Understanding what a Project really is

I have been thinking about project management and I wondered if humanity is getting better at accomplishing projects successfully. Our society has better technology and information when compared to the past, but we also have more complexity to consider than the past. We are more aware of our impact on the environment and on others. We are more connected than ever, physically and digitally. We live more in Extremistan than in Mediocristan, (as defined by Nassim Taleb), and in Extremistan things blow up incredibly devastatingly.

Patrick Collison, CEO of Stripe, has a curious question related to this on his website:

Why do there seem to be more examples of rapidly-completed major projects in the past than the present?

If what he says is true then that would mean there is something missing in our understanding of projects. This got me thinking about our understanding of projects. What does that term actually mean? It seems obvious doesn't it?

Before we go down that path, let us establish some fundamentals, some rules, to guide our thinking. Relying on David Deutsch's idea of "good explanations" we can say the following about a good definition:

It is an idea about reality
It is not immune to criticism, it encourages it
It is hard to modify details while still seeming true
It solves problems

Now let's review some existing definitions of projects. Max Wideman has a great list here of various definitions of which I will share some below.

A process for conducting work that produces a new product of one sort or another.

A temporary endeavor undertaken to create a unique product, service, or result.

A unique venture with a beginning and an end, undertaken by people to meet established goals within defined constraints of time, resources, and quality.

An endeavor in which human, material and financial resources are organized in a novel way, to undertake a unique scope of work of given specification, within constraints of cost and time, so as to achieve unitary, beneficial change, through delivery of quantified and qualitative objectives.

An organized undertaking, limited in time to achieve specific objectives

A novel undertaking or systematic process to create a new product or service the delivery of which signals completion. Projects involve risk and are typically constrained by limited resources.

A systematic process for achieving a distinct objective. The "system" consists of a period of planning followed by a period of "doing", and this system is repeated at every level of detail. These two "periods" are the genesis of the project life span. Project management is the process of managing the project process.

A human endeavor legitimately regarded by its stakeholders as a project [because] it encompasses a unique scope of work that is constrained by cost and time [and] the purpose of which is to create or modify a product or service to achieve beneficial change defined by quantitative and qualitative objectives.

A temporary organization in a management environment created for the purpose of delivering one or more business products according to a specified business case.

A project is a finite process with a definite start and end. Projects always need to be managed in order to be successful.

A means for delivering strategy and beneficial change, e.g. added value, through discrete and unique pieces of work carried out by temporary teams under strict constraints and subject to uncertainty.

A container for work focused on a unique product.

A mechanism for the acquisition/creation and perhaps implementation of an enabler.

A time-constrained operation to realize a set of definable deliverables up to quality standards and requirements, the scope of which fulfills the project's objectives.

A whole set of actions limited in time and space, inserted in, and in interaction with, a politico-socio-economic environment, aimed at and tended towards a goal progressively redefined by the dialectic between thought (the project plan) and the reality.

I think all of the definitions above make a similar mistake seen in thinking that observations are objective, but we never see reality as it is. All of the definitions rely on action as the fundamental aspect but action does not just happen just like observations aren't necessarily true.

Looking at the etymology we have the following.

project (n.)
c. 1400, projecte, "a plan, draft, scheme, design," from Medieval Latin proiectum "something thrown forth," noun use of neuter of Latin proiectus, past participle of proicere "stretch out, thrust out, throw forth," from pro- "forward" (see pro-) + combining form of iacere (past participle iactus) "to throw" (from PIE root *ye- "to throw, impel").

Comparing the etymology to the definitions listed we can see the conjectural aspect of projects more clearly in the etymology. This is a fundamental difference.

Projects are conjectural

Imagine that a person wants to go running tomorrow.

In universe A, this person wakes up the next day and forgets they even wanted to go running.

In universe B, this person plans methodically to run at 5am tomorrow, gets their clothes ready the night before, sets an alarm, etc. Unfortunately, this person still fails to run the next day.

In both situations, assertions are made. In the first, the person asserts that going running requires no planning/preparation or it is arbitrary and so omissions are also relevant. In the second, the person assumes that because there is a concrete plan they should be successful in their endeavor of running. But reality disagrees with them both.

Projects are conjectures about reality

Reality, the world or the state of things as they exist, is what determines whether an assertion is true or not. Projects are guesses and reality is the check, the ultimate test, and no project can escape it. What aspects of these guesses, projects, make them different from other forms of guesses? What are the parameters? This is where the earlier definitions come in.

There is certainly a behavioral component to a project. Something is not only said (or implied) to happen but as a result of certain actions. There is a cause-and-effect prediction.

Projects are conjectures about behavior and their results

The behavior is intended and not just an observation. That means it implies that someone will carry it out in accordance with the intention knowingly. Intention also implies there is some benefit or value for this behavior to be actioned. This raises an important point to consider, what is implied in the conjecture? I mentioned earlier, with the person who wanted to run in universe A, that when specifying a behavior and a result omitting the planning is also part of the assertion.

Omissions are important

Omissions in these guesses called projects mean that the parameter is arbitrary and not required to be explicitly stated. The conjecture embedded here is that what is omitted has minimal to no influence on reality or other parameters, or it is so obvious it is not required to be stated. Now, getting back to the parameters, so far we know there is behavior and results, and also value and benefits. Let's add some other parameters that aim to cover aspects comprehensively and see if we have a reasonable definition.

Redefining what a Project is

A project is an interconnected set of assertions. This set contains assertions about the value (contextual) and benefits (measured advantages) the fulfillment of certain objectives (intended results) will create for its stakeholders. Furthermore, it accounts for the requirements needed, the manner in which to fulfill these objectives, and the constraints under which this fulfillment must take place either explicitly or implicitly. Noting that omissions of any parameters or aspects are also part of the conjectures and relate to their perceived importance or arbitrariness. Thereafter, these assertions are unavoidably subjected to being tested against reality (the world or the state of things as they actually exist) producing an outcome (result). The difference between the outcome and reality represents errors in the conjectures. More succinctly,

A project is an interconnected series of claims about the value and benefits of meeting goals for stakeholders, accounting for requirements, strategies, and constraints, including through omission, inevitably tested against reality.

Why This Definition Matters

Interconnected Assertions: The parts of a project are interwoven; each piece influences the others.
Explicit or Implicit Details: Not stating information is itself an assertion that carries weight.
Comprehensive Categories: The terms like 'requirements,' 'constraints,' and 'strategy' serve as umbrella terms for more nuanced factors, from scope and timeline to stakeholder interests and quality standards.
Tested Against Reality: The defining feature of this understanding is that all these assertions, implicit or explicit, will inevitably be tested against reality, leading to real-world outcomes.

My goal was to introduce a deeper level of scrutiny to what we commonly understand as "projects." I want to encourage deeper and more variety of criticism about these endeavors.

Let's see this definition applied to an example.

The SpaceX Falcon Heavy Project: An Example of Interconnected Assertions

Assertions About Value and Benefits

Value: The SpaceX Falcon Heavy project aimed to create the world's most powerful operational rocket, intending to make space travel more accessible and efficient.

Benefits: By doing so, SpaceX asserted that they would lower the cost per pound for cargo to space, thereby making space exploration and commercial activities more viable.

Assertions About Objectives

Objective 1: Develop a rocket with the capability to lift into orbit nearly 64 metric tons (141,000 lbs).

Objective 2: Achieve reusability of rocket components to further reduce costs.

Assertions About Requirements and Manner of Fulfillment

Requirements:

Develop new engineering technology for greater thrust.
Secure funding from both private and governmental sources.
Assemble a team of aerospace experts.

Manner of Fulfillment:

Utilizing Falcon 9 technology as a base.
Incorporating reusable rocket boosters.
Collaboration with NASA for certain technologies and use of launch pads.

Constraints

Time: Complete initial launch within a decade.

Budget: Stay within a capped budget sourced from SpaceX revenue, investors, and government grants.

Regulatory: Meet all FAA regulations and guidelines for space travel and environmental concerns.

Testing Against Reality

The Falcon Heavy had its maiden launch on February 6, 2018. It successfully deployed its payload, Elon Musk's Tesla Roadster, into space, thereby testing the project’s assertions against reality. The reusable boosters successfully returned to Earth, affirming another of the project’s initial assertions.

The Outcome

The project was deemed a success as it largely validated the initial assertions about value, benefits, objectives, and requirements. However, it was also subjected to delays and budget overruns, revealing limitations in those original assertions.

If we breakdown the complexity levels of the new definition we find it offers a structured pathway to understanding from beginner to expert levels, that gradually builds upon the previous level, cultivating a deep and nuanced understanding of project management.

Beginner Level (Knowing the Seven Key Categories):

Objective: To grasp the basic components that are central to project management.
Approach: Introducing the fundamental categories individually to offer a clear understanding of each.

Intermediate Level (Understanding the Comprehensive Categories):

Objective: To delve deeper into each category to understand the intricacies and how they interrelate.
Approach: Encouraging analytical thinking through exploration and discussion of real-world examples to illustrate the application of each category. {need to mention/highlight people here}

Advanced Level (Understanding the Conjectural Aspect):

Objective: To grasp that project management deals with managing conjectures, not reality.
Approach: Introducing philosophical aspects of project management, encouraging a critical approach towards understanding projects as series of claims or conjectures that are subjected to real-world testing.

Expert Level (Recognizing the Role of Omissions):

Objective: To foster the ability to critically analyze both what is stated and what is omitted, understanding the different dimensions of omissions (known but not stated, unknown but knowable, and unknown and unknowable).
Approach: Developing critical thinking skills through advanced exercises that challenge individuals to think beyond the obvious, considering potential omissions and their implications.

Master Level (Understanding Reality as the Ultimate Goal):

Objective: To develop a holistic understanding that the ultimate goal is to understand reality more than managing individual endeavors.
Approach: Guiding individuals to develop a meta-perspective where they can look beyond individual projects to the broader goal of understanding reality, fostering a wisdom-oriented approach to project management.

For now, I will stop here, but we need to criticize this definition at some point, and see if it holds up with the idea of "good explanations". Even if the new definition falls flat, rethinking the meaning of projects from first principles is a fun and useful exercise. I wish more people took the time to do it. When you plan to do something but fail to do so it shows we lack some understanding of reality. We can, however, get closer to reality through creative explanations and rational criticism. As David Deutsch says, it is what we humans do. I plan to write much more on this topic, but there is so much to think about which is why this post is ending abruptly, trying to find a balance between thinking and publishing. This is the first of many more to come.