Wednesday, July 9, 2025

Where agents don't tread



There are endless posts predicting the demise of jobs that can be taken over by software agents: that information is not news go anyone I imagine. 

Agents subsume process:
In more distinct form, it could be said that any job that is process-driven -- to wit: defined tasks and determinative sequencing and logic -- and is also data enabled and data dependent, and can be graded with objective success criteria is subject to agent takeover. Indeed, Amazon recently reported having in excess of one million robots, now more than employees.

Computer sciences education is being re-architected, and the entry job is definitely going to be different. Our domain is racing to keep up with all the agent intrusion in the PM office: One day, the PM literature and how-to of today will be quaint and amusing to look back upon. 

So, if jobs enabled by process are endangered, the flip side of that coin are safe?
The flip side is where subjective, judgmental, creative, and risky efforts and contributions dwell. 

But what of AGI, some would ask. Won't AGI invade the subjective and judgmental? Won't AGI make risk assessments and commit resources without human intervention? Perhaps some form of AGI will, if it really materializes and become economically ubiquitous.

Where agents don't tread:
My guess -- vision? -- is that we humans will stay a step in front of the destruction wrought by AI and find a future that is value-adding because only the human can outthink and over-create a neural-net. But, unfortunately, the destruction of the present value will be wrenching. 



Like this blog? You'll like my books also! Buy them at any online book retailer!

Sunday, July 6, 2025

A Risk perspective: 'Against the Gods"




If you are in the project management (read: risk management) business, one of the best books that describes the philosophy and foundation for modern risk management is Peter L. Bernstein's "Against the Gods: the remarkable story of risk".

Against the Gods is historical, somewhat philosophical, and void of math!
It's a book for "thinkers"

Between the covers of this "must read" we learn this bit:
The essence of risk management lies in maximizing the areas where we have some control over the outcome while minimizing the areas where we have absolutely no control over the outcome and the linkage between effect and cause is hidden from us.

Peter Bernstein
"Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk"

Knowledge and control
Dealing with risk necessarily breaks down into that in which more knowledge will help us understand deal with risk (climate change), and that in which effects are truly random and no amount of additional knowledge is going to help (rolling dice).

Bernstein goes on to develop one of the key themes of the book which is the idea that probability theory and statistical analysis have revolutionized our ability to understand and manage risk.

Picking apart Bernstein's "essence" separates matters into control and knowledge:
  • We know about it, and can fashion controls for it
  • We know about it, and we can't do much about it, even if we understand cause and effect
  • We know about it, but we don't understand the elements of cause and effect, and so we're pretty much at a loss.
  • We don't know about it, or we don't know enough about it, and more knowledge would help.
Of course, Donald Rumsfeld, in 2002, may have put it more famously:
" ....... because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns—the ones we don't know we don't know."
No luck
So there is an ah-hah moment here: if all things have a cause and effect, even if they are hidden, there is no such thing as luck. (Newtonian physics to the rescue once again)

Thus, as a risk management regimen, we don't have to be concerned with managing luck! That's probably a good thing (Ooops, as luck may have it, if our project is about the subatomic level, then the randomness of quantum physics is in charge. Thus: luck?)

Indeed, our good friend Laplace, a French mathematician of some renown, said this:
Present events are connected with preceding ones by a tie based upon the evident principle that a thing cannot occur without a cause that produces it. . . .
All events, even those which on account of their insignificance do not seem to follow the great laws of nature, are a result of it just as necessarily as the revolutions of the sun.
Bernstein or Bayes' (with help from ChatGPT)

Following up on the idea of the knowledge-control linkage to risk management, Bayes' Theorem comes to mind. Bayes' is all about forming a hypothesis, testing it with real observations, and using those outcomes to refine the hypothesis, eventually arriving at a probabilistic description of the risk.

LaPlace, mentioned above, is one of the architects of the probability theory that underlay Bayes'.  Thus, one of the most interesting discussions in the book centers on Bayes' theorem, which Bernstein describes as "one of the most powerful tools of statistical analysis ever invented."

Bayes' theorem is a manner of reasoning about random and unknown effects and a mathematical formula that allows us to update our beliefs about the probability of an event occurring based on new evidence. It is a powerful tool for making predictions and decisions based on incomplete information, and it has applications in fields ranging from medicine to finance to engineering.

Bernstein's discussion of Bayes' theorem in "Against the Gods" is particularly interesting because he highlights the fact that Bayesian reasoning is often at odds with our intuition. Humans have a tendency to overestimate the likelihood of rare events and underestimate the probability of more common events. Bayes' theorem provides a framework for overcoming these biases and making more accurate predictions.

Cognitive Bias in risk management
Bernstein talks a lot about cognitive biases and their impact on decision-making under uncertainty.

According to Bernstein, cognitive biases are mental shortcuts that people use to simplify complex decisions. These shortcuts can lead to errors in judgment and decision-making. Cognitive biases can be influenced by a number of factors, including emotions, personal experience, and cultural values.

Some examples of cognitive biases that Bernstein discusses in the book include the availability bias, which is the tendency to overestimate the likelihood of events that are more easily recalled from memory; and the confirmation bias, which is the tendency to look for information that confirms our existing beliefs and to ignore information that contradicts them.

One key point Bernstein makes is that humans have a natural tendency to be overconfident in their abilities to predict and control events. This is known as the "illusion of control" bias. People often believe they have more control over events than they actually do, leading them to take on more risk than is rational.

Another common cognitive bias is the "confirmation bias," in which people seek out information that confirms their preexisting beliefs, while ignoring or dismissing information that contradicts those beliefs. This can lead to a lack of objectivity in decision-making.

Bernstein also discusses the "hindsight bias," in which people tend to believe that an event was more predictable after it has already occurred. This bias can lead to overconfidence in future predictions, as people may believe that they could have predicted the outcome of an event that has already occurred.

Overall, Bernstein suggests that understanding and being aware of cognitive biases is essential to making better decisions and managing risk effectively. By recognizing these biases, individuals can take steps to mitigate their impact on their decision-making processes.


Like this blog? You'll like my books also! Buy them at any online book retailer!

Monday, May 12, 2025

Maybe you should hire the "rules" people



A lot of great outcomes are directly from emergent innovation
  • Emergent meaning the properties were not predictable from analyzing the constituents; they surprise us all when the integrated constituents all came together and something new appears!
  • Innovation meaning that risks to norms were deliberately taken; a form of destruction-construction
But not everybody is comfortable for destruction-construction; and indeed, there are many industries where the rules and regulations prohibit departure from the norms.

And so if you are managing a rules-based rules-driven project, what's the profile of the staff you need?
The question begs the answer: people who have been successful obtaining quality outcomes while still following the rules ... staying between the hedges, as it were.

So, who are 'they' that can get it done within the rules?
Look here first for the "rules" people:
  • Former military and police
  • Former government agencies staff
  • Former very large corporate leaders
  • Former staff from major 'safety' projects (where the stakes were life-threatening)
  • People who value discipline, even if not one of the 'formers'
  • Athletes from team sports, particularly if not the star of the team
  • Socially moderate, and so likely to fit well into a heterogeneous team
Now, of course, there are a lot of 'formers' from rules-based organizations that are 'former' because they can't follow the rules. It's likely they have been invited to leave and apply their spirits elsewhere. Your job is to filter these rules-misfits out of your hiring plan.

Rules don't necessarily quash innovation
Rules generally go to methods and limits. Rarely do you find a rule about an outcome.
So, within the allowable methods, and within the allowable limits of disturbance, sustainability, availability, and quality in the large sense, any innovative outcome is possible.

You just need to hire the 'rules people' to get there!


Like this blog? You'll like my books also! Buy them at any online book retailer!
  • Emergent meaning the properties were not predictable from analyzing the constituents; they surprise us all when the integrated constituents all came together and something new appears!
  • Innovation meaning that risks to norms were deliberately taken; a form of destruction-construction
But not everybody is comfortable for destruction-construction; and indeed, there are many industries where the rules and regulations prohibit departure from the norms.

And so if you are managing a rules-based rules-driven project, what's the profile of the staff you need?
The question begs the answer: people who have been successful obtaining quality outcomes while still following the rules ... staying between the hedges, as it were.

So, who are 'they' that can get it done within the rules?
Look here first for the "rules" people:
  • Former military and police
  • Former government agencies staff
  • Former very large corporate leaders
  • Former staff from major 'safety' projects (where the stakes were life-threatening)
  • People who value discipline, even if not one of the 'formers'
  • Athletes from team sports, particularly if not the star of the team
  • Socially moderate, and so likely to fit well into a heterogeneous team
Now, of course, there are a lot of 'formers' from rules-based organizations that are 'former' because they can't follow the rules. It's likely they have been invited to leave and apply their spirits elsewhere. Your job is to filter these rules-misfits out of your hiring plan.

Rules don't necessarily quash innovation
Rules generally go to methods and limits. Rarely do you find a rule about an outcome.
So, within the allowable methods, and within the allowable limits of disturbance, sustainability, availability, and quality in the large sense, any innovative outcome is possible.

You just need to hire the 'rules people' to get there!


Friday, May 9, 2025

Consensus on AI standards


It's a good thing for projects and PM when standard consensus emerges. Risk is lower; competitive compatible products are more available; standard API's become rote.

So it is that in May of 2025 Microsoft and Google come together on a standard for AI agents, or AI-to-AI.
On Wednesday, Microsoft announced that it would bring support for Google’s Agent2Agent (A2A) spec to two of its AI development platforms, Azure AI Foundry and Copilot Studio. Microsoft has also joined the A2A working group on GitHub to contribute to the protocol and tooling.


“By supporting A2A and building on our open orchestration platform, we’re laying the foundation for the next generation of software — collaborative, observable, and adaptive by design,” wrote the company in a blog post. “The best agents won’t live in one app or cloud; they’ll operate in the flow of work, spanning models, domains, and ecosystems.”

Need more detail? Click above on the TechCrunch to get the latest.



Like this blog? You'll like my books also! Buy them at any online book retailer!

Wednesday, May 7, 2025

Interview Avatar, or real?



Doing a bit of project hiring by remote interview?
Some caution advised!
You may be talking with an avatar ....

Kyle Barr has a report on gismodo.com with this headline:
FBI Says People Are Using Deepfakes to Apply to Remote Jobs

So, what is Barr reporting that the FBI is saying?

According to the FBI’s announcement, more companies have been reporting people applying to jobs using video, images, or recordings that are manipulated to look and sound like somebody else.

These fakers are also using personal identifiable information from other people—stolen identities—to apply to jobs at IT, programming, database, and software firms.

The report noted that many of these open positions had access to sensitive customer or employee data, as well as financial and proprietary company info, implying the imposters could have a desire to steal sensitive information as well as a bent to cash a fraudulent paycheck.

These applicants were apparently using voice spoofing techniques during online interviews where lip movement did not match what’s being said during video calls, according to the announcement. Apparently, the jig was up in some of these cases when the interviewee coughed or sneezed, which wasn’t picked up by the video spoofing software.

And, somewhat related insofar as fake references and supporting documention, the report includes this timely warning: "The FBI was among several federal agencies to recently warn companies of individuals working for the North Korean government applying to remote positions in IT or other tech jobs"

Bottom line: with remote interviews, some caution advised!


Like this blog? You'll like my books also! Buy them at any online book retailer!

Wednesday, March 19, 2025

AI and You



"Not learning to code just because there are AI coding agents is like not learning how to think because there are talk shows.
Writing = thinking.
Creating = imagining.
Coding = building.
If you're in tech in 2025 and you can't do these things, your career is at risk."

Daniel Miessler



Like this blog? You'll like my books also! Buy them at any online book retailer!

Saturday, March 8, 2025

Staff vs Line



No time for the staffers; no time for the talkers. "Action this day"!
"I preferred to deal with chiefs of organisations rather than counsellors. Everyone should do a good day’s work and be accountable for some definite task."

"It is easier to give directions than advice, and more agreeable to have the right to act, even in a limited sphere, than the privilege to talk at large"

Winston Churchill, WWII Memoirs



Like this blog? You'll like my books also! Buy them at any online book retailer!