Das Manifest für die Angemessene Verwaltung von Vorhaben

We are seventeen signatories — though three could not agree on the final wording and have appended minority opinions, and one has signed only in his capacity as representative of the Bohemian delegation, not as an individual — who, having arrived independently at the conclusion that the current state of project management is hopeless but not serious, hereby propose the following values.

We have come to appreciate:

Civilised conversation over rigid process. A well-conducted meeting at a reasonable hour, with proper coffee and perhaps a Topfenstrudel, will resolve more than any number of prescribed procedures. We do not reject process — the Empire has always run on process — but we recognise that process without human judgement is merely bureaucracy, and bureaucracy without coffee is barbarism.

Working arrangements that function adequately over comprehensive documentation. We value documentation. We have always valued documentation. The Imperial Archives in the Hofburg contain documentation on documentation. But we observe that a system which works tolerably well, even if no one can fully explain why, is preferable to one that is exquisitely specified and does not work at all. The former is, in any case, the more Austrian condition.

Negotiation and compromise over contractual enforcement. The Ausgleich of 1867 taught us that the most durable arrangements are those in which all parties are equally dissatisfied. A contract enforced to the letter produces a victor and a resentful subject. A negotiated understanding, renegotiated as needed over schnapps, produces a relationship. We recommend the latter, while acknowledging that it requires more schnapps.

Graceful adaptation over adherence to a plan. Plans are lovely things. The General Staff produces them in great quantities, beautifully bound. We do not oppose plans. We merely observe that reality has never once consulted a plan before proceeding, and that the ability to adjust one’s course with dignity — what our colleagues in the civil service call Fortwursteln — is the more essential competence.

That is to say: while the items on the right have their place, we find the items on the left more conducive to the completion of projects, the maintenance of collegial relations, and the preservation of one’s nerves.

The Twelve Principles (reduced from an original forty-three by subcommittee)

I. Our highest priority is to satisfy the client through a reasonable and continuous delivery of work that is, if not perfect, at least adequate and delivered with good grace. Perfection is an aspiration for cathedral builders and the deceased.

II. Changing requirements are to be expected, even welcomed, as evidence that someone is paying attention. We accommodate change at any stage, though we reserve the right to sigh audibly when it arrives on a Friday afternoon.

III. Working results should be delivered at regular intervals, the precise frequency to be determined by the nature of the work and not by some ideological commitment to a number of weeks. Two weeks is not sacred. Neither is four. Time is a convention.

IV. Those who commission the work and those who perform it must converse regularly, preferably in person, ideally over a meal. The Prussian habit of communicating exclusively through memoranda is noted and deplored.

V. Build projects around competent individuals. Provide them with the environment and resources they need, a title commensurate with their dignity, and then trust them to do the work. Micro-management is a Calvinist affliction.

VI. The most effective method of conveying information is face-to-face conversation, which permits the essential subtleties of tone, implication, and the raised eyebrow. Written communication is acceptable where distance requires it, but one should never mistake an email for a conversation any more than one would mistake a postcard for an evening at the opera.

VII. Functioning work is the primary measure of progress, though we acknowledge that “functioning” is a more philosophical question than it first appears and may require committee review.

VIII. Our methods should promote a sustainable pace. The practice of working through the night, celebrated in certain Atlantic cultures, is recognised as a symptom of poor planning, not of dedication. A rested worker with a clear mind produces more than an exhausted one with a sense of heroic martyrdom.

IX. Continuous attention to quality and good craftsmanship enhances agility, or at least makes the inevitable difficulties more bearable.

X. Simplicity — the art of leaving undone that which need not be done — is essential. The Baroque style is appropriate for churches and palaces. It is not appropriate for administrative systems.

XI. The best results emerge from groups that organise themselves, provided they contain at least one person of practical temperament and no more than two theorists. Self-organisation without practical sense is merely bohemianism.

XII. At regular intervals, the team reflects on its own conduct, identifies what might be improved, and adjusts accordingly. This reflection should be honest but not brutal. We are not Prussians. A gentle irony will accomplish what blunt criticism cannot.

Signatories:

Hofrat Dipl.-Ing. K. Wittgenstein (Vienna) — Dr. J. Hasek (Prague, signing under protest) — Sektionschef M. Roth (Lemberg/Lwów/Lviv, the city’s name being itself a matter of ongoing negotiation) — Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. F. Zweig (Salzburg) — Oberregierungsrat A. Musil (Brünn/Brno) — and twelve others whose titles would consume the remainder of this page

Appended Minority Opinion (Dr. Hasek, Prague)

The above manifesto, while well-intentioned, suffers from the characteristic Viennese delusion that problems can be resolved through conversation and pastry. The Bohemian delegation notes that no manifesto has ever improved anything, that all organisational methods eventually converge on the same mediocrity, and that the only honest principle is: it will take longer than you think, cost more than you budgeted, and the result will be different from what anyone intended. We sign nonetheless, as refusing to sign would require writing a separate document, and we are tired.

Appended Clarification (Sektionschef Roth, Lemberg)

The Galician delegation wishes to note that Principle IV’s reference to meals should be understood to include both Viennese and regional cuisines, and that the implicit assumption of Viennese cultural centrality throughout this document, while expected, has not gone unnoticed.