So, if Brooks thinks the best and brightest are often self-contradictory, and institutions that last and endure are also, what do we make of this when we scale it project management?
- Can we support de-centralized and centralized in the same project, say for change management?
- Can we support agile and traditional methods in the same project, say for different technologies?
- Can we support self-managing teams and intervene with the team leader selection?
- Can we promote the principal of subsidiarity and yet insist on weekly reports?
- Can sponsors insist on risk management, and yet deny funding to follow-through with risk response?
For example, a project can be strategically coherent about tolerating change, but yet apply different tactics---decentralized and centralized CM---seemingly contradictory tactics, according to circumstances.