[Excerpted from an article in the Cutter IT Journal (formerly American Programmer).]

The ability to manage risk directly relates to the ability to minimize uncertainty while maximizing stability and predictability. The two are inseparably linked.

I am constantly surprised by the value of the right model. The "right" model can not only convey enormous information quickly, it can provide a framework for future thinking and discovery. I have been reflecting on perhaps the most important model of the 20th century -- the discovery of the structure of DNA by Francis Crick and James Watson in 1953.

As an analyst, I'm frequently frustrated with large IT companies that seem to have lots of interesting initiatives underway, but somehow never manage to coordinate them. At various times, as I've considered different markets, from artificial intelligence to components, I've railed at IBM, HP, SAP, Microsoft, DEC, and SUN.

If your software organization has succeeded in a major change, then one key to sustaining this change often involves implementing an ongoing structured knowledge transfer (KT) and mentoring program. This program ensures that your staff continues to be skilled at doing their job effectively and efficiently, regardless of personnel turnover and changes in technology.

On Tuesday last week, IBM and PeopleSoft announced the "Most Significant Enterprise Applications Alliance in Company History." I think the statement's a little bit over the top, but it's still an interesting announcement.

The book Coping with Difficult People, by Robert M. Bramson, is enlightening on the many different personalities we meet during the day. The book is about impossible people and how to cope with them.

We are often asked for estimates to build a system. Even though the system is complex, we are prodded, "What will it take?" And, to our regret, the estimate -- once out of our mouth -- becomes a contract. I had an experience recently where another professional showed me another way, and I learned that I was pleased with his approach.

Every time I speak to people about what it takes to be a good CIO or CTO, I hear myself talking about the same things -- as I watch my audience respond with weird body language, like maybe I have no idea what I'm talking about (or maybe, just maybe, it's 2025 and I'm boring the audience with what everyone already knows is true).

It should be fairly straightforward for a very smart, highly motivated project manager to successfully deal with the three elements of a project -- scope, time, and cost -- right? Then why are so many information technology (IT) projects less than successful, or outright failures?