure
What Standard
Why Policy
Figure 12.1 Guidance pyramid.
12.6.1 Policies
Successful organizations start with the Why. Policies should address the fundamental ques-
tions of Why an organization does what it is doing. They are typically formal statements
that are written or approved by Senior Management. Driven by business objectives and
consistent with mission and vision statements, policies convey the organization’s
principles and the risks leadership is willing to accept. They lay the foundation upon which
all other aspects of the guidance hierarchy are built. They should be solid, and insulated
from whimsy and hurried change.
12.6.2 Standards
After you know the Why, you can focus on the What. Standards detail the What. They
describe what is required in quantifiable measures. In transportation projects these can be,
and often are, established at Federal, State, and Local levels, with the higher levels trump-
ing the lower levels. Standards are the rules that give formal policies shape and direction.
One critical nuance in standards is the vast intentional difference between the verbs
“shall” and “should.” “Shall” dictates a mandatory requirement that must be satisfied.
“Should” opens the door for some flexibility in interpretation and application in the form
of sound engineering judgment. In case it is needed or justified, every PM should know the
avenues by which exceptions and waivers can be considered and granted for the various
standards. Generally speaking, exceptions and waivers should not replace sound engi-
neering design. They are intended to be a Plan B, and should be used as such.
12.6.3 Procedures
With the Why and What defined, an organization can effectively describe the How, which
also includes the Who and When. Procedures provide detailed step-by-step implementation
instructions on how to achieve the goal or mandate. The word procedure is derived from the
word process. Procedures should build upon the Why of Policies and the What of Standards,
and focus on the detailed guidance that directs individuals to successfully complete an
established process. As such they should be readable and functional, finding the sweet spot
of how much information to provide so all will understand and be able to comply.
While some procedures become entrenched and bear the formal or informal label of
Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), others are prone to change. Policies should stand
the test of time. By contrast Procedures may often be modified in response, or to drive,
changing business, industry, legislative, or operational preferences or requirements.
Accordingly, procedures should adhere to strict change control processes that document
changes and clearly tracks historic and current versions of the guidance.
12.6.4 Guidelines
Guidelines are less formal recommendations of action that can provide very effective
guidance where other documents are silent. They typically take the form of general recom-
mendations while inherently providing flexibility for the unknown and sound engineering
judgment. Guidelines can prove particularly helpful when specific standards do not apply.
These are the time proven advice of “General Rules of Thumb” and “Best Practices” that
can help one navigate through a sea of ambiguity.
12.7 Planning Fallacy 283
12.7 Planning Fallacy
“The planning fallacy is that you make a plan, which is usually a best-case scenario. Then
you assume that the outcome will follow your plan, even when you should know better.”
– Daniel Kahneman
Most transportation projects are delivered late and are over budget. How is this possible
when they are typically designed and managed by intelligent, motivated, and well-inten-
tioned engineers? Yet Boston’s Big Dig that was supposed to be completed for $2.8 billion
in 1997 was finally completed in 2007 for $14.8 billion. The Concorde supersonic airplane
experienced cost overruns of 1,100%. The Sydney Opera House was over budget by 1,400%!
How is this possible? Engineers are supposed to be good at math and logic games. And
aren’t schedules and cost estimates exactly that?
In 1979, Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky introduced the idea of the Planning
Fallacy, the human phenomena in which we tend to grossly underestimate the time it takes
to accomplish tasks. Kahneman later refined this principle in 2003 to extend beyond sched-
ules and also include cost and risk.
Consider a survey by College Board of 1 million college students. 70% ranked their own
leadership abilities above average compared to their peers, while just 2% rated themselves
below average. In their abilities to get along with others, 25% ranked themselves in the top
1%. In another study, on average incoming college students expected to academically per-
form better than 84% of their peers. These opinions defy both logic and reality. You might
think we get better at this with age and wisdom. But generally speaking, we are astonish-
ingly terrible at estimating, be it in terms of time, cost, risk, or even our own abilities.
In addition to our own estimating limitations, there are other personal, professional, and
institutional reasons that consciously or subconsciously promote the Planning Fallacy.
This may be especially true within the transportation industry. Those that start a transpor-
tation project rarely finish it. Planners, politicians, and engineers need to sell the project so
it is selected and funded. Planning predictions are naturally forward focused, which makes
it far easier to disregard past performance and be overly optimistic with current situations
and anticipated efficiencies from ongoing or anticipated leadership initiatives and process
improvements. It is common to overestimate benefits and organizational efficiencies while
underestimating schedule, costs, and risks. The reality is optimistic estimates boost the
project’s benefit/cost ration, and increases the chance of securing funding. Sell the idea and
sort out the details later. Optimistic estimates make great political sound bites, resonate
with the community, and can help advance individual careers. Optimistic estimates are
consistent with an organization’s aggressive objectives and stretch goals.
There are other practical reasons why the Planning Fallacy may occur. Successful people
often assume others, and the organization itself, does or should have the same productivity
as they do. The reality can be quite different. A better PM will deliver a project faster than
a less skilled PM. Professional leadership is not an interchangeable commodity.
Additionally, it is easy to create a best-case scenario for a high-priority project that does not
take into account other projects and initiatives, that are known or may as yet be undefined,
that will drain resources from an idealized schedule. Projects schedules are often created
with the inherent assumption that they are and will always remain the top priority for all
working on it from start to finish. Leveling resources and workloads across the program are
rarely reflected in individual project schedules.
Further exacerbating the impact of the Planning Fallacy is the Optimism Bias, which is
our natural tendency to underestimate the probability of experiencing adverse effects. This
can go well beyond a glass half-full optimism. Our perception of risk can be in direct oppo-
sition to contrary evidence, and even our own personal experiences. We tend to misper-
ceive causes of certain events, giving ourselves perhaps undue credit for positive outcomes,
while we may readily attribute negative outcomes to external factors. We tend to overexag-
gerate our talents, wisdom, influence, and control over risk factors that we truly don’t con-
trol, such as inflation, stakeholder and community sentiment, and so forth. We are also
quick to discount the Black Swan event. Named after the historic belief that black swans
did not exist until they were discovered in nature, this principle captures our inclination to
disregard an unusual event or circumstance that we consider beyond the realm of normal
expectations. In retrospect, these high-impact events happen more frequently than we
acknowledge, such as a hurricane disrupting construction or supply chains in the southeast
United States.
Complicating matters is the fact that in transportation projects, those making the opti-
mistic estimates rarely bear the consequences of resulting budget and schedule busts.
Underfunded projects with inadequate scopes and unrealistic schedules set unachievable
expectations with leadership and stakeholders. There is also a real human impact on the
PM and staff who find themselves in a very difficult situation that institutionally constrains
their opportunities to succeed. Morale quickly erodes, accelerating with each request to
justify the delays and cost overruns while providing yet another recovery action plan. If
persistent and systemic, the discontent will ultimately produce staff ambivalence, turn-
over, and loss of agency credibility.
Once the original optimistic estimate is made, another tenant of the Planning Fallacy
takes hold, Anchoring. This is when the original estimate intentionally or unintentionally
becomes the default benchmark. Anchoring can be strengthened when a project schedule
or budget is tied to other issues and leveraged for other uses. Consider the politician who
promises to deliver a signature project by the next election, or a public speech by leadership
committing to turning around a stagnant project by an arbitrary or meaningful date. The
more entrenched that original anchored estimate becomes, the harder it is to revise it. This
can be especially true in organizations that culturally discourage bad news that conflicts
with the overall message and theme, regardless of its merit. Bearers of bad news may be
labeled difficult, disloyal, or incapable. In extreme cases they may be professionally
shunned, or even have their careers stalled or redirected.
Like so many other things in life, the first step toward a solution is acknowledging there
is a problem. Recognition of the Planning Fallacy by Project Managers, Program Managers,
Planners, and Leadership can go a long way to enabling an effective approach. Practically,
it is paramount that schedule and budget estimates are prepared to appropriate baselines
of similar projects. These reference class projects provide comparisons to actual past
performance. This data should be adjusted to account for risk and confidence levels in the
estimates. Mature organizations will evaluate their projects in order to create solid, pro-
gram-wide schedule templates that balance past performance with department objectives.
These templates should be regularly proofed against actual past performance.
12.8 Closing Thoughts 285
Optimism is a wonderful attribute that enables us to look forward with eager anticipa-
tion. Optimism can motivate employees and inspire a community. Optimism can improve
morale and create a vibrant and healthy culture. While there may be many reasons to be
optimistic as we estimate project schedules, costs, and risks, it is our responsibility as engi-
neers and public servants to also be realistic. Not only is it the better long-term business
decision, it is the right thing to do. Credibility can take a lifetime to earn, and a moment to
lose. Fiercely guard it.
12.8 Closing Thoughts
“To inspire starts with the clarity of WHY.”
– Simon Sinek
In his book Start with Why, Simon Sinek details the critical importance of building your
business foundation on the WHY. Most businesses focus on the WHAT. But businesses that
build fanatical loyalty among their employees and customers have an inherent consistency of
purpose and passion that permeates their operations at all levels. They start with the WHY.
Those of us fortunate enough to work in the transportation industry, never have to
wonder about the WHY. We have a noble calling. We save lives. We ensure public safety. We
fuel economic growth and development. We ensure the efficient movement of people and
goods that drives, sustains, and enhances the economy. We make a difference. We make a
direct, meaningful, and enduring impact on people’s lives, improving the quality of life in
the communities in which we live, work, worship, and play. As PMs, we are uniquely posi-
tioned to drive the development and delivery of transportation projects. This is a sober and
honorable responsibility.
To all transportation project managers…Godspeed!
“We will either find a way, or make one.”

– Hannibal
287
Index
Note: Page numbers followed by “f” refer to figures.
a big picture 2–3, 41, 43, 57, 72, 74, 140, 141,
accurate estimation 36, 43, 53, 61, 63–64, 278 183, 186, 204, 208, 217, 224, 237, 259
action-oriented communicators 173, 174 bottom-up estimation 54
active listening 174, 205, 256, 264, 266 bridging technique 189
acute situational awareness 206 budget baselines 74–75, 227
advancing/refuting arguments: budget management:
cause and effect 264 change management 59–60
deductive vs. inductive reasoning contingency 61
262–263, 262f cost management plan 57–58
evidence 263 estimates and public 61–62
negative thinkers 264–265 estimate validation 58
persuasion tactics 265–266 formatting estimates 60–61
positions 264 triple constraint 58–59, 59f
propositions 261–262 budget process 44–45, 44f
advertise 20 budgets vs. estimation 43–44
advertise plans 36–39, 39f business intelligence (BI) 230, 237
Agile project management 222
analogous estimation 52, 53 c
anchoring 62, 284 categorical exclusion (CE/CX) 24
application-based selections 50, 58 change management 4, 5, 59–60, 94,
appraisal costs 165 213–215
aspirational OKRs 218 change management plan 8, 215, 215f
auditors 275, 276 chaos management 272–274
audit surviving: citizens information meeting (CIM) 29, 30,
during 277 71, 152, 182
after 277–278 Clifton strengths 138–140, 138f
auditors 275 closing scoping 73–74, 73f
preparing 275–276 coaching 123, 244
public agencies 274 coercive power 120
cognitive AI 231
b communications 29, 70, 116, 121, 148, 149f,
bandwagon approach 265 168–170, 202–203, 206–207, 245, 279
benefit–cost (B/C) 50, 58, 69 management 171–172

288 Index
plan 7–8, 170–171, 170f conformance and

styles 172–174, 173f nonconformance 164–165
concurrent engineering 22, 225–226 constructability issues 167
cone of uncertainty 49, 50f, 62, 64, 65, 227 construction equipment 165
conflict management 244 consulting firms 167
conflict resolution: errors and omissions 164, 166, 167
collaborative problem-solving 120 organizational maturity 167
compromising and reconciling 120 organizational thresholds 164
forcing/directing 120 professional procurement process 166
smoothing/accommodating 120 public transportation projects 166
withdrawing/avoiding 120 cost variance (CV) 239, 239f
conflict scenario (CS) 131 CPI/SPI project insights 240f
conformance costs 164–165 CPM scheduling software 97
construction (CN) 20, 21, 52, 60, crashing the schedule 96–97
229, 272 criteria-based project selection 69
inspectors 162 critical estimate components 46–47
procurement 36 critical path method (CPM) 219
construction engineering inspections actual dates 88
(CEI) 36, 155, 162–163 critical path basics 87–88, 91f
consultant procurement 69–70 current dates 88
consultants management: float 87
budget (cost) 145, 146f forward and backward pass 88–91,
civil engineering 142 89f, 90f
communications 148, 149f Gantt chart 91–92, 92f
contract 146, 147f leads and lags 86
owner-operators 142 network path 88
professional service procurement planned dates 88
142–144, 143f scheduling methodologies 83
quality 148, 149f tasks 84
resources 147–148, 149f constraints 86–87
risks 146–147, 148f detail box 89f
roles and responsibilities 144–145 durations 84–85
schedule 146, 147f interdependencies 85–86
scope of services 145, 145f three sets of dates (Planned, Current, and
tips 148, 150 Actual) 88
continuing education units (CEU) 266 workflow 89f
continuous flow intersections (CFI) 17
control thresholds 96 d
cooperation vs. collaboration 257 decision making 8, 181, 245
coordination issues 158–159 decision-making meetings 248
corporate cultures 250 deductive vs. inductive reasoning 262–263,
corrective thresholds 96 262f
cost estimate components 48f Departments of Transportation (DOTs) 2,
cost management plan 7, 57–58 20
cost performance index (CPI) 239, 240f descriptive analytics 229–230
costs of quality: design-bid-build process 38
budget and schedule consequences 167 detailed design phase 30–34, 33f
communications 168 detailed estimation 54
communication styles 166 diagnostic analytics 230
Index 289
diverging diamond interchanges (DDI) 17 PERT 53

dominance, influence, steadiness and preliminary 51–52, 52f
compliance (DISC) 128–130, 129f, project development process 51f
130f range vs. single number 56–57
risk-based 55–56
e validation 58
earned value management (EVM): ethics 269–270
baseline schedule 238 ethos 255
definitions 237, 238f executing 41, 138, 139, 144, 156, 171,
measures 239 183–184, 224, 233
overview 237, 238f expectation gap 198–199, 199f
economic development 19, 285 expected monetary value (EMV) 108
economic growth 285 expert power 120
effective communication 174–175 external failure costs 165
80/20 rule 253, 253f
Eisenhower matrix 252–253, 252f f
electronic documentation management fast-tracking 96–97
system 271 federal authorizations 21, 60
emotional intelligence 126, 203, 244, 245 Federal Highway Administration/Association
empathy 119, 125, 201, 205 (FHWA) 17, 76, 160, 217
enforcement inspectors 162 final design phase 34–36, 37f
engineering education 2, 126, 244 financial resources 76, 216
engineer’s bias 215 Findings of No Significant Impact
engineer’s estimation 54–55 (FONSI) 24, 32
Enneagram: finish to finish (FF) relationships 86f
lines 137–138, 138f finish to start (FS) relationships 85f
overview 134f five project stages 19–20, 20f
personality types 134 formatting estimation 60–61
type descriptions 40/70 Powell rule 211, 211f
feeling 136f Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
instinctive 135f 95, 279
thinking 137f functional organization 8
wings 136
environmental assessment (EA) 24 g
environmental impact statement (EIS) 24 geographic information systems (GIS)
erosion and sediment control (ESC) 22, 220
32, 36 gold-plating 81
estimate at completion (EAC) 240–241 governing agency inspectors 162–163
estimate to complete (ETC) 241 guidance pyramid 281f
estimation: governance 281
components 47–48 guidelines 282
range vs. single number 56–57 policies 281–282
risks and cost components 48f procedures 282
types standards 282
analogous 52
bottom-up 54 h
detailed 54 hard constraints 86
engineer’s 54–55 hard dependencies 97
parametric 52–53 hard logic 96
290 Index
healthy work-life balance 254 organizations 186, 187

Hermann Brain Dominance Instrument preparation 188–189
(HBDI) 172, 173 public opinion 187
Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI) 16 questioning 186
hurricane disrupting construction 284 requests 186–187
hydraulic analysis 22, 213 setting up 187
hypercritical tasks 87 unpleasant situation 189
invasive investigations 24
i
idea-oriented communicators 173, 174 k
independent assurance (IA) 155 Kaizen approach 158
independent verification (IV) 155 knowledge quadrant 104–105, 104f
ineffective communication 169 knowledge quadrant estimation 46f
inflation 45, 47–49, 60–62, 75, 83, 143, 221, known-knowns (KK) 104
234, 278, 284 known-unknowns (KU) 104
influence management 205, 256f
consensus/compliance 254 l
foundation of humility 256 leadership 11, 49, 59, 60, 65, 68, 70, 87, 94,
pillars 256 95, 118, 120, 125, 152, 175–176, 191,
alignment 257–258 201, 204, 205, 210, 234, 244, 246, 251,
balanced 259 258, 267, 271, 274, 283, 284
leverages networks 260 logos 255
situational awareness 260–261
team promotion 258–259 m
technically reliable 259 machine learning 231
trust 256–257, 257f maintenance of traffic/transportation
reliable techniques 255 (MOT) 25, 32, 36, 72
skill set 254 managing expectations 200f, 207f
spheres 255 address conflict 202
time communicating 254 approaches 196–198
valuable information 254 being honest and forthright 200–201
influencing 113, 138, 139, 203, 205, capturing 201–202
245, 263 communication 202–203
informational power 120 deliver 204
information sharing meetings 248 gap 198–199, 199f
informed consent 254 vs. goals 196
innumeracy 232 influence 203
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety institutional inertia 196
(IIHS) 16 intellectual and professional
interchange access report (IAR) 26 background 196
internal failure costs 165 know your capabilities 200
interposal skills 244 managing down 205–206
interruptions 253 managing up 204–205
interview 70, 143, 166, 185, 189–190, 191 monitor 204
avoid tricky questions 190–191 prioritizing 202
control and authority 187 time consuming 195
crisis 192–193 mandatory logic 97
location 187–188 manufacturer inspectors 163
news conference 191–192 Maslow’s hierarchy 124, 124f
Index 291
matrix organizations 8, 9 noninvasive investigations 24

media relations: nonverbal communications 186
interview (See interview) notice to proceed (NTP) 20
types 185–186
meetings 22, 24, 28, 32, 36, 68, 70, 80, 102, o
166, 182, 198, 206, 245 objectives and key results (OKRs) 218–219
30% design review 72 on-site interviews 187–188
characteristics of successful 250–251 operational OKRs 218
formats/styles 249–250 optimism 285
leaders, characteristics of successful 251 optimism bias 62, 284
monthly status 116 organizational basics:
performance 151 PMO 9–10
purpose 247 projects, programs and portfolios 10–13,
self-evident 247 11f, 13f
types 248–249 structures 8–9, 9f
metropolitan planning organizations organizational consistency 45–46
(MPOs) 76 organizational maturity 156, 156f, 157f,
monitor communications 172 229–231, 230f
monitoring risks: organizational risk tolerance 100f
communication 117–118 organizational structures 8–9, 9f, 120
and controlling 116 owner independent assessment (OIA) 155
defined 114 owner independent validation (OIV) 155
exercising 114
metrics 116–117, 117f p
project completion 114 paradigm shift 100, 182, 216, 241
roadway improvement 113 parametric estimation 52–53
triggers 114–116 Pareto principle (80/20 rule) 253, 253f
Monte Carlo simulation 56, 108 pathos 255
motivation 75, 80, 97, 121, 124, 126, 131, PDP phases 22, 23f
178–180, 201, 245, 256, 258, 264, 265, people-oriented communicators 173, 174
267 performance-based design (PBD) 18,
motivational value systems (MVS) 131 216–218, 216f, 220, 224
multimodal transportation systems 2 performance metrics:
Myers-Briggs type indicator (MBTI) accurate estimate 63–64
126–128, 127f, 128f apples to apples 231
big picture 237
n data science maturity ladder 236
National Environmental Protection Act end goal 228–229
(NEPA) 24, 25 engineering disciplines 236
National Highway Safety Traffic EVM 237–241
Administration (NHSTA) 16 innumeracy 232
National Highway System (NHS) 160 intentions 229
National Society of Professional Engineers metric creators vs. consumers 234
(NSPE) 15, 270 metric logic 235
negotiation 34, 35, 144, 244, 257 objective vs. subjective measures 232–233
news conference 185, 191–192 organizational maturity 229–231, 230f
news media 185 organizational motivations 234
nonconformance costs 164–165 outputs vs. outcomes 233
nonessential design elements 4 overview 62–63
292 Index
project busts 64–65 program evaluation and review technique

public funds 65 (PERT) 53, 108
Simpson’s paradox 235–236, 236f project budgets 7, 42–45, 52, 64, 81, 145,
time-tested 241 162, 217, 239, 278
transportation project 237 project-centric approach 5
personality assessments: project communications:
business 126 effective 174–175
Clifton strengths 138–140, 138f importance of 169
DISC 128–130, 129f, 130f management 171–172
diversity of thought 125 monitor 172
Enneagram 131, 134–138, 134f–138f plan 170–171, 170f
influence management 125 processes 170
interchangeable commodity 126 styles 172–174, 173f
MBTI 126–128, 127f, 128f project continuity 270–272
project objectives 126 project details 6, 79, 271
SDI 131, 131f–134f project development process (PDP) 20–22,
summary 140 34, 41, 49, 51f, 59, 64, 85, 88, 219, 224,
personal power 120 225, 244
persuasive power 120 project initiation 68–69
planned vs. actual progress 98 project interdependencies 213
planning fallacy 283–285 projectized organizations 9
plan quality management 156 project management 8, 10, 12, 55, 67, 80.
plans, specifications and estimate (PSE) See also project management
36, 37 methodologies
political/cultural awareness 245 organizational structures 9f
power-interest matrix 178 qualitative risk assessment 106
pre-advertisement conference (PAC) 36 quantitative risk analysis 107
predictive analytics 230–231 risk management 99
predictive thresholds 96 systematic approach 98
preliminary design meeting 25 workflow 88
preliminary design phase 28–30, 31f project management methodologies 222f
preliminary engineering (PE) 20, 21, 52, 60 Agile 222
preliminary estimation 51–52, 52f altitude matters 224–225
preliminary field inspection (PFI) 25, 72 changing conditions 219–221
prescriptive analytics 231 changing performance metrics 226–227
pressure-based power 120 concurrent engineering 225–226
prevention costs 165 fixed and flexible constraints 220f
print media 185 hybrid approach 222–224, 228
proactive communications 215 levels 225f
probabilistic risk analysis 56 project approach comparison 223f
problem-solving meetings 248–249 Waterfall 221
process-oriented communicators 172–173 Waterfall vs. Agile 223f, 226f
product vs. process issue 157–158 Project Management Office (PMO) 9–10, 76
professional development 245, 247, 266–267 Project Management Plan (PMP) 4, 23–25,
professional development hours (PDH) 266 57, 68, 77, 79, 92, 102, 116, 158, 170,
professional engineer (PE) 15, 161, 167, 207, 266
266, 270 guidance/templates 6–8, 6f
professional service procurement organizational guidance 5
142–144, 143f staff transitions 5
Index 293
project manager (PM) 1, 21f, 76, 226, 237, quality control (QC) 58, 154
259, 271–274, 279–284 vs. quality assurance (QA) 153–154, 153f,
acquisitions 35 154f
change management 217 quality management:
conflict resolution 202 definitions 152
contracting agent 38 monitoring and controlling 156f
development team 183 coordination issues 158–159
environmental professionals 25 fundamental approaches 156
information systems 10 organizational maturity 156, 156f, 157f
lead designer 26 product vs. process issue 157–158
media interviews 185 quality management plan 158
methodologies 225f VE 159–161
mission execution 2 overview 151–152
organizations 154, 183 QC/QA layers 154–155
planning fallacy 284 QC vs. QA 153–154, 153f, 154f
project-related tasks 9 qualitative vs. quantitative 152–153
project’s information flow 205 quality management plan 8, 158
resource optimization techniques 141 quality measurement:
risk register 109 CEI 162–163
schedule 95 hard truth 161–162
scoping process 24 QA/QC tips 163
SMART goals 196 quantitative goals:
soft skills 244–245 measured qualitatively 197
stakeholder involvement 175 measured quantitatively 197
team atmosphere 257 quantitative risk analysis 107–108, 108f
UFI meeting 33
visual and digital technology 250 r
project monitor/control: RACI chart 140–141
crisis 208–212, 209f referent power 120
formal and informal metrics 206 regional taxing authorities 76
juggling multiple projects 212–213 relationship building 125, 138, 139
priorities 208 request for proposals (RFP) 69, 145, 197
tiers of importance 206–208, 206f residual risk 102, 112
Project Scoping Kickoff Meeting 70 resource allocation 52, 91, 141
propositions 204, 257, 261–262 resource availability 141
public agencies 2, 41, 69, 219, resource breakdown structure 141
225, 274 resource calendar 141
public hearing 22, 29, 30, 78, 81, 115, 182, resource leveling 141
227, 233, 250, 254 resource management:
public information vs. involvement 181 collaborative decision making 119
public participation 29, 185 conflict 120
culture matters 119
q delegation 121
qualitative goals: mentoring 121
measured qualitatively 197–198 motivators 124
measured quantitatively 197 positional power 120
qualitative risk assessment 106–107, 107f positive intent 120
quality assurance (QA) 58, 153–155 skill sets 119
quality assurance manager (QAM) 155 SMART goals 121
294 Index
team-building experience 121 risk management plan 7, 101–102

team culture 125 risk mitigation 110, 112
team development and risk monitoring. See monitoring risks
management 119–125 risk register 7, 28, 55, 56, 103, 105, 106f, 181,
theory of constraints 121 199
Tuckman ladder 122–124, 122f risk responses 100, 105
well-being 125 change control 112
resource management plan 7, 141–142 contingency plans 113
resource optimization techniques 141 negative risks (threats) 109–111, 110f, 111f
resource planning 140–142 planning 109
resource smoothing 141 positive risks (opportunities) 111–112,
responsibility assignment matrix 111f, 112f
(RAM) 141 proactively/reactively 109
responsible, accountable, consults and risk triggers 109, 110, 112, 114–116
informs (RACE) 141 roadway safety 15
restricted crossing U-turns (RCUT) 17 roundabouts 17
restructuring resources 208
returns-on-investments (ROI) 217 s
reward power 120 safe system 16–17, 19
right-of-way (RW) acquisition phase 21, safety:
34–36, 52, 60 applicable design 220
risk analysis 55, 106–108, 279 equal performance 18–19
risk appetite 109, 163, 217 fatalities 16
risk-based deterministic contingency 56 fatality risks, speeds 18f
risk-based estimation 55–56 historic approach 18f
risk-based percentage contingency 55–56 matter of life and death 15–16
risk-based probabilistic contingency 56 privacy 192
risk burndown chart 116, 117, 118f progressive approach 19f
risk communication 117–118 safe system 16–17
risk identification: system improvement 69
brainstorming 103 salience model 179, 179f
industry strategies 103 scaling project approaches:
intended and unintended budget 278
consequences 102 communications 279
knowledge quadrant 104–105, 104f complexities 280
measures 103 cost (budget) thresholds 278
project assumptions and constraints 103 opportunity 278
project planning process 103 performance metrics 280
register 105, 106f PMs project organization 280
scoping 103–104 risks 280
uncertainty 105 schedule 279
risk log 105 scope 279
risk management 55, 67, 107, 110, 112, 116, stakeholder involvement 280–281
169, 207f, 280 teams 279
engineer’s approach 99 schedule baselines 74–75
massive paradigm shift 100 schedule management plan 7
on-time and on-budget performance 100 baseline 93–94
transportation project management 99 change management 94
workflow 100, 101f design-build and mega-projects 92
Index 295
monitoring 94 sequence of construction (SOC) 32, 36, 72

organizational policies and procedures 92 Simpson’s paradox 235–236, 236f
templates 93 social media 181–183, 185, 186
schedule performance index (SPI) 239, 240f soft constraints 87
schedule variance (SV) 239, 239f soft logic 97
scheduling issues: soft skills:
contingency 95 characteristics 245–247
control thresholds 96 core competencies 246f
CPM 98 importance of 243–245
CPM scheduling software 97 meetings 247–251
critical tasks 98 sound engineering 54, 216, 282
fast-tracking and crashing 96–97 specialty inspectors 163
one schedule 94–95 specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and
organization’s leadership 95 timely (SMART) goals 121, 196,
planning fallacy and managing 218, 219
expectations 97 staff review meeting 25
project-centric environment 96 stakeholder engagement:
scope creep 80–81 management 183–184
scope management 78f monitor 184–185
creep 80–81 plan 180–181, 181f
gold-plating 81 virtual 182–183
organizational protocols 77 stakeholder engagement plan 171, 176–177,
project development 77 177f
storm drainage system 78 stakeholder influence/cost of change 176f
threats 79 stakeholder involvement 175–185
triple constraint 79–80 stakeholder register 180
scope management plan 7 stakeholders identification 177f
scope of services (SoS) 145, 145f brainstorming 178
scope threats 79 internal/external organization 177–178
scoping inputs 23f listing and prioritizing 180
scoping phase 22–28, 27f motivations and potential
scoping process: impacts 178–180
30% design review meeting 72 quadrant definitions 178f
after Kickoff meeting 70–71 quadrant responses 179f
CIM 71 relationships and influences 180
completing 73–74 standard operating procedures (SOPs) 271,
consultant procurement 69–70 276, 282
environmental review process 67 start to finish (SF) relationships 86f
Kickoff meeting 70 start to start (SS) relationships 85f
management 77–81 status update meetings 248
planning resources 68 stormwater management (SWM) 26, 29, 32,
project initiation 68–69 72
risk management 67 strategic thinking 138
roles and responsibilities 75–77 strength deployment inventory (SDI) 131,
schedule and budget baselines 74–75 131f–134f
task schedule 67 StrengthFinder. See Clifton strengths
worksheets 68 stripped-down schedules 98
self-assurance 205 subject matter experts (SME) 21, 54, 103,
self-reflection 199, 213 122, 235, 248, 249, 259, 280
296 Index
t triple constraint 2f, 3–5, 41, 42, 58–59, 59f,

task dependencies 98 74, 79–80, 104, 195, 199, 207, 208f, 210,
team building 121, 140, 244 213, 214, 237, 252
team-building meetings 249 trust building 244
team schedules 251 Tuckman ladder 122f
testing inspectors 163 adjourning 123–124
theoretical and applied mechanics challenge 124
(TAM) 244 forming 122–123
theory of constraints 121 norming 123
three-point estimating. See program performing 123
evaluation and review technique storming 123
(PERT)
tiers of importance 206f
u
uncertainty 9, 105, 109, 122, 123, 186, 195
communications 206–207
unknown-knowns (UK) 104
foundational 207–208
unknown-unknowns (UU) 104
support 207
utility designations 29
time management 213, 251–254
utility field inspection (UFI) 33
to complete performance index
utility relocations 35, 52
(TCPI) 241
traditional vs. safe system 17f v
traffic management plans (TMP) 36 value engineering (VE) 28, 103, 159–161,
traffic safety 16 217
transportation: variance at completion (VAC) 239
big picture 57 video media 186
funding and workflows 221 virtual stakeholder engagement 221
network 14 voice media 185–186
owner-operator organizations 41, 162
planning 50 w
professionals 3, 79, 81 waterfall model 21
programming cycle 41, 42f waterfall project management 221
project-related roles 76 willingness/public hearing 30
stewards and designers 17, 19 work breakdown structure (WBS) 74, 84,
transportation management plan 140, 254
(TMP) 32 World Health Organization (WHO) 15
WILEY END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
Go to www.wiley.com/go/eula to access Wiley’s ebook EULA.

Rob Tieman - Transportation Project Management-Wiley (2023)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rob Tieman - Transportation Project Management-Wiley (2023)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Rob Tieman - Transportation Project Management-Wiley (2023)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Transportation Project Management

Transportation Project Management

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty

Hardback ISBN: 9781394185474; ePub ISBN: 9781394185498; ePDF ISBN: 9781394185481

Cover image: © Veni/E+/Getty Images

1 Project Management 101 1

2 Project Development Process 15

3 Budgets and Estimates 41

7 Managing Resources 119

8 Managing Quality 151

10 Controlling the Project 195

11 PM Soft Skills 243

12 Real-World Challenges 269

Project Management 101

What is a Project Manager?

Transportation Project Management, First Edition. Rob Tieman.

1.1.1 The Big Picture

1.2 Triple Constraint

“Nothing is so simple that it cannot be misunderstood.”

1.3 The Project Management Plan

“An hour of planning can save you ten hours of doing.”

•Purpose and Need, Objectives, Goals

Resource Management •Organizational Chart

•Project Development Approach

Schedule Management •Project Schedule

•Project Budget and Estimates

•Stakebolder Engagement Plan

•Quality Assurance - the process

•Change Management Procedures

Figure 1.2 Project management plan template.

1.3.1 Project Details

1.3.2 Resource Management Plan

1.3.3 Scope Management Plan

1.3.4 Schedule Management Plan

1.3.5 Cost Management Plan

1.3.6 Risk Management Plan

1.3.7 Communications Plan

Plan. Detailed information is included in Chapter 9, Communications, particularly in

1.3.8 Quality Management Plan

1.3.9 Change Management Plan

1.4 Organizational Basics

1.4.1 Organizational Structures

Department Oriented Project Oriented

Functional Manager Authority

Figure 1.3 Organizational structures for project management.

1.4.2 Project Management Office (PMO)

1.4.3 Projects, Programs, and Portfolios

Project Project Project

Figure 1.4 Projects, programs, and portfolios.

It is worth discussing the differences in approaches. On one side of the spectrum is

Comparison Project Program Portfolio

Purpose Develop and deliver the Satisfy program’s objectives by Support

Comparison Project Program Portfolio

Key Technical knowledge and Leadership, support, and Insight, innovation,

Figure 1.5 Comparison of projects, programs, and portfolios.

1.5 A Look Ahead

Project Development Process

2.1 Safety First

2.1.1 A Matter of Life and Death

Transportation Project Management, First Edition. Rob Tieman.