EN 
DE One of the most common frustrations in project work is the ruthless miscalculation of effort and costs. The more complex the project, the more ruthless this becomes.
The situation is exacerbated when the pace of innovation is so rapid that past experiences are difficult to transfer to new projects, or when knowledge holders are no longer available. These conditions are commonplace in software and chip development projects, for example.
The result is that, due to a lack of usable information and high pressure, what has to happen, happens: reason is replaced by gut feeling. This isn't a reference to overweight project team members. I'm talking about the invisible automatisms of our thinking. We will now turn to a particularly insidious form: anchoring.
Our memory uses anchors to find support. But these also pose risks.
Scene excerpts from the effort estimation of a project: … Eberhardt claims that he has already worked on a similar project. „That took about 3-4 person-years.“ Aha, that’s a start. Usually, no one bothers to ask for the exact details and circumstances. Large software project, similar platform, same programming language, fits. After some further consideration, the team concludes that their own project has about twice as many modules…
Finally, a worst-case and best-case analysis is conducted. In the best-case scenario, everyone assumes that, thanks to the superior team (listen up!), they could complete it in 3 person-years. In the worst-case scenario, the team anticipated it could take 6 person-years. Since the trade fair date for the product launch only allows for 4 person-years, management stipulates that it must take no more than 4 person-years. The project manager agrees. His young son is celebrating his 4th birthday. Coincidence or a good omen?
You've probably experienced something similar before. There's always something mystical about such estimates, since a concrete number emerges from many vague assumptions. They remind me of the cult novel "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy," in which a computer, when asked about the meaning of life, gives the simple answer "42.".
However things unfold, it all starts with the search for clues. Any hint is welcome. In our case, Eberhardt's statement provides an initial anchor point that influences the estimate, even though it's only vaguely linked to the project's complexity and effort. Another guide for the decision is the middle ground. People generally don't opt for the worst-case or best-case scenario, even though these extremes are usually just rough estimates. The majority tends toward the middle. This is also why political parties aiming for a majority so often call themselves centrist parties. Therefore, the likelihood that the team will settle on 4 or 5 person-years is very high.
You see, our decisions are often based on very simple clues. At least that's better than rolling dice. But not infrequently, "rolling dice" is actually an apt description. Because these anchors can also be associations that are connected to the current situation in a possibly very exotic way, or arbitrary events that, for whatever reason, haunt our minds. The mere temporal proximity of an event or perception is enough to exert an influence.
The denser the project's uncertainty, the greater this danger. It is very likely that his son's fourth birthday "helped" the project manager to attach greater significance to this number.
It sounds absurd, but many studies have demonstrated how strong the influence of arbitrary temporal and content-related connections can be. For example, students at a university in Boston were asked to estimate the value of various products on a questionnaire. Before they began estimating, they were instructed to write the last two digits of their social security number at the top of the form. The analysis showed a significant correlation between this number and the submitted estimate. The only connection between the social security number and the estimate was that both were numbers that occupied their thoughts at a recent time.
Because these anchors work so well without making us feel manipulated, they are often used by shrewd salespeople and professional magicians. Even beggars use the trick by placing coins in their hats as a guide.
You can see that these anchors are very powerful and quite capable of capsizing your projects.
Weigh anchor for project success
As just described, events or information that bear no logical relation to the task at hand also influence assessments, forecasts, and decisions. How can we recognize and avoid the influence of misleading anchors? Here are a few pointers:
Knowledge:
As is so often the case, the realization that such anchors actually work is already a major step forward. You can now anchor your colleagues, customers, relatives, and acquaintances to your heart's content. That alone makes reading this column worthwhile.
Question:
Now that you know how powerful these anchors can be, you might ask yourself more often in the future which influencing factors in your environment are effective and could serve as anchors. What have you experienced previously? What is currently particularly moving you? What associations might have been triggered by your surroundings, the person you're talking to, etc.? Why is something so important today that was unimportant yesterday, and vice versa?
Changing anchorage:
Every environment and situation casts different shadows. Therefore, it's useful to repeat an important consideration or decision under different conditions. To do this, choose a different setting, a different time of day, or different presentation formats. Use alternative sources of information or try to empathize with a different perspective.
Different people, different anchors:
Involve people who have a different professional and emotional connection to your project. They will help you question your own fixed points of view. All you need is the willingness to acknowledge that, like everyone else, you are always anchored somewhere invisibly.
So, dear readers, let's weigh anchor and set sail for project success!
I look forward to your suggestions below. denkanstoss@microconsult.de.
Further information
Training & coaching
MicroConsult Training & Coaching on project management
MicroConsult training and coaching - overview
Food for thought:
Column by Peter Siwon about the human side of project work
Peter Siwon: Systemic project management
