Project Lessons through Chess
PrezSez 062009,
by Dr. Lew Ireland, asapm President
Games are often a representation of real life and in many aspects can be related to actual situations, either in the past or in the future. Chess has many of the attributes of a project – such as a life cycle, planning, strategy, limited resources (staff), resources with different capabilities, and decisions that determine success. Chess, like projects, is vast in terms of the number of variations and combinations of moves forward toward successful completion.  Chess and projects have life cycles that initiate the game or project and culminate in success or failure. All things on this earth have a beginning and an end, except life in the hereafter. This linking of the beginning to the end is done through various stages of maturity, which represent evolving phases of life through change. Project life cycles are a means of controlling the project advancement and signaling a shift in emphasis on the work to be accomplished. The traditional life cycle is Conceptual, Planning, Implementation, and Closeout. Regardless of the names associated with the divisions and the number of divisions, projects generally follow this model in the life of a project. Finer granularity and different industries use models that fit their needs. Projects might be compared to the game of chess where there are three phases – opening game, middle game, and end game. There are millions of options in the first ten moves. Fortunately, many of these opening moves are poor and should not be made if one plans to win the game by capturing the opponent’s king. The king, queen, rooks, bishops, and pawns are the resources for game, which is opposed by an equal number of resources. In both projects and chess, one cannot revert to a prior phase, but must struggle through while playing catch up. One must complete one phase before launching the next phase to ensure effective
management of the process. In chess, phases are not planned in the future because the opposition controls some of what transpires. Transitioning to another phase is dependent upon progress made in chess moves and exerting influence on squares of the chess board. Going from the opening game too early in play often leaves one vulnerable to attack and an opponent’s easy checkmate. Delaying transition to the middle game can rely too much on a defensive posture that limits the opportunities for offensive moves that capture the opponent’s pieces (resources).

• The life cycle is key to applying resources and managing actions that build on project/chess success

• Understanding the life cycle and performing actions appropriate to the life cycle phase results in the best outcome for the project or chess game.

The opening chess game is typically five to seven moves where one develops a position on the board that attempts to control the center squares while creating a defensive barrier against the opposition. Both projects and chess games set the stage through early actions that affect the future implementation or middle game. The chess middle phase is an important function in that resources are traded to achieve both superior positioning and conservation of resources. The pawns are represented by a value of one, bishops and knights a value of three, rooks a value of five, and the queen a value of nine. The king, of course, has no assigned value because if it is checkmated, the game is over. Those who exchange pieces on the chess board need to consider the value of the resource being traded and why. An equal value tradeoff is not always a good move.  Chess is a game of strategy where the master players think as many as ten moves ahead. A good chess player may think from three to five moves ahead. Just responding to the opposing conditions is referred to in chess as “pushing wood”, or moving in response to a perceived threat.

Always responding to threats is a defensive strategy and has only the opportunity for “accidental success.” Viewing the chess board and paying attention to the games is critical to being as good as a person can be. An error made through a wrong move can be costly in terms of resources and sometime not recoverable. Attention to opposing forces is as important as husbanding ones resources. The exchange of a queen for a bishop results in a loss of six points in value.

• • Transition between life cycle phases must be clear and distinct for proper management of the project or chess game.
• • Either too early or too late phase transitions create problems that must be resolved to ensure smooth performance.
• • The judicious consumption of resources in both projects and chess improves the opportunity to be successful.
• • One should gain greater value when using resources than the assessed value.
• • Both chess and managing projects requires thinking about future moves and activitiesto be successful.
• • Thinking through how planned actions affect future actions is considered the path to success.
• • A slow start and poor positioning can adversely affect the subsequent activities.
• • The opening phase of either a project or chess has significant impact for follow on chess moves or activities in projects.

Chess has rules that govern how the game is played and there are fundamental moves that set the stage for how the game develops. Significant variations from the fundamentals typically result in poor positioning, unnecessary loss of pieces (resources), random moves without thinking of the consequences, and, finally, loss of the game. Adhering to the fundamentals of the game gives the best opportunity for successfully capturing the opponent’s king. The end game in chess should be a clear-cut capture of the opponent’s king through perhaps less than five moves. It should be accomplished by a series of moves that forces the opponent to defend while slowly losing position on the chessboard and resources. The capture of the king should not be a surprise from a single move, but deliberate actions that lead to exerting pressure until the opponent’s king can no longer move away or block the threat.

In Summary

In summary, a game, such as chess, can teach one some basic lessons that can be used in managing projects. An overall strategy is needed in both games and projects to ensure that the progress is directly related to the end result desired. Sticking to the fundamental practices is perhaps the most promising path to achieve the desired end product. Risky moves and actions that violate foundation concepts will most often give poor results and rework or repositioning.

Chess, like projects, has many unique and varied solutions. One should not attempt them all – just the solutions that work best in the environment present and under the conditions dictated by circumstances. Thinking through planned actions before implementation is perhaps the most valuable lesson learned from chess that needs to be applied to managing projects.

• • It is important not to relax and become overconfident in either chess or projects –there is danger in the comfort zone.
• • Poor use of resources in the present affects the ability to be successful in the future.
• • Following the fundamentals in both chess and projects gives the best results forsuccess.
• • Failure to follow through on the fundamentals typically results in failure.
• • Planning and following through on a series of actions that clearly lead to delivery ofthe final product defined as success is needed.
• • Final delivery should not be a surprise, but the result of deliberate, planned action.

Lew Ireland is an Executive Project Management Consultant based in Tennessee and serving both US and international clients. He has worked with clients to establish their project management systems to ensure they are supportive of the organizations’ respective goals. He is experienced in all phases of project management that include planning, scheduling, project office implementation, project maturity modeling, and project assessment.  Lew has authored or co-authored project management books and articles for professional journals.  He is a continual contributor to the American Society for the Advancement of Project Management, regularly writing short articles for our website. Lew has a history of serving for nearly 25 years in volunteer positions to advance project management. He is past President and Chair of the Project Management Institute and has served in various positions within the Institute. He has been recognized by the Institute for his contributions by the Distinguished Contribution Award, Person of the Year, and elected a Fellow of the Institute.  He serves as President of the American Society for the Advancement of Project Management (asapm), a not-for-profit professional society dedicated to more effective project management  practices