Project Lessons through Chess - asapm

US
®
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.
• 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.
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).
© 2009 Lew Ireland; published at the asapm website: www.asapm.org

US
®
Project Lessons through Chess; Ireland, page 2
• Transition between life cycle phases must be clear and distinct for proper man‐
agement 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 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.
• 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.
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 trade off is not always a good move.
• 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.
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.”
• Both chess and managing projects requires thinking about future moves and activi‐
ties to be successful.
• Thinking through how planned actions affect future actions is considered the path
to 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.
© 2009 Lew Ireland; published at the asapm website: www.asapm.org

US
®
Project Lessons through Chess; Ireland, page 3
• 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 fu‐
ture.
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.
• Following the fundamentals in both chess and projects gives the best results for
success.
• Failure to follow through on the fundamentals typically results in failure.
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.
• Planning and following through on a series of actions that clearly lead to delivery of
the final product defined as success is needed.
• Final delivery should not be a surprise, but the result of deliberate, planned action.
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.
© 2009 Lew Ireland; published at the asapm website: www.asapm.org

US
®
About the Author
Lew Ireland, Ph.D.
600 Dunbar Cave Road
Clarksville, TN 37043
Tel: 931.647.7373
Project Lessons through Chess; Ireland, page 4
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.
© 2009 Lew Ireland; published at the asapm website: www.asapm.org