Podcasts about bent flyvbjerg

How do you get big things done? That is a question that leading expert in megaproject management Bent Flyvbjerg has sought to answer when it comes to big infrastructural projects around the world. In a country where things often seem to run over budget and time, what are the main reasons this happens around the world and what can we do to stop it?

BONUS: Tom Gilb on Building True Engineering Culture and Delivering Value Through Evolutionary Methods In this BONUS episode, we dive deep into the world of true engineering discipline with Tom Gilb, a pioneer who was writing about Agile principles before Agile was even named. We explore his latest book "Success - Super Secrets & Strategies for Efficient Value Delivery in Projects and Programs, and Plans" and uncover the fundamental flaws in how organizations approach project delivery and stakeholder management. The Genesis of Success-Focused Engineering "People were failing at project deliveries - even when using Agile. I saw there was very little about setting clear goals and reaching them, it had nothing to do with being successful." Tom's motivation for writing his latest book stems from a critical observation: despite the widespread adoption of Agile methodologies, project failure rates remain unacceptably high. The core issue isn't methodology but rather the fundamental lack of clarity around what success actually means. Tom emphasizes that true success is about achieving the improvements you want at a price you can afford, yet most organizations fail to define this clearly from the outset. In this segment, we refer to the book How Big Things Get Done by Bent Flyvbjerg who published statistics on the poor performance of projects in general. Beyond OKRs: The Power of Quantified Multi-Dimensional Objectives "First you need to have a definition of what it means to succeed. And that needs to be multi-dimensional. And you need to clarify what they are." While many organizations believe they're already quantifying objectives through frameworks like OKRs, Tom reveals significant weaknesses in these approaches. True value isn't just profit—it encompasses multiple dimensions including security, usability, and other stakeholder-specific benefits. The key insight is learning to quantify what needs to be achieved across all critical dimensions, as you simply cannot design for high-quality attributes like security without first quantifying and designing for them explicitly. In this segment, we talk about Tom's paper on OKR's titled "OKR Objectives and Key Results: what's wrong and how to fix it". The Missing Engineering Discipline "Why is the failure rate of our projects so high?" Tom identifies a paradoxical problem: engineering organizations often lack true engineering discipline. This fundamental gap explains why project success rates remain low despite technological advances. Real engineering requires systematic approaches to design, stakeholder analysis, and incremental value delivery—disciplines that are often overlooked in favor of rushed implementations. Stakeholder Analysis: Beyond User Stories "Stakeholders have a requirement - even if we don't know it. They might be people, but also law, contract, policies, etc. They all have requirements for us." Traditional user-centered methods like user stories can lead to failure when critical stakeholders are overlooked. Tom advocates for comprehensive stakeholder analysis as the foundation of engineering discipline. Stakeholders aren't just people—they include laws, contracts, policies, and other constraints that have requirements for your system. The practical tip here is to use AI tools to help identify and list these stakeholders, then quantify their specific requirements using structured approaches like Planguage. The Gilb Cycle: True Incremental Value Delivery "Get things done every week, next week, until it's all done. We need to decompose any possible design into enough increments so that each increment delivers some value." What distinguishes Tom's evolutionary approach from popular Agile frameworks is the focus on choosing the most efficient design and then systematically improving existing systems through measured increments. Each increment must deliver tangible value, and the decomposition process should be aided by AI tools to ensure optimal value delivery. This isn't just about iteration—it's about strategic improvement with measurable outcomes. Building Engineering Culture: A Two-Leader Approach "There are two leaders: the tech leaders and the management leaders. For management leaders: demand a value stream of results starting next week. To the tech leaders: learn the engineering process." Creating a true engineering culture requires coordinated effort from both management and technical leadership. Management leaders should demand immediate value streams with weekly results, while technical leaders must master fundamental engineering processes including stakeholder analysis and requirement quantification. This dual approach ensures both accountability and capability development within the organization. Further Resources During this episode we refer to several of Tom's books and papers. You can see this list below Software Metrics by Tom Gilb Principles of software engineering management - Also available in PDF Evo book   About Tom Gilb Tom Gilb, born in the US, lived in London, and then moved to Norway in 1958. An independent teacher, consultant, and writer, he has worked in software engineering, corporate top management, and large-scale systems engineering. As the saying goes, Tom was writing about Agile, before Agile was named. In 1976, Tom introduced the term "evolutionary" in his book Software Metrics, advocating for development in small, measurable steps. Today, we talk about Evo, the name that Tom used to describe his approach. You can link with Tom Gilb on LinkedIn.

Min múlik, hogy egy terv diadalt arat vagy elbukik? "Az esetek 92 százalékában a nagyszabású beruházások rémálomszerű fiaskóvá válnak: nem készülnek el határidőre, és jelentősen túllépik a tervezett költségkeretet. Így történt ez eddig minden olimpia megrendezésénél, de a világ szinte összes nagyvárosában találunk rá példát . A szerényebb kezdeményezések is - legyen szó akár egy kisvállalkozás beindításáról, egy konferencia megszervezéséről vagy egy munkahelyi projekt lebonyolításáról - gyakran hasonló sorsra jutnak." A Megvalósítás hatékonyan egy érdekes példákkal teli, lényegretörően és szórakoztatóan megírt okos könyv, amely a Shiwaforce támogatásával jelent meg magyarul a Hvg Kiadó gondozásában. A Shiwaforce kommunikációs igazgatója, Dojcsák Dániel a Könyvben utazom vendége, vele beszélgetünk a könyv példáiról és meglepő tanulságairól.

Javnaðarflokkurin kunngerð í dag hvør tekur sæti í landsstýrinum fyri Ingilín D. Strøm. Og sum Kringvarpið skilur merkir tað, at ein lítil flyting verður gjørd í landsstýrinum.  Vit viðgera støðuna við Beintu Løwe, politiskum eygleiðara. Vit fylgja eisini støðuni á almenna arbeiðsmarknaðinum, nú tveir tímar eru eftir til at Starvsfelagið og alemmu arbeiðsgevararnir skulu taka støðu til eitt semingsuppskot.  Suðuroyartunnilin verður eitt stórt stig nærri at gerast veruleiki, tá allir flokkar á tingi í dag skriva undir eitt semjuskjal um at gera tunnilin.  Tíðindafundur verður klokkan hálvgum ellivu í tinganesi. Samstundis ávarðar búskaparráðið ímóti, at skunda verkætlanina í gongd. Í Breddanum í dag tosa vit eisini við Bent Flyvbjerg, professara a Oxford, sum hevur granskað í stórum verkætlanum í ein mansaldur - um hví tær ganga væl og hví tær ganga galið. Gjørt sendingina hava Marjun Dalsgaard og Hallur av Rana, sum var redaktørur. Tøkningur er Kári Annand Berg  

In this episode of Navigating Major Programmes, Riccardo Cosentino sits down with Annie Goodchild, a passionate advocate for inclusivity in major projects. As a trans, non-binary professional in the infrastructure industry, Annie shares insights on industry resilience, stakeholder management, and the value of diverse perspectives in shaping successful projects. The duo discusses all this, plus the role of public inquiries in major projects. Annie Goodchild brings a wealth of experience in communications and stakeholder outreach, driving strategic initiatives for complex infrastructure projects across Canada. As the Director of Communications and Stakeholder Outreach at Kiewit, they currently lead efforts on Ottawa's Confederation Line extensions, focusing on building essential relationships for project success. Known for their commitment to teamwork, learning, and connection, Annie believes that true progress happens when everyone moves forward together.“We are the eyes and ears in many ways of how the project's going to do everywhere else, but in the very boardroom that it's executed from, and that those outside forces, the climate around the boardroom affects the boardroom more than sometimes they'd like. So let us help. Let us be in the room. Let us share our understanding of what's coming and help us plan a mitigation around any problems we might see, because that's our ultimate benefit to the major project." – Annie Goodchild Key Takeaways:Annie's journey into major projects and the importance of diversity in creating resilient teams. How proactive and transparent stakeholder management can build trust and transform community relationships, revealing insights that could redefine your approach to major projects.How embracing diverse perspectives enhances the problem-solving capabilities of major projects.The role of allies in creating a more inclusive and supportive industry for marginalized groups, from a trans perspective. If you enjoyed this episode, make sure and give us a five star rating and leave us a review on iTunes, Podcast Addict, Podchaser or Castbox.Mentioned Links:How Big Things Get Done by Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan GardnerThe conversation doesn't stop here—connect and converse with our LinkedIn community: Follow Annie Goodchild on LinkedInFollow Navigating Major Programmes on LinkedInFollow Riccardo Cosentino on LinkedIn Read Riccardo's latest at wwww.riccardocosentino.com  Music: "A New Tomorrow" by Chordial Music. Licensed through PremiumBeat.DISCLAIMER: The opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints expressed by the hosts and guests on this podcast do not necessarily represent or reflect the official policy, opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints of Disenyo.co LLC and its employees.

Neste resumo vamos falar sobre projetos e organização para colocar alguma ideia sua em prática, a questão a ser resolvida é entender porque na maior parte dos casos os orçamentos são ultrapassados e como respeitar ele. Espero que gostem!

In Episode 34 of the podcast "Redefining Energy Tech" (part 2/2), host Michael Barnard engages with Professor Bent Flyvbjerg, author of "How Big Things Get Done," to delve into the intricacies and strategies of megaprojects, focusing particularly on the comparison between pumped hydro storage and battery systems.The conversation emphasizes the importance of modularity and repeatability in large-scale projects and highlights various risks associated with construction, including data deficiencies and stakeholder management.   Professor Flyvbjerg introduces the concept of the 'window of doom,' underscoring the necessity of swift project delivery to mitigate risk. The episode explores the advantages of modular construction as evidenced in projects like the Tesla Gigafactory and renewable energy sectors, contrasting these with the prolonged timelines typical of nuclear power plant constructions.The discussion provides actionable recommendations, urging listeners to review critical risk management heuristics and the variance chart from Flyvbjerg's book. These insights are aimed at enhancing project management practices in infrastructure development. Listeners are encouraged to understand base rates and project risks, utilize heuristics for successful project management, and consider the significance of the variance chart in Chapter 9 of Flyvbjerg's book. The episode concludes with a call to develop personal heuristics for managing megaprojects effectively.

In Europa und den USA endet mittlerweile jedes neue Atomkraftwerk im Desaster. China dagegen baut problemlos ein neues nach dem anderen. Wie kann das sein? China hat ein Atomprogramm ohne Stop-and-Go-Historie und plant neue AKW offenbar mit realistischen Annahmen, nicht wie bei einem "Schönheitswettbewerb".Mit? Bent Flyvbjerg. Der dänische Ökonom untersucht und lehrt an den Universitäten Kopenhagen und Oxford "Major Program Management", also den Bau großer und teurer Vorhaben wie Flughäfen, Staudämmen oder Kernkraftwerken. In seiner Datenbank befinden sich inzwischen 22.000 Projekte. In seinem Buch "How Big Things Get Done" präsentiert er die wichtigsten Erkenntnisse.Text und Moderation? Christian HerrmannSie haben Fragen? Schreiben Sie eine E-Mail an podcasts@ntv.deSie möchten uns unterstützen? Dann bewerten Sie den Podcast gerne bei Apple Podcasts oder Spotify.Alle Rabattcodes und Infos zu unseren Werbepartnern finden Sie hier: https://linktr.ee/wiederwasgelerntUnsere allgemeinen Datenschutzrichtlinien finden Sie unter https://datenschutz.ad-alliance.de/podcast.htmlUnsere allgemeinen Datenschutzrichtlinien finden Sie unter https://art19.com/privacy. Die Datenschutzrichtlinien für Kalifornien sind unter https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info abrufbar.

Os Jogos Olímpicos produzem imagens fantásticas da superação dos atletas, não é mesmo? Mas outro aspecto que é superado em TODAS as edições são os orçamentos planejados, o que coloca a preparação para os jogos como um dos piores tipos de projetos do mundo! Vamos entender o motivo de estouros de orçamento tão significativos e frequentes, e também como isso pode ser reduzido! Quer saber qual edição dos jogos de verão foi a mais cara de todas? E qual teve o maior desvio de orçamento? Separe a pipoca, não tire o olho do quadro de medalhas, e vamos juntos! O estudo completo com os dados apresentados, de autoria de Alexander Budzier e do Prof. Bent Flyvbjerg (que já esteve aqui no canal), com o nome de “The Oxford Olympics Study 2024: Are Cost and Cost Overrun at the Games Coming Down?”, você pode baixar aqui: https://www.linkedin.com/safety/go?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.academia.edu%2F121099266%2FThe_Oxford_Olympics_Study_2024_Are_Cost_and_Cost_Overrun_at_the_Games_Coming_Down_May_2024%3Fauto%3Ddownload%26email_work_card%3Ddownload-paper&trk=flagship-messaging-web&messageThreadUrn=urn%3Ali%3AmessagingThread%3A2-MjM0MjcyYzQtYjY3My00YTM2LWIzNjktYzRlM2I4NDFmM2FhXzAxMg%3D%3D&lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagship3_messaging_conversation_detail%3BWsThjwKQTc2pvkPCKcfYzQ%3D%3D Para se inscrever no 14° Congresso Regional de Gestão, Projetos e Liderança do PMI-CE, acesse: https://www.sympla.com.br/evento/14-congresso-regional-de-gestao-projetos-e-lideranca-pmice/2441790?referrer=pmice.org.br&referrer=pmice.org.br Para se inscrever no Seminário de Gestão, Projetos e Liderança do PMI-BA, acesse: https://www.sympla.com.br/evento/seminario-de-gestao-de-projetos-e-lideranca-sgpl-2024/2370910?referrer=pmiba.org.br Quer continuar acompanhando conteúdos relevantes aqui no nosso canal? Considere fazer parte dos apoiadores do canal e do Capital Projects Podcast! Acesse aqui e veja os planos disponíveis: https://www.catarse.me/capital_projects_podcast_3c1e?ref=project_link   Quer entrar no grupo VIP para saber em primeira mão sobre as lives e a nova turma do Curso GPI/FEL? Acesse: https://chat.whatsapp.com/KZNt0vR1zLfBt4ZeqflVGN   #CapitalProjectsPodcast #GestãodeProjetos #CapitalProjects #AndreChoma #Construção #Engenharia #ProjectManagement #PMI #ProjectManagementInstitute #FEL #Frontendloading #MetodologiaFEL #OlympicGames #Olimpíadas #BentFlyvbjerg #Capex #DesviodeCusto #Governança

Ian Mann, Regular Book Reviewer and MD at Gateways Business Consultants, joins host Bruce Whitfield to discuss how Flyvbjerg demonstrates how you can. Recognize that your biggest danger is you. How Big Things Get Done, filled with vivid examples ranging from the construction of the Sydney Opera House to the production of Pixar blockbusters to an errant home repair in Brooklyn, demonstrates how to complete any ambitious project on schedule and under budget.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

99.5 percent of megaprojects are either over time, over budget or have lower benefits than expected. What's going wrong? Today, we look at case studies from California's high speed rail project to the Sydney Opera House to consider the do's and don'ts of ambitious projects. Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardner's book on megaprojects is How Big Things Get Done: The Surprising Factors that Determine the Fate of Every Project, from Home Renovations to Space Exploration and Everything In Between. Related episodes:Why building public transit in the US costs so much (Apple / Spotify) Planes, trains and bad bridges (Apple / Spotify) ICYMI, preorder our new Indicator t-shirt at the NPR shop. For more ways to support our show, sign up for Planet Money+ where you'll get sponsor-free listening, bonus episodes, and access to even more Indicator merch!Music by Drop Electric. Find us: TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, Newsletter. Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

The podcast for project managers by project managers. In this second part of our conversation about Decoding Megaprojects with Bent Flyvbjerg, we explore the idea of "Pixar Planning," a method inspired by Pixar Studios' approach to making movies. Next, we tackle the concept of Modularity, and the significance of standardized, modular approaches in driving efficiency and reducing the frequency and severity of project failures. Table of Contents 01:22 … Pixar Planning06:33 … Iteration10:37 … Modularity12:46 … Modular vs. Bespoke16:20 … Kevin and Kyle18:04 … Examples from Shipping Containers22:26 … Advice from Bent28:26 … Contact Bent29:22 … Closing BENT FLYVBJERG:  So, my advice to anybody working in any field is start thinking about how you modularize what you're doing.  Don't ever do bespoke projects.  Only if it's absolutely unavoidable should you ever do bespoke projects.  You should always do projects that have an element of standardization and modularity.  And the larger you can make that element of standardization and modularity, the more successful your projects will be.  So that's the direction of travel for the whole project industry, no matter what type of project you're working in.  And every one of us who's working in this industry can make a huge contribution by constantly thinking, how do we make what we do more modular and more standardized? WENDY GROUNDS:  You're listening to Manage This, the podcast by project managers for project managers.  I'm Wendy Grounds, and as always, I'm joined in the studio by the one and only Bill Yates.  This is Episode 2 of our conversation with Bent Flyvbjerg.  We are thrilled that he generously extended his time with us, and we are eager to share our conversation with you today. Before we dive in today's episode, we want to remind you to check out our website, Velociteach.com, where you can easily subscribe to the show so you never miss out on the latest insights and discussions.  And you can also earn PDUs, your Professional Development Units, by listening to our podcast. Pixar Planning BILL YATES: We're going to jump right back in where we left off. Just a quick review. The first two things we talked about were: thinking from right to left; and thinking slow and acting fast. Bent, I want to shift to a third key concept. You know, where we've seen some of their amazing movies, and Pixar Studio follows this same idea “think slow, act fast” when they take their approach to making movies.  Some of the great stories that I've read through “Creativity, Inc.,” written by Ed Catmull.  As you and I were just talking before we even started recording this, such a great book, such a great leader Ed Catmull is.  When I read the book back in 2016, I didn't latch on to what you found in this and through your research, which is this concept of Pixar planning.  So this idea of Pixar planning, I know you go into it deep.  What is it that makes that unique, and how can we apply these same concepts to our projects that Pixar does when they're developing their movies? BENT FLYVBJERG:  So Pixar planning is not a concept that Ed Catmull came up with.  This is what we call it because we think that their method is so important and ingenious that it deserves a name, you know.  And it deserves the name “Pixar Planning” because Pixar is the organization who came up with this.  And what surprised us was how much Gehry's method and the Pixar method, which was spearheaded by Ed Catmull, who was the CEO of Pixar then, he later became also CEO of Disney Animation and Pixar at the same time, and he's now retired.  So he and his team pioneered this.  And when I read Ed's book back in 2016 also, I was so excited because – and I started asking my students at Oxford to read the book. And at first they were like, what?  We don't work in the movie industry, and certainly not animated movies.  Like why would we want to read about animated movies?  You know,

The podcast by project managers for project managers. Part one of our two-part conversation with Bent Flyvbjerg, delving into decoding megaprojects. Bent's research draws from a database of 16,000 megaprojects to extract valuable insights. Megaprojects are increasingly shaping our world, and Bent sheds light on both their successes and failures, aiming to provide lessons for future endeavors, big and small. Table of Contents 03:52 … “How Big Things Get Done.”06:25 … Examples of Mega Projects08:35 … Iron Law of Megaprojects10:23 … The Success Stories12:28 … Thinking from Right to Left14:44 … Frank Gehry's Leadership Principle18:42 … Ren Love's Projects from the Past21:12 … Think Slow and Act Fast26:23 … Guggenheim Bilbao vs. Sydney Opera House30:34 … Find Out More30:43 … Closing BENT FLYVBJERG:  But we made a big effort of, you know, hoovering up all the success stories that we could find and see what we could learn from those and present that to the reader so that we actually, our intention with the book is that people can read this book, and they can start doing their projects better, based on the insights, both the data and the management leadership principles that people who were successful.  So we deliberately sought out people and organizations that have a track record that they can actually deliver one project after another successfully.  So it's not just luck.  They weren't just lucky once.  They actually have some kind of methodology, some kind of system, some kind of process that makes it possible for them to deliver success over and over. WENDY GROUNDS:  You're listening to Manage This, the podcast by project managers for project managers.  I'm your host, Wendy Grounds, and as always I'm joined here in the studio by the one and only Bill Yates. Before we dive in today's episode, we want to remind you to check out our website, Velociteach.com, where you can easily subscribe to the show so you never miss out on the latest insights and discussions.  And if you enjoy what you hear, we'd love you to leave a comment on our website.  Better yet, spread the word about us to your fellow project management enthusiasts.  And you can also earn PDUs, your Professional Development Units, by listening to our podcast. BILL YATES: Looking for an easy and affordable way to maintain your certifications and get better at your job? Our PDU Passport is an all-access pass to every online PDU course in InSite. Take your pick from over 200 high-quality and engaging PDUs aligned to the Talent Triangle. Available when and where you are, with any connected device. WENDY GROUNDS: At Manage This, our focus is on sharing captivating stories of fascinating projects and engaging in conversations with experts who are reshaping the landscape of project management. And today is no different. We're thrilled to have the opportunity to speak with Bent Flyvbjerg. In fact, we're happy to announce that our conversation with actually Bent will span across two episodes. We enjoyed talking with Bent so much that we made the decision not to trim any content, but instead, to extend it across two episodes. Bent is the first BT Professor and Inaugural Chair of Major Program Management at Oxford University's Said Business School.  And we asked him, and the BT stands for British Telecom Corporation.  He's also the professor and chair in Major Program Management at IT University of Copenhagen. He has also received numerous honors and awards, including a knighthood and two Fulbright scholarships.   His latest book is “How Big Things Get Done.” BILL YATES:  Yes.  Somebody recommended his book to me, and I purchased it and started reading it and then got hooked.  The subtitle is “The Surprising Factors That Determine the Fate of Every Project, from Home Renovations to Space Exploration and Everything in Between.”  Bent takes a database of 16,000 megaprojects and looks at their performance, and then extrapolates from that some key findings.

In this week's episode, Riccardo Cosentino and guest co-host, Corail Bourrelier Fabiani, sit down with fellow alumnus Brandon de León to discuss his Oxford Saïd Business School dissertation on electric aviation.Brandon emphasizes the importance of public perception in adopting new technologies and explores the potential of electric aviation to transform urban mobility. The discussion covers technical advancements, regulatory challenges, and the necessary societal embrace for successful integration of electric aircraft into daily transportation. Brandon's insights highlight the intersection of technology, society, and the future of urban air mobility.“But what really validated my research was that social acceptance came up as an interesting issue already, before the first vehicle flies. And like I mentioned before, the next plans are also around big events, the World Expo in Osaka. Next year in 2025, this was to be flights. And in 2028 in Los Angeles for the Olympics there. Other companies from the US are also planning to fly. So yeah, social acceptance is already showing itself as a key risk.” – Brandon de León  Key Takeaways:Defining the pre-commercialization of electric aviationThe critical role of societal acceptance in the adoption of electric aviationThe potential impact of electric aviation on urban infrastructureInsights into the interplay of technological advancements and regulatory frameworksDistributed and decentralized mega projects If you enjoyed this episode, make sure and give us a five star rating and leave us a review on iTunes, Podcast Addict, Podchaser or Castbox. The conversation doesn't stop here—connect and converse with our LinkedIn community: Follow Brandon de León on LinkedInFollow Corail Bourrelier Fabiani on LinkedInFollow Riccardo Cosentino on LinkedInFollow Navigating Major Programmes on LinkedInRead Riccardo's latest at wwww.riccardocosentino.com Transcript:Riccardo Cosentino  0:05  You're listening to Navigating Major Programmes, a podcast that aims to elevate the conversations happening in the infrastructure industry and inspire you to have a more efficient approach within it. I'm your host, Riccardo Cosentino. I bring over 20 years of Major Programme Management experience. Most recently, I graduated from Oxford University Saïd Business School, which shook my belief when it comes to navigating major programmes. Now it's time to shake yours. Join me in each episode as I press the industry experts about the complexity of Major Programme Management, emerging digital trends and the critical leadership required to approach these multibillion-dollar projects. Let's see where the conversation takes us.  Riccardo Cosentino  0:54  Hello, everyone. Welcome to a new episode of Navigating Major Programmes. I'm here today with my co-host, Corail, and we have a special guest, a good old friend of ours joining us today on the podcast. I will pass the mic to Corail who's gonna co-host the podcast today and help me asking questions to this really great guest that has agreed to join us today. How are you doing, Corail? Corail  1:19  Hi, Riccardo, I'm doing really good. Thank you for having me co-hosting this great episode. And I'm excited to talk to Brandon. So maybe a little bit of background, we met doing a major programme management master in Oxford. And during that two years of our lives we met Brandon who was a superstar in our cohort because at the time, he was working for Tesla. And he was talking to us about this really exciting industry and how he's been part of the founders of Tesla. And he's been part of the team that made it a great company that we know today or the big adventure. And then he moved on to work for Rizwan and developing this into a great new enterprise that goes beyond Tesla by working on all different types of trucks and other things that I don't know enough about. But so I'm really excited to hear the story of Brandon. And I think Brandon, it would be great to start with you maybe introducing yourself telling us a little bit about how you ended up in the electric car industry and what drove you to that really expanding field. And yeah, to know a bit more about your background.   Brandon de León  2:37  Wow, what an introduction. Thank you guys so much for having me here on the podcast with you. It's been incredible to see what you guys have produced after the Master's course and hard to follow what you shared Corail. But I think, generally speaking, it's been an amazing learning experience. The Oxford Masters in Major Program Management, learned a lot from you guys, as well as the content. So happy to be here and share a little bit of what I've been working on and some of my background. It's been about 12 years since I've been in the electric car space, but maybe just a step back and give a little personal context about how I even ended up in that. I, my voice betrays me, I'm from the States originally, even though I'm coming to you from Holland today, I'm living in Rotterdam and working in Amsterdam. I grew up on the east coast of the U.S. mainly in Georgia in Florida. And then that's where I connected with Tesla. And what brought me down to Florida originally was my pursuit of International Business Studies. I wanted to study that because I had grown up hearing about how my parents met in Germany, in the army, and so early on, I was ingrained with these ideas of a world beyond the bubble that I lived in. So even though I grew up in small town, Georgia, I knew that I wanted to go and at least traveled to these places maybe even work in these places, if that were possible. And so in high school, when I discovered international business classes, I couldn't get enough. I also learned in those classes that there's a lot of ways society progresses, and probably the fastest mechanism to make that happen is commerce. So you know, regulation and government takes a long time. Nonprofits are phenomenal. But also some of them have limited impact. So it wasn't really clear what the best path was. But having parents that had done service for the country, as it were, and then pursued their careers and more local service type of roles and social worker and studying pre-med and things like that, I knew that I wanted to find a way to make the world a better place in my own little way. Right? So international business was my chosen vessel that brought me to Miami to study undergrad. And then in university there I had a chance to actually work in a company that I had admired for what I would consider a great engineering design and that was BMW their local retailer in the south Florida area. I persuaded them to let me take an entry level job that they didn't have at the time. But I was really eager to get out of the department store I was working at, and to go work in the company that I admired so much down the street and regularly saw the employees from that office. And so thanks to some persuasion and friendliness on their side, I was able to take a very administrative basic role. And I spent two years with BMW, but I realized that 18, 19, 20, there wasn't a lot of career options for someone that young, in the automotive retail space, at least not the traditional automotive, even with really innovative products like BMW. So I went on the search for career path, and I ended up in a bank and I thought, wow, this is terrific, financial district, maybe I peaked early, there's a career advancement ladder, it's all planned out, pension, etc, all the trappings of a great career, but then my interest in engineering and technology kind of clashed at a certain point, because new payment technologies came out into the market. And some people will be familiar with these dongles that you'd plug into an iPhone, which is relatively new back then. And you could swipe credit cards, and it was a revolution for small merchants and mom and pop shops, and I thought, this is wonderful, it's gonna be great for getting them better cash flow, they'll grow faster, it'll really helped a lot of small businesses out. But banking is a very conservative culture and does not run to embrace new technology. So at the time, we were working on a laptop that had an operating system that was three generations old, because the security patches were all well-developed and stuff, there was a clash there. And I figured, okay, I need to find a career path that's also aligned with my interest in technology or automotive or something along those lines. And after a lot of soul searching, and job board searching, I came across Tesla, and they were starting a store locally in South Florida. And through a lot of discussions for different roles. I ended up joining the launch team for the Model S, which was the car that really established the brand as a large volume producer of vehicles. And of course, its focus was electric cars. So that was 2012. I joined right after the vehicle launched. And it's been a wild ride since then. But at that time, because of my international orientation, I thought the wildest dream I have right now is that Tesla will do great. And then we'll get the chance to go and launch in other countries. And maybe I can be part of that. Happily, I had that chance. So although I started in California, and then after we launched the vehicle there, and I gained a lot of experience integrating, delivering the vehicles, the first vehicles and integrating it directly into the lives of people and families across California, I had the chance to bring that back to the East Coast. And then there was an opportunity to join a different department back at headquarters in California. And I jumped at that, because I knew if international opportunities emerge, there'll be people from there, they're good to go. And so that was a strategic step, it was not clear that it would work out. But happily, I was in the right place at the right time, there was an assignment to go help the team in Canada kind of get find their feet, if you will. And then after doing that a couple of times going out to Toronto, and doing what I would call international, but doesn't necessarily appear to be very international experiences going from California to Canada, I also had the chance to join a very small team of four or five that came out to Europe for a few months to do the same, essentially to help train the first model as launch teams here. And that was quite a privilege. When I came home to San Francisco, I thought oh, wow, this is it. Everything I could dream has happened. This is fantastic. What do I do now? And I didn't have to wait long for an answer because being at the headquarters in the beehive of activity, there was an opportunity that was presented to me to come over and help build critical partnership networks because we were starting to deliver vehicles but didn't really have solutions in place for if people were driving from the Netherlands or Norway down to Spain for holiday, what happens if they run out of charge or if the car breaks, and we had a very small footprint in Europe, within three weeks, I was on a one-way flight back to Europe. And I haven't looked back since. So that's a little bit about me in a very long-winded way and how I've gotten here to you. Corail  8:58  No, that was fantastic. Brandon, thank you so much for sharing your passion. It's really fascinating how you're constantly growing, reinventing yourself, but yet you seem to have such a drive. And that brings me to something a little picture that you shared of yourself recently that was you, yourself. I don't know how old you were maybe five or six. And you were in this beautiful little plane. And I think we talked about how you progressed from different career paths, but always with a certain drive and in that journey now I feel like you also have great interest into the future of electric aviation. And you decided to write your dissertation on this specific topic, and the social acceptance of electric aviation. Can you tell us a little bit more about this interest of yours and how you came to write about this in your dissertation in Oxford? Brandon de León  10:00  Yeah, sure. Thanks for reminding me of that picture. It's my haircut was terrible. But yeah, I was very young. And that was, it was a fun picture of me as a very small child in this mock-up of what must have been like a pretend F-16 for children at an Air Force stand at some air show in the U.S. So that was quite a throwback. Thanks for that. The, that picture I think really reflects my interest from the earliest of memories. And I call it transport now because it seems more appropriate. But it's really cars, planes, things that move fast. They're exciting, or have always been exciting to me. And I know that's sometimes cliche and certainly not exclusive to me. But that's where my fascinations were as a kid and that really hasn't died. But my career being mainly in automotive and electric automotive for more recent decade or so, maybe it's worth sharing, it's quick middle steps. So after about 10 years at Tesla, scaling the core product and ecosystems around it in North America and Europe, I thought, okay, what do I, the recipe is pretty much set at Tesla. So we have gigafactories opening, launched four or five different vehicle programs, how can I best use all this wonderful experience? And in 2021, I joined a company called Rivian, which essentially, is, for those who don't know, it a lot like Tesla in that it's a new company that makes cars. But their plan was to electrify totally new vehicle types, still ground vehicles, right? So trucks, which are hugely popular in North America, also SUVs, which are growing in popularity globally. Perhaps, if you look at the Tesla Model Y, the best selling car globally, right now in 2023, I think it was. And then for me sitting in Europe, perhaps most importantly, commercial vans, so they have or we have a huge order with Amazon for 100,000 delivery vans. And that was super exciting to me, because being in Europe, I know that trucks are not a big deal here. SUVs are typically on the smaller side or middle size, definitely not the large American scale. But I knew that if they produced the vans, then we would have a tremendous success on our hands. And that's gone really well. We've delivered over 16,000 vans now it's super exciting to see that happening. So essentially, why join Rivian was to extend electrification. So when looking for a dissertation topic, during our master's degree, I really wanted to take that opportunity to explore the other side of my fascination. One, because there wouldn't be any conflict of interest. So it was a lot cleaner to not do electric vehicles. And then the other side is there was a really interesting ecosystem emerging that was ripe for research. And that's electric aviation. It obviously aligns with my fascinations, but also super timely.   Brandon de León  12:32  So when I started looking into how can I use a dissertation to add some value, however minuscule to what's going on in this ecosystem that fascinated me so much, I started to reach out to people and one of the people I reached out to was someone I would consider a founding father, a modern time founding father in electric aviation. And he had spent three or four decades at NASA researching electric propulsion. And it really caught on towards the 2010s. And we'll get into that later. But essentially, I was asking people like him who are highly technical, unlike me, who's a non engineer, how can a non-engineer contribute to the conversation into the development of this space, and in our discussions that came out that acceptance is really interesting, because it is a known concern. But it's kind of a fuzzy topic, a fluffy topic, it's ambiguous, people aren't really quite sure what to make of it, how to define it, how to grapple with it. And there's not a unified message around it. That's, that seems ripe for Social Sciences dissertation. And that's what led me into it because there weren't any other spaces that weren't mostly other parts, or aspects of the ecosystem today, are highly technical, or regulation-oriented. And this was a space where someone coming from social sciences point of view could really add value. So that's what led me into it, happy to document it more. But that's the background and how I got there. Corail  13:51  I think it's so interesting that you're bringing, as you say, a non-engineer background into a field that is highly engineering-heavy. And we see in Oxford, we talk a lot about the work of Kahneman, for example, and how it mixes psychology and economy and what amazing ideas that created and I feel you coming from a different background is also generating discussion that we don't think the regular engineer doesn't necessarily think about. And I think it's quite beautiful. You talked about the social interest of your parents early on that kind of inspired you. And it's interesting that you went into social acceptance and which encompasses I think many things but also the how people receive what we're producing. Right? And I wanted to ask you a bit more about this because when I think about social acceptance of electric vehicles or electric planes, as of, I don't know, kind of French bias, (inaudible) we talk about how planes are terrible for the environment and we are always thinking about shaming each other in France for how much we travel? I know my aunt for example, is constantly telling me you shouldn't take the plane so often, etc. And so for me, I only see positive outcome, right, for electrifying planes. So why did you, how did you identify social acceptance as a risk? How is it perceived in the industry? Brandon de León  15:19  Yes, it's a great question. And actually, thanks for the chance to add more background because it's not, it wasn't something I was able to include in the dissertation itself, I had to really shrink down that context and generally referred to the study as a study into the acceptance of electric aviation without giving a lot of detail and color. So essentially, in order to understand that better, it's helpful to describe the 2010s and the emergence of the ideas around electric aviation and how it was going to look and feel what the vision was, and who was articulating it. So although there have been decades of research at NASA, in particular from the guy, Mark Moore, is the gentleman I talked to and brainstormed with around ideas, potentially, that could be useful to the ecosystem. So there was quite a lot of work done on the physics and the engineering aspect. But what was interesting is that it didn't come from a lot of technology seemed to come from the defense side, right, where you have the internet, GPS, other things that are developed for military or defense purposes, and then they become commercialized. This is a rare instance where, even though NASA had done prior work, and really help manifest the technology, or the idea around how to use it, it was actually technology, commercial minds, technology and commercial minds that were leading the development of this vision, a particular vision of electric aviation, and they called it urban air mobility, mostly. There were many different names and the names of all the increase since then, in the early 2010s, essentially, you had Google printing tons of money and so just to pick, cherry-pick a specific example, this is not the origin story for the whole ecosystem, but it's a major part of the background. So Google is just minting money, right? And Larry Page starts to make bets. And they're called Alphabet. Now, there's a play on words there. But essentially, Silicon Valley companies that make it that big start to then have to find new avenues to create growth. And these are the bets that they're making. And one of them was autonomous vehicles, right? And today, that's Waymo. And another one that was backed by Larry Page in particular was a company called Kitty Hawk. And it had different names, as in its predecessor phases, but essentially, they were making a two/four passenger air vehicle, and it was all electric. And it looked like nothing you've ever seen before. If I had to describe the inspiration, I think that in many cases, these air vehicles developed by the organization he was backing, or Google was backing. I guess it's more him than Google to be honest, on the on the electric aviation side. And other pioneers of electric aviation in the same timeframe, they kind of looked like scaled up drones, toys, essentially, they're called multicopters in that format. But essentially, the vision was that these were going to be flying taxis. And they were going to be in cities. Now I'm not old enough to remember this in person. But I've read stories about how Delta and United used to have these phenomenal helicopter services where you could catch a helicopter from the top of the Pan Am building in downtown Manhattan, or Midtown and then fly over to JFK, or whatever airport. And that was the heyday of aviation, right when it was really a VIP experience. And this wasn't just New York City, this was San Francisco, tons of other cities have this helicopter service. And it's not really the case anymore outside of a couple non-airline, independent helicopter services in, let's say, New York City for example. And enter Uber, another emerging tech company, who was really ambitious and wanting to really reinvent mobility, not just on the ground, but they also saw an opportunity to play a role in this airspace as well, if you will. And so they took what they knew about ride-hailing and the app and the data that they had seen, all the trips people were taking around urban areas like L.A. and New York and probably better than anyone they fully understood and had the data and the data orientation that a Silicon Valley company would do to understand how there's a huge amount of traffic between this origin and destination. And so airport, if we look back at this helicopter services presents an interesting option. And so they started to, they started a sub-organization or department called Uber Elevate, and they issued a white paper, I think it was 2016, maybe 2017. But the white paper basically articulated a really grand vision for all these air vehicles doing thousands of movements in urban areas a year. So it's a whole new kind of flying, not the wing and tube that we're used to going between over long distances or medium range distances.   Brandon de León  19:49  This was a whole different layer of air transport that hadn't been seen before, because presumably, existing small airplanes were, with the capacity of a ground taxi, four, five, six seats or whatever, were too noisy, not comfortable and outdated designs and they couldn't vertically take off. And that's a big difference too is that these new vehicles were supposed to take off and land like a helicopter. So that then unlocked a lot of opportunities to land in urban areas without a massive airfield and runway. And so that was the lower end division in that Uber Elevate white paper. These days, that evolution of that vision has evolved quite a lot and become a lot more mild. To give you one example, there were images circulating around the time of that white paper, where you would imagine a high-rise tower and different levels that would have open bays that the small car-sized air vehicle could fly into horizontally and land or land at a top and then the elevator would move it around. But essentially, it was beehive for these. And that's where social acceptance really became a question. Because if you have that many vehicles flying around in the airspace that's not really used today and they're potentially making a lot of noise because helicopters are super noisy. And that's the best benchmark that we have, even if they're electric and quieter, they're not going to be in silent, then how are people going to react to the noise? How are people going to react to the visual pollution or obstruction to whatever view they have, if you enjoy the city view of Manhattan, it's now going to have a lot of air vehicles in it. If you enjoy the Coastal View, perhaps you'll see a lot of vehicles above the beach, that sort of thing. Social acceptance was early on identified as a risk, something that needed to be dealt with. But how to deal with that wasn't really clear. Riccardo Cosentino  21:29  Brandon, I have a quick follow-up on that. Because it's very interesting how this was a dissertation. So was the final project for the master's degree or for a master in major program management. Can you articulate how you end up picking an industry as a major programme? I'm assuming, I'm paraphrasing a little bit because your study is not about one particular project, one particular company, it's really just societal, and how society is going to who's going to embrace this new technology or not. And so when you were discussing with your supervisor about this topic, how was it received from the academic side because we're all educated, and we're all told my major project is a project about 1 billion dollar/pounds, whatever. But I'm not a believer in that metric. To me, it's, major programmes are about complexity and I think your dissertation fits perfectly that definition, but you must have had some back and forth with your supervisor, or even with some other academics. Brandon de León  22:38  Yeah, it's a great question. And I really thought this was a risk to my dissertation to be fair open to the point of marking, I didn't know if it was going to be received well, that how to articulate this as a mega project or giga project, as I called it. But basically, I think that if we look at the way we presented this content in the course, just to give the listeners an idea, that for most of history, or let's say the last century, there has been increasing focus on these growing, the projects of growing scale and complexity, and cost getting into the billions getting into this, they totally changed traffic patterns in the city or they, if there are huge new bridge or something like that and it's just visually imposing huge civil infrastructure or digital systems that cost a ton or aerospace programs like an A380 Airbus, which is just a mega behemoth of an airplane, right? And if the complexity is clear, super tangible. But I think that's the school of thought that are when we had the great fortune of I think straddling two eras of the faculty at Oxford. And the first chair that we encountered was Bent Flyvbjerg. And he literally wrote the book on this stuff. And so far as the Oxford Handbook for Major or Mega Project Management, and in that, through that lens, or what he helped us understand, it was this more centralized type of project. And then later, we actually had another generation of leadership for the faculty come in with the new chair, Daniel Armanios, and he was very interesting in that he introduced the concept of it not necessarily having to be a centralized, that's a singular entity, the mega project could be distributed, decentralized, even. Right? And so after reading both of their research, I'd actually found that Flyvbjerg and contemporary said, coined the phrase of an array of projects. And I thought that fits this. This is actually exactly what I need to articulate how this is a large, complex project, although it's effectively being built in a decentralized manner and actually, quite extremely decentralized manner. There are over 800 different organizations that have released a concept for an electric aviation or electric air vehicle of some kind or another. There's this nonprofit that tracks the industry and most of the funding is with a handful and most ofthe technical progress is at a handful, but the reality is that there is a massive number of companies that intend to enter this space. And essentially, by building these vehicles, they're having to also engage regulators and build the regulatory envelope for this to actually happen. And then also go out and entertain cities and get them on side. They even let it fly. So ultimately, what they're all building towards is a central vision, even though it's moderated a bit since the over white paper in the beehive towers in the city, what they're actually when you step back and look at it all, what's actually being constructed, is something quite central. And that is a layer of air transportation, a new air transportation system that doesn't exist today. Because electrics, there's no charging out there. It's also and this is the part I didn't really get to yet is that a lot of the companies want to get towards autonomy. Some people might know already, there's a pilot shortage historically, pilots are now being paid very well, after having years and years of declining. That's not the case anymore. There's a vast shortage of pilots today. But also, if you're looking at technically looking at these vehicles through a technical lens, from a physics point of view, the energy density in lithium ion batteries or automotive grade, especially. But even research batteries, they're still limited compared to typical combustion fuels, hydrocarbon fuels, in so much in how much energy they can carry per kilogram. And if you're in aerospace where every gram matters, it's critical that you lighten the vehicle, because it's a trade-off for payload and revenue. And so although electric vehicles have started to scale up the production of lithium-ion batteries and automotive grade electric batteries have really gotten cheaper and better energy density so they're improving every day, in labs across the world they're still just crossing the threshold where they're useful in the air and just unlocking short-range missions. So this is a new, this is a new transport layer that is just becoming feasible in the late 2010s  and still in development. So that's where I basically come back to your point, which is it's not a central program, it's definitely super distributed and decentralized, but they're all building in essentially a common vision of electric air transport that doesn't exist today. Riccardo Cosentino  27:21  Okay, one more question that on that note, and then I'll pass it back to Corail. As an industry, I mean, where would you position it in the developmental phases of an industry? And maybe, if you could make a comparison, we always go back to the internet, right? So every time there's a new revolutionary technology, we always say, yeah, think of the internet in 1995 or finger the internet in the 2000. On that basis, so with that in mind, where would you place this industry in the developmental arch? Brandon de León  27:59  Yeah, maybe if I could go a few years before the internet just for a comparison that rings harder in my mind is mobile phones. I think we're at the place, there's a famous study from McKinsey that I'll get the number wrong slightly. But I think that they hint here McKinsey did a study for AT&T, I think it was where they predicted in the early 90s roundabout then that the maximum total addressable market for mobile phones is 900,000 Americans. I think we're at that stage with electric aviation. And I don't mean that in the, to poke fun at our friends at McKinsey, I know we all have some, anyway, consulting generally. But I think that it is impossible to anticipate the actual scale that this will be deployed at over time. And I say that because if you look at this technology, the business model for many companies is not clear yet. So I think that's, once the technology is ready, we're at the point where the technology is only just becoming certified. And even with helping hands from governments that are eager to be technology leaders in Q4, right about Q4 last year, the first electric vertical takeoff and landing vehicle certified anywhere in the world was certified in China. And just this month, the first one was transacted to a Japanese customer from another company in China for demonstration flights at the upcoming expo, World Expo in Osaka. Nothing's actually, there's no revenue yet. Unless you talk about small revenue regimes from Defense Departments and things like that to help with the testing and helping R&D funds. So we're really pre-commercialization. And that's precisely why I wanted to jump in for the dissertation into this space. And I thought it was really rich picking for that study-wise because what we hear in the program and all the things we've learned about mega project management and so on, is that when did they go wrong, if not in execution mostly in the planning phases in the earliest phases. So this was a huge opportunity to talk to people across the G7 really across OEMs, regulators, infrastructure companies and so on. Even NGOs. And to get a sense for okay, where's everyone's head at individually and collectively. What's the sense for how they're all thinking about this particular aspect? Social acceptance of a new technology? Yeah. And so that's, I think lends itself to the study, but super early is the answer to the question in a couple of words. Riccardo Cosentino  30:19  Thank you.   Corail  30:20  Brandon, that's really interesting. And to go back to your dissertation, I think you were planning to interview 10 leaders and you ended up with 29 interviews. I think it shows the real interest that it sparked amongst the leader in that industry. And do you feel like they got interested because this is a topic that they didn't necessarily so much sought about? And they wanted to discuss more with you? Or was it very much a risk that was very present in their minds? And you just found that they had already thought about a lot of solutions to raising social acceptance? Brandon de León  30:59  Yeah, it's a fair question. You're absolutely right. My ambition was 10. I accidentally overshot that by three times. I paid for that on the back end, when it came to actually giving the proper level of attention to the data analysis and cleaning the data from the interviews. Yeah, that was, it was quite a heavy fall. But it was really a pleasure to, because once I started to talk to people in the space, Dr. Mark Moore and I had engaged over LinkedIn, of course, and email and then had a call. But I think that really, I realized early on, and one of the things that I picked up on from one of the faculty members, Dr. Harvey Mahler, was that observation can actually be a part of your research. And I thought, let me, let me go to at least one event where these people gather and just see what's the level of discourse? Is this really a risk? Or is it just something that I see in their social media content or things like that, and I was really lucky, because there were three major industry events, if I can call them that, that were happening right around the time I was doing my dissertation and or the early stages of it. And so I went to London to eVTOL Insights London Conference and it was very much inside baseball, you had the top leaders from the companies that were trying to develop and certify these air vehicles. But you also had the leading regulators, globally for aerospace were there, it was really interesting to just, fascinating to hear the conversation between them. But what I picked up on was that acceptance came up, it was, in some cases a footnote. In other cases, it was a panel topic. But it was never, there was only such a limited depth that could be accomplished in that format. And having chatted with Dr. Mark Moore, having seen that in person in London, but also at Revolution Aero, which is another major event in Dublin, I realized that there, there's not a lot of exploration of this topic, if this is essentially the limit of it. And there are other podcasts in the industry too, that I've listened to where it maybe it gets explored a little bit more, but usually, it's pretty, pretty limited how much people can talk about this, because the overwhelming focus right now is to use every dollar of investment. And right now there's over $15 billion, I think it's over 18 at last count, invested in this space, mainly in the vehicle developers, that will in the future produce these electric air vehicles, essentially, the ones that are just planning to actually produce the vehicles, a lot of them aren't necessarily interested in acceptance, that's something they consider a responsibility of the operator to go out and develop acceptance wherever they plan to operate the vehicles. The operator meaning like airline, essentially. And then the other case, some vehicle developers or pureplay operators, they see the acceptance risk a lot more clearly. And in some cases, they've experienced it before with their traditional air vehicles.   Brandon de León  33:42  So I think, for me, it became clearer and clearer that this was both interesting for me, and potentially helpful for them to have a longer form conversation, the average interview was something like 45 minutes to an hour, someone as long as two hours a couple of them, when as long as two hours, I made the coding quite a long process. But it was super insightful for me. And I felt really privileged. As I was reaching out to people, the reception I was getting was quite strong. I thought 10 was going to be the high end and also a significant enough sample that would make the research worthwhile and meaningful. But then actually, I started to realize that if there's greater interest, I'm happy to expand that to a larger number, especially if it allows me to get perspectives from multiple people representing the different sides of the ecosystem. So like I mentioned, regulators, not just in Europe, but also in North America. And also OEMs, not just in Europe, but from North America as well. So a lot of the funding sits in North America right now. And depending on who you ask the technological leaders, some of them are in Germany, some of them are also in California and Silicon Valley, and so on. So I didn't want to represent just one small pocket of the ecosystem because again, it's a larger array globally. If I could do a better job of capturing those points of view from a European point of view as well as an American point of view, I wanted to do that. And so that ended up getting me to nearly 30 interviews pretty quickly. That's how it grew so fast. Corail  33:44  I think it's fantastic. And there must have been so much work to just code this amount of interview, I just cannot imagine in the limited amount of time we have to do this dissertation. It's a lot. So congratulations. Brandon de León  35:26  Thank you. Corail  35:27  So can you share with us then how so I wanted to ask you, Brandon, how did this leader define the risk? And what were the solution that they were putting forward?   Brandon de León  35:39  It's a great question. I think maybe the step back as a precursor, or the best example of what they were trying to do before was helicopter services from decades ago. And if you live in New York City, or Sao Paulo, or Hong Kong, helicopter services are not an infrequent site. So there are places in the world where it's still quite common. It's just that in the U.S. we, being American, that's sort of my bias, those services had dwindled. After there was a famous incident in New York City at the top of the Pan Am building, I think it was bad weather that affected the helicopter landing. Long story short, one helicopter did a particularly bad job landing, and crashed onto the rooftop. And when it did, a propeller went this way. Another one fell to the ground, I believe it was or some debris fell to the ground and killed the young lady. The other one might have injured someone when it flew into a nearby building. This was, I didn't read the entire history of this industry, the helicopter service industry. But what I can tell you is that if you look at the old timetables and the brochures, being a historical geek and an aviation geek have done more than my fair share that there are very clearly helicopter services advertised in most, in a lot of major metropolitan areas from these mainstream airline names we all know and love today, or despise today, depending on what you think of it. But anyways, the reality is that those services dwindling, I think, in part happened, because there were restrictions put in place, when you had an incident like that it captured the attention of the public around, probably not just that city, probably not just the U.S., perhaps major cities around the world, especially as news could spread wherever the American newspapers are read. So I think that that put a little bit of ice on helicopter services. And so today, if you look at Blade, which is an operator that works does fly from Manhattan over to JFK, for example, to do the airport shuttle type use case, I believe they take off on the perimeter of Manhattan, they're not, they're just off on those waterfront, they're not on top of some building in the middle of the city. So things have definitely changed. And so when it came to acceptance and how they view it, one was, there was this precedent for things going wrong. And if things go wrong, it can really pause an industry. So making sure perceptions are warmed up to the idea of this happening again, because what they're talking about doing is literally lending in many different places across downtown Manhattan, for example of the island of Manhattan, actually being able to pop down on different buildings, but also perhaps green spaces or whatever, wherever they can place what they call a vertiport, which looks a lot to normal person, like a heliport, small helipad with a V instead of an H. There are other things there. The industry insiders will tell you, there's a lot more to it. And there is charging equipment and storage and things like that. But all that to say what the vision was in 2016-17, when Uber was hosting these huge industry segments with 72 experts one year and hundreds the next year to try and really build steam around this vision of urban air mobility. They knew they had an uphill battle. And then on top of that helicopters are famously extremely noisy. That's part of why they have limited routes that they can fly. The other part, of course, is safety and things like that there. If you look at London, I think there's one main helicopter route through the whole of London that goes, basically follows the river, for the most part. And then I think the only operational heliport inside core London, that's not a hospital for an air ambulance is essentially on the reverse side, too. So helicopters are really limited in where they could go, partly because of the noise, but other you know, fears, safety and things like that. And so that's essentially, what captivated the interests of the industry participants most was how do we reduce noise through technical innovation, better propeller design, electric motors are inherently quiet, they're not jet engines. Even if you hear things build as for marketing purposes, and electric jet, it's quite different. It's more of a fan. So I think that they saw an opportunity with electric propulsion to be much quieter, and also more safer, ironically, because you can put many more electric motors and propellers. So if one goes down, you're not worried about that you can still safely land the vehicle and then yes, I think basically centered around noise primarily because the industry insiders knew that, fundamentally, the vehicle was safer, more resilient, more robust, more redundant, if you will, with different electric motors and propellers, a higher number, some have six, some have eight, some have 12 propellers built into the vehicle design. So if one fails, it's really not a major issue for most of the format's of these electric air vehicles. But getting people to warm up to the idea of it was a real risk the way they see it. Riccardo Cosentino  40:29  So Brandon, obviously, this is a podcast about your dissertation. And you wouldn't, you wouldn't have a dissertation without a conclusion and some findings. What were your key findings? Brandon de León  40:40  It's a good, I think that so if I, my research question largely centered around how do these executives from all over the ecosystem, all sides of it, essentially define social acceptance? Who and what do they think drives it? And then also, effectively how they plan to approach it? Right? So how do they think that they can maximize social acceptance and minimize social rejection? And the primary finding I found in the case of the first question was, there is no single definition for acceptance. People describe it differently. You'll hear things like regulatory acceptance, social acceptance, of course, public acceptance, community acceptance, market acceptance. So it depends on the mentality of the person and what they're responsible for, and what they're interested in. So if you're looking holistically, you could argue that it's social acceptance, but some of them, a lot of them necessarily focus in on the stakeholders that are closest to the activities that are proposed. And first and foremost, these vehicles have to be certified in a very rigorous process, the organization's have to, as well. So regulators are front of mind. And then market acceptance, of course, they think there has to be some demand, whatever their chosen business model, whether it's airport shuttles or other things. So they look at it through those different lenses. But when you're at a conference, those are sometimes thrown around as synonyms. And people innately understand the acceptance, that means other people being okay with this, but who they're concerned with. And the degree of embrace is something that I found varies quite broadly. And I think what's interesting is, even with that said, it's kind of there's a structure, there's always a question of who are they talking about we're concerned with, and then what's the degree of embrace, and that was a common thread, and their different phraseology, if I can call it that. And then so far as who and what drives it, if you look at a template stakeholder map, this is a lot of the literature around stakeholder management is written by Dr. Friedman. And Dr. Friedman has multiple books on the topic, he's the most cited guy in the field. And I tried to stick to these bedrock, most cited folks in these different disciplines because I felt like you said, this is quite an ambiguous space I'm diving into, I need to anchor myself to really key literature here. And so there's a beautiful map of stakeholders, and he breaks them into primary and secondary. So we call primary stakeholders, essentially, everyone who's in the value chain, plus government and community. So the people, we're directly interfacing with whatever you're doing, plus the people helping you produce it, and finance essentially. So most of the industry is focused on primary stakeholders. And I think operators are a little bit more aware of the secondary stakeholders, but through the interviews, the 29 different executives, we touched on every one of them got covered at least once. So although there was an overwhelming focus on primary stakeholders, naturally, there was an awareness of an interest in getting all stakeholders on board. And so they defined it very differently. But when you ask them who they needed to actually get to accept, it was pretty comprehensive. So no surprise, these people were executives in this industry, or in adjacent industries that made them relevant for joining these jobs for decades, right? They have, I think, on average, almost two decades of experience, many have masters and doctorates. They've done this before, or at least led businesses before and are aware of the spectrum of stakeholders that they need to talk to. What I had hoped to get into, and maybe this is because I was just coming out of academia with that hat on was the nuts and bolts of human thinking and decision making around taking this vehicle or this airport shuttle or not. We didn't quite get into that. I think that what I quickly understood was that the level of discourse didn't go that deep yet. And so I was asking you about which bias do you think plays a role in the decision to take this air shuttle or not to the airport? And after a couple of interviews, I realized, okay, let me bring it back up a level and further define, really who's involved and who's being mentioned the most, who's most important or seen as most important? And that's about as far as I could go in that space. There was a fourth question, I omitted it earlier, but essentially it was to what degree is acceptance a risk and simple to say most of them surprisingly, there was a lot of actual alignment here, social acceptance was considered a risk but also a high risk, I think partly because of the helicopter service example, in Manhattan. And also just generally helicopter services being so restricted over decades that they, everyone in this space has seen, made it really clear that they need to do a lot of work on the side. But what was interesting to me is a few of them went further and said it was existential to the industry. And again, thinking back to that Manhattan rooftop, you can imagine why they might think that because if public opinion turns against the industry, there's no writers, there's no financing. And then it's not a great day for the participants in the industry. So that one was pretty clear. And then the other one was sort of how to maximize social acceptance. And that was really fascinating for me to hear. Because again, I was talking to people on all sides, there were some people who were in marketing, communications, leadership roles. There were other people that were in, essentially engineering leadership roles. What was fascinating is that, essentially, they all largely saw the demonstration flights as a major win that were happening. There were limited demonstration flights happening by a couple of companies that were making sure that they were being seen as leaders in this space, and then also taking advantage of being first mover at certain major events. So for example, last was it, I forget the month, I think it was June, I was able to go to the Paris Air Show. And there was a company from Germany called Volocopter, who was led by a former Airbus executive. And they were flying their two seater prototype called the VoloCity. And this is the one that's supposed to appear during the Olympic Games this year and do some flights over Paris as well. On this day, it was flying over the airfield Le Bourget in north of Paris, which is in aviation history, it's a fascinating place tons of history, museums there, Charles Lindbergh landed there when he did this transatlantic flight. Anyways, long story short, to see this electric multicopter. Aircraft take off and fly over the airfield was really cool for me, because of my research. But also, it was stunning, because even though I have worked for decade-plus in electric vehicles, and I know just how quiet electric transport can be, I was shocked that I couldn't hear it, it was inaudible, from a very short distance away. Doesn't make any sense in the mind. It doesn't compute, it should be audible. It's not once it's maybe a football field away, in my personal sense. And so I think that what, what they were getting on to is what I experienced at Tesla, which is the technology, if it's really good, is convincing on its own, all you have to do is show people allow them to drive an electric car allow them to go to an air show and see this thing flying. And understand that it's, it feels silent from most places. And I think they're definitely onto something with that. Others went further to say we need to do education campaigns, I think that generally the spirit is roughly the same. But when asked to diagnose the state of acceptance building, most of them agreed that not much has been done or not enough has been done there. Some companies have gone on like 60 minutes and other major news shows for a segment to talk about flying cars, or flying taxis and these sorts of things. Because it's interesting and cool that there's some new innovative air vehicle. But other than that, and social media content, which really only gets to their followers, few had gone out of those. And more is happening now happy to talk about that in a minute. But essentially, that those were the four areas that I asked about, and was able to get concrete answers and learn what their perspectives were. Corail  48:32  That's great. Brandon, I wanted to ask you, like you said that a lot of them flagged this risk as a critical risk. And yet one of your one of your notes in your dissertation is that yeah, there is very little that is done about it. And as you're saying it's starting to increase, and we have the Olympic Games coming in Paris, and potentially, I'd love you to talk more about this and what will happen during the games. But first, why do you think so little is done if it's seen as this important risk that needs to be managed early on?   Brandon de León  49:07  Yeah, it's a fair one. And also, it was the thing that perplex me coming out of the dissertation. Obviously, in the month since doing the dissertation. I've had more time to digest it and think about it. And to factor in more of their point of view, I think. But essentially, and also last week I was able to join one last conference in my roadshow, if you will, to see what had changed since I had done the conferences about a year ago. And I think the short answer, if I were to speak for them, what they would say is that acceptance is important, valuable, meaningful and critical when we get to commercialization. But right now, the reality is that most companies don't have enough money to make it to commercialization. They're staring down their coffers and they don't see enough financial runway and funding left to potentially even get through certification. Some of them have just enough to get there. But it's very clear that almost all them if not all of them are going to have to go back and raise more funds. So when the funds are that precious, they're looking at how do we maximize every dollar, or euro or pound, right? And in those cases, essentially the critical milestone they need to get to to show that they have a viable product and business insofar as at least producing these vehicles, if not, to operate themselves to sell to someone else to operate, is to get certification, or to show meaningful certification path progress, and it's no small task. So just to give you a taste, they have to prove that they can, they're certified design organization, that they have a production method that can make exact copies over and over again, and this has to be signed off by the regulator, this is not something they can self certify, like in much of the automotive space, which is also highly regulated, it's still a fraction of the regulation level of aviation. And then even once they get the design, organization approval, and the production organization approval, and I might be getting my words a little bit wrong here. So aviation experts don't scare me. But essentially, they also have to be able to get an approval that they have processes in place that are certified for maintenance, repair, and overhaul, just to name a few. There's other things that they actually have to get certified for. But essentially, getting those things, those ducks in a row is billions of dollars. And again, if the whole industry has, let's call it 18 billion and counting, and there's over 800 players, you can imagine most of them aren't going to make that. And even the ones that have raised money, they've burned billions in many cases already. There are major, let's say, some of the companies that have raised the most funds in Europe, for example, have about 12 months of runway, but they still have more than 12 months to get to certification potentially. So I think that they're resource-constrained and focused on the core next milestone but, to your point, I think it's also because it's a fuzzy topic. It's not really clear who's responsible for it and then who should be spending money on it, and if one company alone can do it. And there's other interesting things that I uncovered into the research in the financial filings of some of the companies that have gone public through IPOs, or specs in recent years. Some of them consider developing public acceptance as a potential risk to their first mover advantage, because it'll benefit the whole industry and their competitors too, in that subset, right or in that collective. So while they see it as a good thing to do, from a social point of view. And maybe even from a business point of view, they can appreciate that it would be helpful to reduce some friction in the future. I think they're betting that it's overcomable. And they're biasing towards maintaining a first mover advantage if they can do. Our research from literature and social sciences would argue that maybe that's not the best balance, happy to talk about that more. But essentially, they're taking a pretty big bet there that they're going to launch. And then be able to build awareness, convert people to believers, and interested customers, at least as fast as they can produce vehicles and put them into servers and build capacity. So I think that's where it's a bit of a risk is that if they don't start to build awareness, early, the lag, there's a time lag between building awareness and first awareness and actually being willing to use a service. Not everyone's an innovator, early adopter. And I think they're counting on the fact that they're going to have a slow ramp. So they're not going to be over capacity. They're going to have more than enough innovators and early adopters that are willing to take their services, or use these vehicles. And they rather maintain the first mover advantage, largely not everyone, but most people seem to be acting in that way. Corail  53:40  Okay, I guess I have one final question. I'm really intrigued about what you're thinking about the opportunity that the Olympic Games are representing in Paris for this industry? Are you excited to see something in the air at that time? Please, tell me what are your thoughts on the games coming? Brandon de León  54:01  Oh, yes, sorry. I missed that point entirely. Thanks for making sure I answered. So I think, yeah, it's a fantastic point. Because, for better or for worse, you can hate or love the Olympics, right? There's a lot of debate around that. But I think that the reality is major sporting events of other types, and just major events generally, whether it's a Swiftie concert, or whatever, that is a prime opportunity to build awareness and plant those seeds if you can get your product in front of that audience. It's massive for any business, right? This is why in the U.S., you see companies paying millions and millions and millions for 30 seconds during the Super Bowl, which is our American Football Championship, right? Every year. And it's the same thing is at play here. And so, the Paris Olympics are very interesting because Paris as of late, especially, has been a city that is very intent, with the city leadership on improving quality of life, introducing better transport, a lot more biking paths and making it just easier to use, to a more livable city, let's say it that way., I'm living here in the Netherlands bicycles are a way of life. And the people who are pushing the bicycle culture and infrastructure and urban planning from the Netherlands point of view at the universities and Amsterdam and other places, Paris is one of their favorite cases to point to. I think more people this week or this month, it was reported, more people were biking than driving in Paris for the first time in known history since I guess the advent of automotive. So I think it's really exciting time in Paris, but also Paris is also known for and France, too, for being unabashed in protecting their culture and also making sure that their perspectives are respected. And so you see a lot of this in sort of the way from the space I work in. Now with SUVs, one of the things I've noticed and seen is a policy around SUVs, where I think it's a proposal or it's gone into effect now, where SUVs will pay more for parking in the city. So what happens and where this comes into play with the Olympics is that for years, people have been in the industry targeting the Paris Olympics as a launch point some other some companies that were planning on doing flights at the Paris Olympics in this summer in 2024 realize they weren't going to make it in time technically, to be ready to fly. But this particular company called Volocopter, that I've mentioned before, out of Germany, they're very keen on demonstrating again, they were the ones that flew the Paris Air Show last time, and they've since done a massive amount of flights in the U.S. going around different cities and stuff on a roadshow. So they're very eager to build awareness, which results from this researcher's point of view, of course, and they see the Olympics as an iconic moment, because they're European company. They're very much proud of that. And also, if you look at the history of Airbus, Airbus was a European project, Pan European right parts come from all over Europe to build those planes. And this is maybe a second coming of Airbus in so many ways, in this new air transport world. And so it's super symbolic to be able to fly at Paris, in front of the crowds of Olympic spectators, not just at Paris airshow where you have a lot of aviation, aware or interested or geeky type folks, or people who work in the industry. It's a home field advantage when you're flying above that crowd. But when you put it in front of the Olympic audience, that's a whole nother level of magnitude and exposure and media coverage. And so that can do wonders for the company and change its fundraising prospects, it's runway and its ability to develop future products and launch into other markets and really, potentially accelerated and develop its first mover advantage, too. So it's huge. What's interesting is in September, the Paris city council acting on complaints from citizens about this plan of that air vehicle flying there now, I would say negotiations is not very clear what conversations are happening. But it was brought into question whether they're actually going to be allowed to fly over the city, whether or not they can get certified in time to do it. And that last check, I believe the CEO was reported as saying that they might not launch in July as originally hoped if the certification doesn't come on time. But they're hoping at least to be able to do it in August for the Paralympics. So there's a nonzero chance that they don't get to fly. That could happen. And that would be for them, I think they would class that as a really big disappointment, a missed opportunity, and so on. And also an opportunity for Europe and Paris, the show itself as a showcase for innovation in the space and air transport. So I think it's really interesting when you look at these big events, because they present such an opportunity. It's clear to the commercial side that they're chasing it. But what really validated my research was that social acceptance came up as an interesting issue already, before the first vehicle flies. And like I mentioned before, the next plans are also around big events, the World Expo in Osaka. Next year in 2025, this was to be flights. And in 2028 in Los Angeles for the Olympics there. Other companies from the US are also planning to fly. So yeah, social acceptance is already showing itself as a key risk. Corail  58:58  Yeah, that's crazy. It's kind of a live case study. For your (inaudible). The images you put in your executive summary of this electric planes flying were incredible. I have to admit, I didn't even know that it was already existing. and they were already flying planes, electric flying planes. So that was great. And I will be in Paris this summer, and I crossed all my fingers, that social acceptance is not blocking this line from playing because I want to be there and look at them.   Brandon de León  59:34  Same here.   Corail  59:35  Well, thank you so much, Brandon. I think I don't know Riccardo, if you have a closing question, or, but I think... Riccardo Cosentino  59:42  No, that's no, I think no, I'll leave it with you. Close.   Corail  59:46  Yeah. I think Brandon, that was fantastic. We learned so much. Although I read your entire dissertation. It was super interesting and fascinating. And I feel that you gave us even more explanations and stories in thepodcast. So thank you so much for being generous with all your knowledge. And yeah, I wish you the best in your career, really. Brandon de León  1:00:07  Thank you guys. Thanks for having me. Riccardo Cosentino  1:00:08  Thank you, Brandon. And thank you, Corail, for co-hosting the episode today. It's always an honor having you as my co-host, and there'll be hopefully more opportunities. And Brandon it's always a pleasure chatting with you. Brandon de León  1:00:21  Likewise. Take care, guys. Riccardo Co

As a member of the C-Suite, you may readily support Big Hairy Audacious Goals (BHAGs)—those ambitious, industry-shaping aspirations that separate leading companies from the rest. These high-stakes goals have the power to disrupt entire industries, often turning bold vision into remarkable results. Yet, you've likely also encountered the sobering insights from *How Big Things Get Done* by Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardner. Their research highlights a harsh reality: major projects across the globe frequently fall short.

*Husk at tilmelde dig podcastens nyhedsbrev. Det gør du her: https://bit.ly/3UF8dKB**Se hele det interviewet på YouTube lige her: https://youtu.be/FjGjQZ5vaJI*Den verdensberømte projektledelsesforsker Bent Flyvbjerg er tilbage i Adfærd. I dagens episode deler han sin formel for at eksekvere store projekter med succes.  Samtalen tager udgangspunkt i Bent Flyvbjergs globale bestseller-bog: How big things get done.  Vi taler blandt om:  Hvilket spørgsmål alle dygtige projekt-ejere skal stilleHvordan man styrer sin risiko bedreHvad der kendetegner succesfulde projektledereHvad den mest risikable projekttype erHvorfor håndværkere hopper og slikker på ting …:-)Men det meste af samtalen handler faktisk om, hvordan I undgår at blive en del af den kedelige statistik, der siger, at 99,5 procent af alle projekter fejler på enten budget, tidsplan eller lovede gevinster.

GE Vernova Canada President and President of Global Growth Markets at GE Vernova Heather Chalmers is in conversation with host Francis Bradley about this new company, her role in Canada and in global growth markets, technology ambition, the need for governments and stakeholders to align in order to meet sustainability goals, and her take on the Government of Canada's draft Clean Electricity Regulations. Heather also talks about the criticality of Indigenous reconciliation, the challenges of supply chains and ensuring we have the people to build our energy future. They close the conversation with two timely recommendations for additions to the Flux Capacitor Book Club.Links:GE Vernova: https://www.gevernova.com/Heather Chalmers on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/heather-chalmers/?originalSubdomain=caBook recommendations:How Big Things Get Done: The Surprising Factors That Determine the Fate of Every Project, from Home Renovations to Space Exploration and Everything In Between, by Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardner: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/61327449-how-big-things-get-done21 Things You May Not Know About the Indian Act, by Bob Joseph: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/38620150-21-things-you-may-not-know-about-the-indian-act

In today's podcast we will delve into the knotty and, it seems, unending challenge of controlling and reducing the cost and the time spent delivering our major infrastructure projects. As we a constantly reminded by politicians, the public and our colleagues, the track record of global major project delivery is not good. I have referenced the findings of Oxford University professor Bent Flyvbjerg's book How Big Things Get Done many times on this podcast before – specifically his findings that globally over the last 30 years, just 8.5% of projects met cost and schedule targets while just 0.5% satisfied all benefit goals.It's a pretty shocking set of findings. And we don't have to look far in the UK to see evidence – I give you HS2, Hinkley Point C, Crossrail, etc etc. But given that the UK government just published its £800bn pipeline of infrastructure aspiration in the face of an increasing public finance black hole, the pressure is growing to turn this around.So what is going wrong? Well my guest today is Ali Mafi, an engineer who has spent a career, largely in the shadows, trying to drive change across the sector. In fact he is currently collaborating with Bent Flyvbjerg and Alex Budzier of the Oxford Saïd Business school under their Oxford Global Projects consultancy to try to bring some new thinking to the sector.And the focus for this work, is the Timist programme, which he founded last year and, as he will explain now I hope, he defines as a next generation project delivery system – a new approach major projects that he reckons could see teams deliver better outcomes in a shorter time and at lower cost than any other systems available. He believes – as the name of his approach suggests – that most problems really stem from our inability to focus on time. As a result projects lose on average 2.5 days per week which means that the output and productivity is half of what it should be. That's the diagnosis – so what's the cure?ResourcesTimist websiteThe Latham Review - Constructing the TeamThe Egan Review - Rethinking Construction Association for Project Management article on ward rounds

What links the iconic Sydney Opera House, Monsters Inc and the mess that is HS2? Well, they involve all giant projects and most conform to the "iron law" that schemes costing $1bn or more always end up over time and budget. According to the data, a piddling 0.5% get delivered on time, for the right price, and produce the forecast benefits. So with the world facing a mountain of infrastructure projects to deal with everything from the climate crisis to clapped out transport systems, we talk to infrastructure expert Bent Flyvbjerg of Oxford University about some of the disasters and also the rare successes such as the Guggenheim in Bilbao to find out what separates the winners from the duds. Presented by Jonathan Ford and Neil CollinsWith Bent Flyvbjerg.Produced and edited by Nick Hilton for Podot.In association with Briefcase.News Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As you make big plans for 2024, here's one of our most popular episodes from the past year featuring author and professor Bent Flyvbjerg talking about how he and his team studied more than 16,000 projects—from skyscrapers to Oscar-winning films—to learn the secrets of their success, and the common thread in their failures.THIS EPISODE'S GUEST:Bent FlyvbjergProfessor, Oxford University and IT University of CopenhagenBent Flyvbjerg is the first BT Professor at Oxford University and the VKR Professor at the IT University of Copenhagen, an economic geographer, and “the world's leading megaproject expert,” according to global accounting network KPMG. He has consulted on over one hundred projects costing $1 billion or more and has been knighted by the Queen of Denmark.

Final Episode of 2023 (and last one for the MINUTES on their own channel). All episodes will be on this channel going forward.Here are the Redefining Energy Awards for 2023:Company of the Year - BYDStart Up of the Year - PV CaseDeal of the Year – Tesla and NACSTrade of the Year – Short Gas TTFScandal of the Year – Venture Global and the 200 LNG cargoes heistPerson of the Year – Jigar ShahStupidest Quote of the Year - Kim KardashianLINK TO THAT COMMERCIAL https://youtu.be/9EASYmElZuU?si=ygpWeT5FeUsQ0e26Book of the Year: How Big things get done – Bent Flyvbjerg & Dan GardnerHappy New Year to all our Listeners.Thank you for your unwavering confidence!And we will see you again on the 2nd of January 2024 for our famous Predictions 2024!

Final Episode on the Redefining Energy MINUTES channel.We are moving to the main channel in 2024 (That's why we also publish this Episode on the main channel.)Here are the Redefining Energy Awards for 2023:Company of the Year - BYDStart Up of the Year - PV CaseDeal of the Year – Tesla and NACSTrade of the Year – Short Gas TTF Scandal of the Year – Venture Global and the 200 LNG cargoes heistPerson of the Year – Jigar Shah Stupidest Quote of the Year - Kim KardashianLINK TO THAT COMMERCIAL https://youtu.be/9EASYmElZuU?si=ygpWeT5FeUsQ0e26Book of the Year: How Big things get done – Bent Flyvbjerg & Dan Gardner Happy New Year to all our Listeners.Thank you for your unwavering confidence! And we will see you again on the 2nd of January 2024 for our famous Predictions 2024!

Bent Flyvbjerg shares his insights on the key principles that distinguish successful big projects from the failed ones. Through his research and experience, he identifies important factors such as understanding the odds, planning slow and acting fast, and starting with the end goal in mind. Join us as we explore how to master the unknowns and achieve wild ambitions with Flyvbjerg's guidance. Subscribe for ad-free interviews and bonus episodes https://plus.acast.com/s/the-unmistakable-creative-podcast. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Why are only 8.5% of large projects completed on time and within budget? No matter what type of project you're involved in, whether it's home renovations or space exploration, this conversation promises a wealth of knowledge and insights.Bent Flyvbjerg is a professor at both Oxford University and the IT University of Copenhagen. He is also the author of several works, and his latest book is How Big Things Get Done: The Surprising Factors That Determine the Fate of Every Project, from Home Renovations to Space Exploration and Everything In Between.Bent and Greg delve into the influence of strategic misrepresentation on project outcomes and the often-overlooked power dynamics within organizations that wield considerable influence over a project's fate. They discuss fascinating case studies from the Sydney Opera House, Pixar's blockbusters, and Amazon's product development approach.*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*Episode Quotes:The more you allow your brain to work, the more biases you're going to have10:49: The more you allow your brain to work, the more biases you're going to have. If you're allowing your brain to work in this manner where it's trying to figure out things for this specific project, if you allow your brain to work in collecting data on similar projects, where it's an empirical fact that these data had the performance that they did and now you use this empirical fact as your base rates for what you're doing, then you're doing the right thing. Then you're thinking the right way. But if you're thinking the conventional way, where you're trying to understand things inside out, you understand your product from the inside without taking other projects into account that's when you open the doors for all these cognitive biases that we have—because you have to make everything up.11:31: The mind is very good at making things up, and that's what you have to be careful about when you are working on big investment decisions.The need for courses in power and politics 56:59: If you're working on anything big, you are going to be in an organization, even a small organization. There's power. Wherever people are gathering, there will be power issues. And if you haven't been trained in how to deal with them, I don't know how you can be effective in a power environment.Why is uniqueness bias dangerous? 09:40: Uniqueness bias is a pretty mean bias in the sense that it makes us ignore reality. If you think my project is unique, you have no reason to look at other projects and go out and search for knowledge about what happened in other projects because it's irrelevant per definition, as you think your project is unique, right? And that's really dangerous.On rationality and power54:25: I think that it's less legitimate to talk about power than it is to talk about rationality. So it's much easier. And, by the way, on a lot of the project types that we are talking about, including IT projects, there's a large dose of engineers, and of course, engineers are trained in rationality, talking about rationality, and making their projects rational. But on the big projects, engineers are actually working in political organizations. And again, whether they are private businesses or public government, there's politics in both kinds of organizations. And that means that there's pressure to do things in certain ways.Show Links:Recommended Resources:Cass SunsteinPlanning fallacyOptimism biasFalse-uniqueness effectFat-tailed distributionSkewnessKurtosisNassim Nicholas TalebDaniel KahnemanMandelbrot setSydney Opera HouseGuggenheim Museum BilbaoFrank GehryPixarSarbanes–Oxley ActAlbert O. HirschmanJørn UtzonAndrew WolstenholmeGuest Profile:Faculty Profile at OxfordBent Flyvbjerg on XBent Flyvbjerg on LinkedInHis Work:How Big Things Get DoneRationality and PowerThe Oxford Handbook of Megaproject ManagementMegaproject Planning and ManagementReal Social Science: Applied PhronesisPublic Sociology: Proceedings of the Anniversary ConferenceDecision-Making On Mega-Projects: Cost-Benefit Analysis, Planning and InnovationMegaprojects and Risk: An Anatomy of AmbitionMaking Social Science MatterGoogle Scholar PageMedium Articles

“Projects get delivered by people and how we do things in our day to day life and how we make big decisions around our day to day life, whether it's small or big, are actually very relatable on how we make decisions in the business world when funding, approving and delivering projects.”– Dr. Diana Nada Dr. Diana brings over 20 years of experience advising public and private sector clients on strategies and toolkits for best practices in improved capital project delivery and informed decision making. She is a regular industry contributor, a published scholar educator with over 25 speaking engagements. She is the current AAC Canada Region One director, and is a member of the ULI Public Development and Infrastructure Council and the UK APM Project Assurance SIG. Diana is one of the contributing authors to the 2023 first edition for A Guide to Auditing Programmes and Projects, published by APM. She was shortlisted as one of the 2020 A Woman Infrastructure Network, emerging leaders in Canada. Key Takeaways: The importance of qualitative research in major projects, where social sciences intersect with major programmesBasing major project success on a rocky foundation, the deflation of estimates and unrealistic expectationsHow PMBOK (Project Management Body of Knowledge) and PMP (Project Management Professional) certification can evolve to encompass broader strategic considerations and better prepare major programme implementersCollaborative contracting and identifying collaboration (regardless of delivery method) as a key component for success in major programmesPerformance measurement and how not aligning incentives can influences decision-making and team relationships Links Mentioned: Dr. Diane Nada's Project Approval Decisions: Exploring Success FactorsCurbing Optimism Bias and Strategic Misrepresentation in Planning: Reference Class Forecasting in Practice by Bent FlyvbjergThinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman  If you enjoyed this episode, make sure and give us a five star rating and leave us a review on iTunes, Podcast Addict, Podchaser or Castbox. The conversation doesn't stop here—connect and converse with our community via LinkedIn: Navigating Major Programmes on LinkedInFollow Riccardo Cosentino on LinkedInFollow Dr. Diana Nada, PhD on LinkedIn Transcript:Riccardo Cosentino  00:05You're listening to navigate major problems, the podcast that aims to elevate the conversations happening in the infrastructure industry and inspire you to have a more efficient approach within it. I'm your host, Riccardo Cosentino brings over 20 years of major product management experience. Most recently, I graduated from Oxford University's day business school, which shook my belief when it comes to navigating major problems. Now it's time to shake yours. Join me in each episode, as I pressed the industry experts about the complexity of major program management, emerging digital trends and the critical leadership required to approach these multibillion dollar projects. Let's see where the conversation takes us. Dr. Diana nada is a project management expert and advisory mega capital projects, a civil engineer by background with a PhD in project management from the University of Calgary. She brings over 20 years of experience advising public and private sector clients on strategies and toolkits for best practices in improved capital project delivery and informed decision making. She is a regular industry contributor, a published scholar educator with over 25 speaking engagement. She is the current AAC Canada region one director, and is a member of the ULI public development and infrastructure Council and the UK APM project assurance SIG. Diana is one of the contributing over to the 2023 first edition for a guide to auditing problems and project published by APM. She will show listed as one of the 2020 A woman infrastructure network, emerging leaders in Canada. Hello, everyone. Welcome to our new episode on navigating major programs. today. I'm here with Diana nada PhD. Diana did a dissertation a few years ago. And I was very intrigued by her dissertation. And so I asked her to join us today in the on the podcast. How are you doing, Diana? Great. All right.Diana Nada  02:15Thank you, Riccardo for having me.Riccardo Cosentino  02:17Nice to have you. Yeah, I took a lot of joy in reading your dissertation. And it's was quite interesting for me because it was written a few years ago. And some of the topic is still extremely relevant. But you know, maybe you can tell us a little bit more about your dissertation, why you picked it, and what do you learn from it?Diana Nada  02:37Okay, so it's very interesting that we're having this conversation right now. Actually, I did defend the PhD, exactly 10 years ago, around October 1. So if it's been 10 years, and every time I check it, then you've made me go and look into it again. And and remember some of the reasons why I picked this or that. So it's very interesting to reflect after all of those years, maybe a bit about myself. I'm a civil engineer by background, but got very intrigued by project management early on, in my degree. Coming in, as a third culture kid with parents who are engineers, I decided to go into engineering, just probably not by choice, but expectation. My career has been very interesting that I grew up in Dubai. And by the time I graduated and finished my masters, it was very booming in Dubai early 2000s. And I ended up working in a lot of mega projects, a lot of big projects in with a lot of multinationals. In you see how projects get executed get funded. And for me, it was more of I've seen it from the side of delivery and working with a project management consultant. But then I worked also as a developer, and this gave me a bit of like, okay, I've worked on the same project on both sides of the table. And I could see things differently. So I wanted to step back and know more why, why projects go over budget, why there are scheduled delays. And I wanted to explore that and know more about it because project management is a very applied field. I felt that there is a lot in literature and research that actually doesn't get translated into the industry. And that's when I decided to move to Canada and did my PhD at the University of Calgary. Big thanks to my late supervisor, Professor Francis Hartman. I have to say when I started my degree, I presented a specific research interest And then the first day I met him, I said, I don't want to do that. And he was a great mentor. And I don't think I did my research, the outcome of it. And where I was few years later was what I anticipated. It was more of a journey, and a learning experience and a reflection of what I saw in Dubai, what I was seeing in Canada, it was the recession, the financial crisis has just started. By the time I graduated, there was the oil crisis in Calgary. So it's always an opportunity to just reflect on how things around you impact our projects get delivered. So what was your dissertation about? As a research topic, it was called Project Approval decisions exploring success factors, when I mentioned it, the first thing that most people think of is okay, this is about is this is very quantitative, it's about economic analysis, or value for money, etc. But I took a very different perspective, I took it from a qualitative aspect. It's a it's a qualitative research. At that point in time, I didn't know what is qualitative research. As an engineer, you're like thinking about numbers. So it was very intriguing, and I didn't think it applies. So what, as time went by, I learned that qualitative research is very interested in the project management field just because it's an interpretation of why we do specific things, how we solve complex problems. And and I think, in that sense of mega projects, or capital projects, you're dealing with a number of stakeholders, you're dealing with complexity, you're dealing with a timeframe that could be decades. Qualitative research gives you an opportunity to study this from a research base that is based on how people think I had to read a lot of psychology. I've learned a lot of terms like neuro economics, biases. And I remember when I was reading all of this, besides the academic research, part of like, what is qualitative research, I was very intrigued with the psychology and how our brain works. And I remember having conversations that I think it's very applicable to my day to day life, rather than to project management. And this was, for me a very eye opener, because projects get delivered by people, and how we do things in our day to day life and how we make big decisions around our day to day life, whether it's small or big, are actually very relatable on how we make decisions in the business world when funding approving delivering projects.Riccardo Cosentino  07:50Yeah, it's very interesting. Yeah, I, you know, I also learned, when I did my master's degree, in major program management that major programs are treated, the research in major program is treated as a social science. It's very, very interesting, as well as yourself. I'm a civil engineer. And to me, mega projects were always concrete and rebar and, you know, ashphalt and numbers and, and then, you know, when you actually look at the research, you learned that no, it's more about the people. It's more about the biases. I think your your I can't believe how still relevant to your researches in today's world. You know, optimism bias, strategic misrepresentation is still a very relevant topic when it comes to understanding why major programs get delayed and over budget. And it doesn't seem but however, even though that's a well established cause nowadays, it doesn't seem to be a way, especially in the public sector to tackle that issue. You know, I think you mentioned in your research, Bent Flyvbjerg, and you know, is, you know, he's done the most work in translating the Daniel Kahneman research Prospect Theory from the field, the Kahneman and Treviski did into major programs. So they're in you  talk about that. And, you know, I'm new to this academic field. And it's interesting to see that, even after 10 years is still relevant and still not being fully addressed.Diana Nada  09:30Yes, I totally agree with you, even when I was doing it, and I was you read stuff that are 20 years ago, and you're like, oh, this didn't move. We didn't move the needle much in 20 years. And after I was done my PhD and actually before it, I went to the AAC conference and presented it as a pilot to just see how people are gonna react and then presented it few times after that point. When you talk about social sciences, soft skills, trust biases, It was a very different conversation. And people were very skeptical on what that means to project management, to design to construction. And now 10 years later, I think the conversation has shifted, there's more talk about what you've mentioned, like optimism, bias, strategic misrepresentation, the research by Professor Bent. And I remember reading, Thinking Fast and Slow, and was like, wow, really, this is applicable in how amazing or how much we actually need to do this things differently. Because the success rates of projects is really bad. And we all talk about how we should deliver differently and how we should do things in a different way. And only maybe the last few years. I can say maybe for the first time, there is an acceptance of maybe doing but it's it, we're going to see how this movement or how that shift in mindset will will, will take place.Riccardo Cosentino  11:06Yeah, that that's, that's a very, very interesting point, and how, you know, the social science is actually at the core at the core of the success of major projects. And as an engineer, I always wondered, you know, because I know how projects are estimated, and I could not quite rationalize, if you're estimating a project, we're all very smart human beings, we can all determine we have all the statistical tools, we have all the past data, we have all the information, how can you how can we get this so wrong? How can we get the budget so wrong? I mean, we're smarter than that. And so it was refreshing when I learned, you know, the Bent theory about prospect theory about applying to mega project. And that to me was that, to me was the answer. It is like, okay, it's not about not being able to adapt the number to the right budget is just all these biases in these alternative ulterior motive, like strategic misrepresentation in the public sector. In order for in order for project to move forwards politician cannot afford to have the real budget, share publicly, because the sticker shock will stop the project for going forward. So there's always going to be a deflation of the project estimate, even at decision or the point of decision making, or the point of approval, because politicians and the public is not really prepared to accept the true cost of the project. And but then, then you end up in situation where there's there's a big confusion is five years, 10 years after the project was approved? Why is the budget not enough and you know, and then nobody looks backwards to why it was, you know, what happened at the decision making point, they all looked at? Oh, well, you know, the project was mismanaged. And sometimes that's the case in my experience, but it's not always the case. Sometimes you never had a chance to begin with, because if you're not given the proper resources to begin with, you're never going to be on time and on budget.Diana Nada  13:32Yeah, yeah. And I had the same, I'd say a epiphany I was looking as like, yes, we are. How do we get the budget that wrong? And how do we get the schedule as well, because we are building something like we're putting a schedule, that's unrealistic, and a budget, that's not going to be met. A and that was the point in time when I was very curious, is this the environment I am working in? Is this the industry like construction? Is this different teams? And the research was mostly around, okay. It's not related to the industry, the most of the industries that are plagued with the same issues, whether you're looking at infrastructure, healthcare, it oil and gas, any any you name it, and it's not by the location across the world. And that's why the interesting part you mentioned is this critical point and when you make the decision to invest or want or approve the project, and that's what and that was a point when I wasn't very appreciative. Our what could go wrong at this point. And the fact that we actually start on the wrong footing, like right from that point, you approve a budget and a schedule that no one believes If you ask anyone they would know that this number is I would, in an extreme sense, a, an educated guess, the schedule. And later on you are evaluating the success of this project, like you said, by the people by the management of the people, the teams. Other factors, what you're actually not looking back to see, did we approve, did we do this right? Was this business case, fully representative of of all factors that we need, but then later on, I appreciated that you actually cannot predict the future at that point in time. And I think embracing this risk and change is important. Because no matter how much you learn at that point in time, you are trying your best. And it's based on limited or less information that you will know as you actually design and have a project because there is no project at that point in time. It's all numbers. And and I think that's why the qualitative part is important. Because the quantitative part takes the attention as a doc as a business case, and everything. But that qualitative and how we actually go about that decision and deliver on font is what, what actually we need to pay more attention to. And I think even right now, this aspect of the how we approved the project in to get the funding and to get it approved. And to get that signature and to get it sanctioned. I think this is where we will struggle for a bit. Because even though I'm going to speak about the environment in Canada, we are now in a phase where we are considering other models, this number still, we have not went back to see this this number, the right number we start from or not the right schedule or not. And that's even without considering that you're making this approval or this schedule 20 years, and then by the time you're actually on the ground, it's 20 years later, by the time this number is approved by a specific politician. This number probably stays the same for 10 years without inflation and escalation. And then you don't visit it, because you can't at that point in time, and you just keep going. Yeah,Riccardo Cosentino  17:33I mean, they are according to Bent Flydjerg. I mean, part of the problem is, is that yes, I mean, it's correct that these numbers, once he's approved, it doesn't get changed. But I think the reality that the main, the main problem is that sometimes the number is is strategically deflated. Because if you actually calculate the right number and present the right number are gonna get is not going to get approved. And because in you know, there is, you know, there are, you know, Kahneman talks about it and Ben Flybjerg talks about it, you know, you can you can have an outside view. So you can you can do a benchmarking, you know, usually you can do bottom and bottom up estimate, which is not going to be perfect, because you don't know, as you said, you cannot. But, you know, by by also having a bottom up estimate a benchmarking estimate using an outside view, you could triangulate a better number. But so I don't think that predicting the future is the main issue, I think, is that the true cost of a project and the decision making, or the point that the shoe making point is just never something that politician can stomach. So there's always going to be a tendency to deflate it in order to get through.Diana Nada  18:55Yep. Yeah. And, and even the sense of like, you cannot predict the future, but you can get better at it. Yes. And that's why Professor Bent talks about reference class casting and how you can actually look at how you have been delivering projects and making it and, and working out backwards and see how you can make that estimate better. But we're not doing that. We can get better, but we're not thereRiccardo Cosentino  19:20Let me let me take you to another part of your dissertation that I found quite interesting. And hopefully, hopefully you still remember it. But you know, I think is in the original introduction in the literature review, you actually do a critical assessment of the PMBOK Yeah. And and the and the you know, the the PMP and I found a found that is quite interesting. I think I think your your findings were probably the PMBOK is not is not a deep enough tool to help keep project on time and on budget. Can you. Do you remember Can you elaborate?Diana Nada  19:55Yeah, I do. I do. Remember that. I tackle it all the time. So I first learned about the PMBOK. Actually, during my undergrad, there was a course that was on the PMBOK. For me, at that point, it was like, wow, there is a project management, body of knowledge out there. And I think it was maybe second, third addition. And then at that point in time, you're like, you have to get the PMP, you have to get the PMP. This is important. And the PMP, I think, is important because it gives you the basics, the jargon, and I'm talking, I'm now moving into a term that a lot of people would not appreciate. But I don't think so I finished my degree. When I when I, when I finished my literature review, it was 2012 2013. So at that point in time, the PMBOK did not yet touch the PMI, triangle strategy business, it was still very focused on project management. From a technical perspective, the edition in 2013, or 14 has, like, if you look at it 10 years later, there has been a big shift, the PMBOK has changed quite a bit. So my analysis at that point in time was very much based on this is not enough, you're only talking about 10 bodies of knowledge. You're not talking about external factors, you're not talking about the style, which socio political economic factors. You're not talking about the business case and the strategy. And you're also not talking about, you're talking about human resources, even from very, like HR, but not you're talking about that you can't find resources or supplies or challenges around that. So I found that very limiting at that point, and that's why I have that, that view, and I would go even an extra step and say that the PMP on its own, it's like talking about education versus experience versus studying for an exam, it's a mix of things, you can't say that just because someone has this experience, or this degree or this certificate that they know it all, it's a bunch of things. So that's why I addressed it from from this point. But I also then learn that that journey about the APM, the Association of project management in the UK, and and I found that the that there are aspects there and research based aspects that I think is worth. US including in North America, mind you, the jordanelle, the Project Management Journal of the PMI is, is huge. It most of the research is out of the PMI, I think is just how we can embrace some of this research in that the PMI hosts to into the PMBOK And in I think that's that's where the the issue is. Yeah, I have a similar, I have a similar so I used to have a PMP designation, I kinda lead a lapsed, and a you remember? So this was probably around even before 2013 Yeah, and I found it was very, very rigid, very rigid structure. And I agree with you now that I've been exposed to novel theories, like major programs that cause complex adaptive systems, right. And you know, treating major programs or temporary organization and designing designing major programs as organization. So applying, you know, the, what we typically apply to businesses to project a major project. I mean, we talk about major projects, because those are more complex. And so, you know, the same way you apply a porter five forces to, to a corporation, you should be able to also apply, you know, maybe not Porter, but a different framework that, you know, we apply to Galbraith star to a major program, and adopting the PMBOK goes into that level of organization design, and, you know, and as managing external stakeholders, and, you know, applying system thinking to major programs. So, yeah, I don't know if now PMBOK got there. But yeah, at the time, it wasn't there. And it probably is not there today, either. Yeah, there has been a shift and change in the last seven years. There are some aspects I still go and like I'm curious to see how much it has changed. But I don't think it has changed yet. But but the most important thing is that for me that when I did it, it was very, compared to maybe it Two years later, after I defended, there was a change in the PMBOK. But I don't I think there it is critical that the pm Bock embraces some of those factors given that it is the basis of, of how, like, it's basically okay. Do you know project management? Do you have a PMP? which is… I put the question mark.Riccardo Cosentino  25:29is more complex than that? Yeah, yeah. Okay. So, you know, I know, we talked about your, your dissertation and how you defend it, you know, in a few words, how would you how would you characterize the findings of your research?Diana Nada  25:46So I think the biggest finding that I kind of put out there is that the documentation or the approval for funding or the sanctioning that critical point is not documented well? And is is that that what we talked about at the beginning that we start on the wrong fitting, that I think wasn't what a major or a big finding out of it, there were the other ones where I studied how executives make decision making making and how project I called them project implementers, not project managers, basically, the delivery team. And even you can think of it of a context of an organization where there's executive slash staff. So there is the difference in how teams make decisions. And this difference is mostly around, their priorities are different. When you're making a decision, as an executive, you are thinking about specific priorities, and you're thinking about the company interests, you're thinking about profit, you're thinking about shareholder value, you're thinking about different aspects. And then when you're making a decision as a delivery team, you're actually thinking about cost, schedule, budget scope. And these are two different worlds, or two different realities. In a lot of my data collection was around making sense of how those two teams interact, and what are their priorities, and how they share information, or not share information, transparency, trust, communication, and all of these factors that come into play, once you actually start delivering the project. So the findings were around that how we make decisions as teams is very different. There are different priorities and acknowledging that this is a big factor that will continue. But I think, to bridge this gap, is to actually share why we're doing this project. Because we're, why we're doing the project from each team's perspective is very different. And the way I've termed it is like a project intent. Getting alignment on this, from the different stakeholders that are involved is key, so that we're working towards the same success. Outcomes are the same, the definitions of how we want to proceed. And then I take examples of how teams change make a decision around the change in scope, around priorities, etc. Part of this big research was also a big picture of at that point in time, collaborative contracting at that point in time, and that was the big research group. So each one of us had had a specific aspect, in like my contribution at that point in time was around those the teams are different. And how we can make sure that the teams work together from a success outcome, and other team members were taking it from procurement from risk, etc. So that was kind of how sharing information trust communication, and biases impacts how actually projects get delivered. And how do they actually make or break a project and cause delays or overruns.Riccardo Cosentino  29:14Very interesting. So this was 10 years ago. Yeah, already looking at collaborative contracting. We now talking about collaborative contracting in Canada. Yeah. On the largest scale, and we have authority started to exploring I don't want to say embrace because nobody's embrace collaborative contract. That definitely exploring but yeah, it's been it's been out there for a while. And yeah, I've I've had, you know, my dissertation was about that as well. Obviously, not a PhD dissertation, but, and I've had other colleagues coming on the podcast to talk about IPD alliances in different sectors. Yeah, it's, yeah, I mean, I'm I anecdotally I I believe collaboration is a significant player is a key component of success in delivering major programs. I always said that, you know, I think it was my anecdote that lawyers, you know, money that you spend on legal fees don't get to pour concrete faster. So if you are able to remove the litigation from the day to day running of the project, and you focus that those resources on actually moving the project forward, you have a better chance of achieving success and completion on time and on budget.Diana Nada  30:32Yes, yeah. And at the end of the day, a contract, whether it's an IPD, or an alliance, or a P3 or a design build is a contract, you will find issues with the contract. It is how you interpret the contract and how you work together, and collaborate. So even if you change the type of contract, and you're not doing all those things that you need to do from a success, like collaboration and how you share information, you're still gonna might get the same result.Riccardo Cosentino  31:06The contract is I defined a contract myself has, you know, that's, that's, that's the ultimate back stopper, right? Yeah. So ultimately, when when relation breakdown and or the working level contract, you go and look at a contract, right. And so I believe that you can have collaboration within even like, contract with, with litigation built into it. However, you have less room for maneuvering, right. So if you have not enough budget, because you never would never price the correctly or you never had to write rewrite budget at the decision making point. And then you have another adversarial contract, eventually, with all the best will in the world, is going to come to a clash at the working level, and you're going to go back to the contract, and then it is going to become litigious. So I think you can have collaboration, but without without a collaborative contract. But then you need to have the right resources available. Because if when there's scarcity of resources, you go back to the contract, and then you find a way of getting the money that you loosing.Diana Nada  32:25court. Correct? Correct. And that's probably why my my research was very, was not tied to a specific contract as well, because I believe that that collaboration is key, regardless of how you're delivering the project. Some of my recommendations were around, okay. How do you enhance this collaboration regardless of of the contract in, in any project in in, and I think this is applicable, like some of the stuff that I talk about is our rules of engagement, how you would do partnering meetings, that you're not talking about the project that design the cost and schedule, but you're talking about all of us as a team, how we're working together, what behaviors we need to change, what what decisions we need to make, because a lot of the time that you go into litigation or you go to that stage, when actually you have failed in, in having a proper communication or a decision or resolution of a of an issue. So how will you share that bad news and make a decision, because that a lot of the times, even not making a decision is a decision. So how you would have that environment where we are working in a in a in a transparent, relatively transparent environment where you could say this went wrong. Or you could share and, and most of the time, I remember that the best projects that we all remember are the teams and people we worked with. Not that the schedule was over budget, or the schedule was was delayed, or it was an overrun, but you remember your relationships that you've built in that project. And that's why building this relationship, and even how you form a team, you're not gonna start a team and trust each other from day one. If we take like marriage, you're not like or if you meet someone, this this is something you're investing in, and it's the same as a project. So so how you build that, so that you are all working towards the same success outcomes. I also talk about how you can bridge this gap between how teams, executives or project managers think Think or prioritize differently. And I say, well, we need to be in each other's shoes. So I call it correct courier swaps. Give the opportunity for project team members to understand why you are making decisions from a business perspective this way, share with them more information. And vice versa. The project team is not sharing the right budget, or the schedule with your design consultant, or the contractor. So, so try to find opportunities where you would actually learn from each other because your realities are different. And you're also governed like, performance measurement for each one is different. So you're actually going to make decisions differently. So if you are, if your performance is going to be measured by profit, that's different if your performance is going to be measured by meeting a project deadline, and I've seen it firsthand when, when I work then and I usually give this example. I worked on one project where I was part of the project management team. And there was sales there was strategy team. And this sales and marketing team were able to sell the apartments or the or, or the basically go on sale like and meet their priorities in terms of, okay, we sold X number of apartments, and they got their bonus. But the project team was putting a budget and schedule that was not favorable. So they didn't get a bonus. But we're all working on the same project. But we're measured differently. That was for me, an aha moment that if we are measured differently, then there are our outcomes will be different. And that's not even talking about job security, by individual biases, and all of that. So and that's why I talk about company interest, Project interest and individual interest and they are different.Riccardo Cosentino  37:13Yeah, I mean, that's why I mean, I mentioned earlier, the Gerber f star right, aligning processes, people remuneration, strategy, culture, like that's what you do in any organization. However, we don't seem to do it when it comes to project. And this is the perfect example. You know, you've got a sales team, who's focuses on selling the project management team is supposed to construct and build and it's one team, right. And then so you've now by not aligning the the incentives and aligning the compensation, you now created. Diverging interest. Yeah, it'sDiana Nada  37:51point two fingers.Riccardo Cosentino  37:53But it's interesting how there is so common knowledge and common practice in business, right, I've done an MBA. So I mean, that's, you know, you go to MBA, and you study all of this. And in yet, when it comes to project management or major program management, there's not the same level of understanding, but it's it's it's, it's there it's hobbyists, major projects is an organization.Diana Nada  38:18Yeah, I still find it very fascinating. It is, when I see projects, and how team members interact, and how a project or when looking at documents and all of that, it is a very fascinating field.Riccardo Cosentino  38:36So the No, this was a really, really interesting conversation, I think, I think we're coming to an end of the podcast. You know, I think you've, you've now defended your dissertation. 10 years ago, you seen some changes? I just, I've asked this question in the past to our guests, and I'm going to ask you as well was, Do you have any hope for the industry? Do you have any hope for the field of project management?Diana Nada  39:03I do. I do. And then in it's interesting, you asked the question. And I myself went through a learning curve. So the when I got asked, I actually got I got asked that question differently. It 10 years ago when I was like, oh, Diana, then you're saying there is no hope. And at that point in time, you're still fresh from your PhD, you don't you have not tested it again, like you did. You you worked. You did the research, and you want to go back to industry and actually test okay, because the research was mostly testing what you've seen. That's how I saw it. And I think there is there is hope. I think the conversations that we are all having in the interest in the sharing of knowledge across the different borders. Is there as simple as The research by an in, in us having that conversation when we first met about Professor bent and all of all of that, I think there, there's more talk about it. So I think there is hope. And I think there's some how, and appreciation that okay, we need to stand back and see what we're doing wrong. Because we're getting the same results. It's basically I was Einstein scoring six, yeah, Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. And we've been doing things over and over again, expecting different results. So I think there is an appreciation that we need to do some something about it. We are trying to do things differently. And I think this is good in that sense. And I think for me, it's more of an appreciation that actually projects are not unique. You can learn from past projects, and you can come up with better schedules and better budgets, you can make decisions at the right time, you should also acknowledge that there will be changes on the project. We had the pandemic, no one expected it. It's a black swan event, things could go sideways. And I think the governance in how the teams work together is what's the hope that we could actually do projects differently and better. And if we study the projects that were successful, they did something that we should learn about.Riccardo Cosentino  41:34No, I could No, I could not agree more. I think you touching upon or very, very relevant topic. You mentioned uniqueness bias. I mean, bent, always says that your project is not unique. So uniqueness bias is a problem. A lesson learned from successful projects. I posted an article a few weeks ago about OPG here in Ontario, learning from from what went wrong in nuclear and changing for the refurbishment of Darlington and now their project is going very well. So yeah, I mean, there is hope. There is hope. It's not all doom and gloom, but I think yeah,Diana Nada  42:12and don't rush into execution. Yes.Riccardo Cosentino  42:15What does Ben say? Glance thing lands? Execute fast.Diana Nada  42:20Yeah, yeah. So plan, you have to plan. And then you have to execute, but don't rush into execution and break ground.Riccardo Cosentino  42:31Well, and on that note, thank you very much they and it was it was a pleasure to have you on the podcast. And I look forward to to meet you again. Some somewhere in Toronto. And maybe we'll have you back for season two to explore other topics.Diana Nada  42:47Thank you, thank you Riccardo for this opportunity and actually giving me the opportunity to reflect on on this in a way that I have not had the chance to actually go back and revisit and read. So thank you for for that and pleasure beings.Riccardo Cosentino  43:04Thank you. Bye now. That's it for this episode on navigating major problems. I hope you found today's conversation as informative and thought provoking as I did. If you enjoyed this conversation, please consider subscribing and leaving a review. I would also like to personally invite you to continue the conversation by joining me on my personal LinkedIn at Riccardo Cosentino. Listening to the next episode, where we will continue to explore the latest trends and challenges in major program management. Our next in depth conversation promises to continue to dive into topics such as leadership risk management, and the impact of emerging technology in infrastructure. It's a conversation you're not going to want to miss. Thanks for listening to navigate the major programs and I look forward to keeping the conversation going Music: "A New Tomorrow" by Chordial Music. Licensed through PremiumBeat.DISCLAIMER: The opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints expressed by the hosts and guests on this podcast do not necessarily represent or reflect the official policy, opinions, beliefs, and viewpoints of Disenyo.co LLC and its employees.

A bias for action can help you do big things and reach big goals.  In big projects, it's vital in the delivery phase, which should be fast. But it hurts the planning phase, where it's better to be slow. In episode 66 of The Incrementalist, you will learn:1) 0:00 A bias for action feels productive but can also backfire and cause big failure in big projects.2) 0:55 Every big project has 2 basic phases: Planning and Delivery. 3) 1:11 In their book, How Big Things Get Done, authors Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardner note that 99.5 percent of megaprojects go over budget, over schedule, fail to deliver promised results, or have some combination of these.4) 2:01 Failed projects use the Think Fast, Act Slow approach (rushed, superficial planning before project delivery). Successful projects apply the Think Slow, Act Fast pattern (careful, precise planning before project delivery). 5) 2:59 To do big things, apply the Think Slow, Act Fast approach with these 5 action tips:  i) 3:05 Tip #1 - Commit to not committing. ii)  6:06 Tip #2 - Think from right to left. iii) 8:33 Tip #3 - Tinker, test, and experiment. iv) 12:10 Tip #4 - Figure out what's your LEGO - your basic building block – and keep adding one block to another. v) 13:19 Tip #5 - Take the outside view, not just the inside view.5) 15:15 Why the significance of planning is often downplayed: The Principle of the Hiding Hand and the Theory of Beneficial Ignorance or Providential IgnoranceYou don't need to be deep in delivery mode to spark creative ideas. Use the think slow, act fast pattern to plan carefully, deliver effectively, and get the best results in big projects. Website: http://www.dyanwilliams.com/The Incrementalist: A Simple Productivity System to Create Big Results in Small Steps, is available on Amazon and Leanpub:https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CFHYHGFZ(Pros: lowest price for readers and readily available on Kindle)https://leanpub.com/incrementalist(Pros: price flexibility for readers and 60-day money back guarantee)

Project Management Journal® has awarded its “2023 Most Cited Paper of the Last 10 Years” award to Bent Flyvbjerg for his article, “What You Should Know About Megaprojects and Why: An Overview,” published in Project Management Journal, Vol. 45, No. 2. To learn more about the impact of this academic contribution to the profession, watch this video with Giorgio Locatelli and Bent Flyvbjerg. This is not owned, sponsored, or endorsed by the Project Management Institute or Sage. The views and opinions expressed by the video's participants are for informational purposes only.

This week, Michael's guest is Henrik Stiesdal, former CTO of Siemens Gamesa and a pioneer of wind turbine technology. Nicknamed "The Godfather of Wind", this Danish inventor is behind many of the sector's most important innovations. He is responsible for over 175 inventions and is named in over 1,000 patents. Today, he runs Stiesdal, a startup which innovates in floating offshore turbine foundations, thermal power storage and hydrogen. Links: Henrik was profiled in The New York Times in May: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/03/business/energy-environment/denmark-wind-power-stiesdal.html Henrik featured in Offshore Engineer in 2022: https://www.oedigital.com/news/497276-cto-in-focus-henrik-stiesdal-wind-power-pioneer Discover more about Henrik's company, Stiesdal: https://www.stiesdal.com/about/ Purchase The Boy Who Harnessed the Wind: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Boy-Who-Harnessed-Wind/dp/0007316194  Related Episodes: Watch Episode 130 with Paddy Padmanathan here: https://www.cleaningup.live/ep130-paddy-padmanathan-the-usain-bolt-of-solar-power/ Watch Episode 128 with Prof. Bent Flyvbjerg here: https://www.cleaningup.live/ep128-prof-bent-flyvbjerg-how-big-things-should-get-done/  Guest Bio Henrik Stiesdal is Founder, Chief Technical Officer and Board Member at Stiesdal, who are committed to developing and commercializing technologies with high impact on climate change mitigation. Henrik is a wind power pioneer: having built his first test turbine in 1976, Henrik sold the license to commercial design to Vestas in 1979, kick-starting today's wind industry. Henrik was Technical Manager of Bonus Energy from 1988, then CTO of Siemens Wind Power from 2004-2014. Henrik installed the world's first offshore wind farm in 1991, and holds more than 1000 patents.

This week we talk about Unity, Unreal, and Godot.We also discuss fee structures, user revolts, and indie game-makers.Recommended Book: How Big Things Get Done by Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan GardnerShow Notes* https://www.statista.com/outlook/dmo/digital-media/video-games/worldwide* https://www.billboard.com/pro/ifpi-global-report-2023-music-business-revenue-market-share/* https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/07/video-game-industry-not-recession-proof-sales-set-to-fall-in-2022.html* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_industry* https://www.washingtonpost.com/video-games/2022/08/22/are-video-games-recession-proof-sort-experts-say/* https://www.gamedeveloper.com/blogs/unity-s-pricing-changes-are-trying-to-solve-too-many-problems-at-once* https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/unity-apologizes-to-devs-reveals-updated-runtime-fee-policy* https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/22/23882768/unity-new-pricing-model-update* https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/15/23875396/unity-mobile-developers-ad-monetization-tos-changes* https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/12/23870547/unit-price-change-game-development* https://www.washingtonpost.com/video-games/2022/08/22/are-video-games-recession-proof-sort-experts-say/* https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/022216/how-microtransactions-are-evolving-economics-gaming.asp* https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/srhonorsprog/902/* https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/053115/how-video-game-industry-changing.asp* https://finmodelslab.com/blogs/operating-costs/video-game-company-operating-costs* https://www.makeuseof.com/ways-the-rising-costs-of-games-affect-the-industry/* https://codeswholesale.com/blog/5-ways-to-make-money-in-the-gaming-industry/* https://gamemaker.io/en/blog/cost-of-making-a-game* https://www.gamedesigning.org/learn/video-game-cost/* https://www.reuters.com/technology/video-gaming-revenue-grow-26-2023-console-sales-strength-report-2023-08-08/* https://www.statista.com/outlook/dmo/digital-media/video-games/worldwideTranscriptDepending on how inclusive you are with your measurements and the specific numbers you're tallying, the global video game market is expected to pull in somewhere between $187.7 and $334 billion in revenue in 2023.That's somewhere between 2.6% and 13.4% above 2022 numbers—and again, those figures are pretty far apart because different entities keeping tabs on this industry measure different things, some only looking at direct sales of video games and in-game items, while others look at connected sub-industries, like e-gaming events and service jobs that do customer support for game companies.Whichever end of that spectrum you look at, though, the global video game industry is a behemoth that's growing every year, and its income surpassed that of the music and film industries, combined, years ago, the global film industry expected to bring in around $92.5 billion in 2023, while the global music industry pulls a paltry $26.2 billion.The video game market is continuing to grow at a fairly stellar pace, compared to other entertainment categories, as well. And while it was shown not to be entirely recession proof, as had been claimed since the financial crisis of 2007 and 2008, when it remained one of the few industries still growing steadily, that growth balking a bit in 2022, when the industry contracted by 1.2%, it grew substantially at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, and has largely maintained that growth since, which has allowed entities operating in this space to claim more and more entertainment-related marketshare, which in turn has shifted the center of gravity in the media world toward video games and away from other leisure options, including things like travel, vacations, and other things you wouldn't typically think of as being competitors of the video game market.Since video games really took off, hitting the mainstream in the 1980s, and becoming a big deal in the 1990s with the emergence of user-friendly consoles and 3D graphics, the economics of video games have changed substantially.Once, video game companies sold games that would play on a user's computer, then consoles—which are basically gaming-focused mini-computers that plug into a customer's TV, or can be carried around in their pockets—those quickly became the new default for many gamers, creating a more optimized gaming experience, though also introducing a new cost for game-makers, as they typically need to pay something to the console-maker to use their tech and have their products work on these platforms.Retail stores became increasingly important to the gaming industry's budgetary concerns around this time, as they would need to take a cut of the sale price of everything they sold, but also have the flexibility to offer deals to their customers, to incentivize purchases and lure them away from other game stores.And further toward the base of the development stack, as games became more sophisticated and refined, game-makers had to spend more money on high-end hardware, but also higher-end software tools that would allow them to develop the games, polish them so they could compete with other offerings, and in some cases use what's often called "middleware" to serve as a scaffolding for their game projects—software tools that are sometimes referred to as game engines.All of which has made the process of producing video games a lot more complex and expensive, and as the industry has become more popular, roping-in more and more customers, more and more entities have popped up, intent on making their own games; and that's fed a spiral toward higher-costs and more complex game-making processes, leading to a lot of enrichment in some cases, and quite a few new business models optimized for different platforms and styles of game, but also quite a few bankruptcies and hostile takeovers, even seemingly successful video game companies sometimes falling short or investing too much in a game that flops, leaving them with insufficient resources to keep the lights on or produce their next product.What I'd like to talk about today is a recent scandal in the video game industry related to one of those middleware, game engine-making companies, and how they're scrambling to make things right after seemingly losing much of their goodwill and credibility essentially overnight.—In early September, 2023, a game engine company called Unity announced that it would be changing its pricing structure, effective Jan 1, 2024, and that set off a wave of outrage and anger from its users, most of which are individual game-makers and game-making companies.To understand why this response was so widespread and vehement, it's helpful to understand a bit about how game engines work and their role in the modern video game industry.Fundamentally, a game engine is a piece of software that serves as a framework for making video games.So while it's not a simple "click a button, get a game" sort of setup, it does dramatically reduce the amount of time and effort required to produce a finished game product, giving users—game-developers of all shapes and sizes—level-editors, physics engines, rendering engines that help them more easily produce and edit 2D and 3D graphics, collision detection tools, which basically track and control how things bump up against each other in the game and what happens when they do, alongside more basic media tools like those that allow for the creation and editing of audio, animations, video content, text, and the like.Modern game engines also help developers keep the size of their games moderated without losing too much quality, they help with memory management on the developers' computers, they can provide artificial intelligence tools and software that helps them build-out multiplayer functionality—it's a really big and powerful toolkit, so the engine that game-makers choose to use is important, and it shapes every other decision they make, and in some ways the final product, too, because of how easy or difficult things are to do within their specific scaffolding.Unity makes a very popular game engine that was originally released in 2005 as a Mac-specific product, but it has since become multiplatform, allowing developers to make games for all sorts of computers, consoles, mobile devices, and virtual reality interfaces.It's perhaps most popular in the mobile gaming space, as it's relatively easy to learn compared to other engines, and is fairly lightweight; and because the mobile gaming space has been growing so rapidly, that's meant Unity has become increasing popular and widespread as a tool, which in turn has had the spillover effect of making it more popular on other platforms, as well—because folks making a mobile game might go on to make a Playstation game next, and may decide to stick with the engine they know, or a gaming company might decide to perch all their games upon the same game engine because that's just a lot easier, both in terms of keeping things simple for developers, and in terms of the costs associated with using a bunch of different engine.The pricing models used by these game engines vary quite a bit from company to company, but typically they make money by selling licenses to use their products; there's generally a free tier for folks learning to use their tools and who make games below a certain threshold of popularity and profit, but at a certain point they'll need to buy the right to use the engine, which generally also comes with a few bonus perks, like better analytics and error reporting options.This system has worked for everyone for a long time now, and though some developers have balked at the idea of paying Unity and similar companies for their engines, opting for free and open source options like Godot, instead, the larger gaming industry has generally oriented itself around just a few primary, paid options, including the Unreal Engine owned by Epic Games, the maker of Fortnite, among many other offerings, and Unity, which since its release has been used to make more than 750,000 games, alongside non-game offerings, like augmented reality experiences in Microsoft's HoloLens headset, about 90% of Samsung Gear VR content, machine learning programs like Google's TensorFlow, and even film content, like the backgrounds for the 2019 real-life version of The Lion King and engineering blueprints, like those for cars and buildings.All of which partially explains why so many people were up in arms about the changes Unity announced, seemingly out of nowhere, to their fee structure in early September.The old Unity model, again, included a free version of Unity for folks operating below a certain threshold—that threshold has been $200,000 for a while now—and after that folks would pay a monthly fee to use the engine, and that fee would typically cost about $400 per year per game, though it varied quite a bit as folks paid per seat—that is, per developer using the engine—and based on the size of the studio and game they're working on.Unity's newly announced pricing model, in contrast, would keep a free tier, but would remove some of the cheaper payment options, nudging people up to higher yearly rates, while, importantly, also tacking-on a small fee, somewhere between a cent and twenty cents, for each installation of a game that uses the Unity engine, after a threshold has been crossed.The announcement also said that Unity would use a secret, internal method of determining download numbers, and folks would be on the hook, in some cases, for something closer to $2,000 a year per game, rather than $400-ish, though that number would also vary wildly based on a game's popularity and reach.This sparked all kinds of concerns, as it was an additional fee on top of existing fees, costing game-makers more over time, and without providing any new value in exchange, and because it was retroactive, so everyone who had ever used Unity for any game would be on the hook for this new payment structure—meaning, all those 750,000 games or so would potentially be new sources of revenue for Unity, but would be burdened with new expenses for the folks who made them.All sorts of immediate concerns bubbled to the surface of the gaming community, ranging from worries that small, indie devs would be priced out of the market—folks without big bank accounts to draw upon, and who aren't making games that bring in tons of revenue—to concerns related to the concept of putting a price-tag on downloads: would trolls be able to aim hefty fees on developers they don't like by repeatedly installing and uninstalling their games? Would Unity's tracking software be legit? Would it differentiate new downloads from redownloads, or would someone who buys a game, paying for it once, conceivably be a drain on the developer's bank account forever into the future, because they might install it over and over again, over time, on multiple devices?This outcry was also laden with a heavy sense of betrayal because it seemed to violate Unity's terms of service, and that outcry grew even louder and more betrayal-laden when it became clear, as folks went back to check the end-user license agreement they'd signed, that Unity had quietly, in the preceding months, gone through and edited its EULA to basically allow themselves to do what they had done, even though previous versions said they would never do such a thing.The first week after this announcement, as the gaming world unified against Unity, the company's stock tumbled around 16.5% from where it was before the announced change, which is the opposite of what the company had hoped to accomplish—industry analysis suggests that the company is trying to shore-up its numbers, never having been profitable, but finding itself especially pressed for cash right now, and hoping to avoid being in the same situation in the future.What seems to have happened is they tried to do too much at once, essentially grabbing at immediate cash as much as possible, while also trying to scale-up their future prospects by giving themselves a means of benefitting from the success of the games that use their engine; this isn't an entirely novel concept, as their competitor, Unreal, charges a 5% revenue share from game-makers using their engine, but because this was new, out of nowhere, seemed to come about without the folks running Unity checking-in with anyone in the gaming industry to see if it would be alright, and if so to see what sorts of numbers would be tenable for their business models, and because it was retroactively applied using a seemingly pretty skeezy, secretive method of basically giving themselves permission, on the down-low, after swearing up and down they would never do exactly this—all of it went over quite badly, the gaming world revolted against them, near-universally, and this has led to a huge exodus from Unity to other platforms, including the free and open source Godot, which has quite suddenly received a wave of funds from some of the more successful indie game studios out there, and newfound attention from folks who are learning they can relatively simply port their games from Unity to Godot, saving them the future hassle and expense of dealing with the former.The alternative floated by some gaming studios and individual makers was to simply pull their games from shelves, and this was also threatened, especially in cases where the games are free to play, and thus tend to garner huge numbers of downloads, but don't make money on all the people who install their game—which means their work would become huge weights around their ledgers, losing them money each year, rather than earning them money.It took more than a week, but the higher-ups at Unity eventually made some noises about having heard the game-making world and feeling bad about releasing this new model without first seeking their input, and they said they would take another stab at things and get back to them.They then released a new plan, a new pricing model, that seems to have infuriated people substantially less—a revamp that still includes changes, but apparently less catastrophic ones.The new plan says they'll rely on game-maker-reported numbers to tally downloads, and they've raised the revenue cap at which folks need to upgrade to $200,000, so below that and you can keep the low-tier Unity Personal plan, which is excluded from this new pricing model, and that roughly lines up with where things were before—and any game that makes less than $1 million in 12 months will also be exempt from the additional, per-install fee.Perhaps most importantly, though, Unity is now saying games made with previous versions of their engine won't be beholden to this new pricing model, nor would they need to abide by the new terms of service, which among other things says their games need to include a big, Made by Unity splash screen at the beginning, and only those that use the new version being released in 2024 would be required to pay based on downloads, though developers can choose to pay a 2.5% revenue share rather than using the per-installation model—and there's some indication that if they report install numbers, the company will choose whichever is the lowest fee for them, automatically, and charge them that.All of which seems to have cooled things down quite a lot, though a fair bit of damage has already been done to the company's reputation in the industry; many game-makers are still saying they're intending to port their games away as soon as they're able, and that they won't use Unity in the future, because the people in charge of the company have shown their true colors, have shown that they're willing to renege on previous commitments and promises, and burn the goodwill they've earned over the years, in order to pull in more money, to fill the gaps in their balance sheets.The company is investing in a big PR push to try to win people back and polish their now-tarnished brand, but it could be a while before they manage to do so, if indeed they do manage to do so.In the meantime, industry alternatives have seen a big boost in attention and use, and there's a chance we could see more entrants in this space, popping up to take advantage of the hole left by Unity's flub, and introducing entirely new business models that may further innovate on what we've already seen, and allow entirely new game-world business models to arise and flourish. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit letsknowthings.substack.com/subscribe

EPISODE 1728: In this KEEN ON show, Andrew talks to Bent Flyvbjerg, author of HOW BIG THINGS GET DONE, about the suprising factors that determine the fate of every project, from home renovations to space exploration Bent Flyvbjerg is the first BT Professor at Oxford University and the VKR Professor at the IT University of Copenhagen, an economist, and “the world's leading megaproject expert,” according to global accounting network KPMG. He has consulted on over one hundred projects costing $1 billion or more and has been knighted by the Queen of Denmark. Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting KEEN ON, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy show. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Why are major projects so often delayed and over budget? On this episode, I'm speaking to Bent Flyvbjerg, the author of 'How Big Things Get Done'.Bent s a Danish economic geographer. He was the First BT Professor and Inaugural Chair of Major Programme Management at Oxford University's Saïd Business School and is the Villum Kann Rasmussen Professor and Chair of Major Program Management at the IT University of CopenhagenOn the show, we discuss:The pivotal role of human risk in the execution of mega-projects, ranging from small tasks like kitchen remodelling to monumental endeavours like bridge construction.The significant influence of cognitive and power biases on the success or failure of these large-scale undertakings;The importance of simplicity in project governance for smooth execution;The role of data collection and storytelling in the success of mega-projects and how availability bias can shape perceptions;The unique challenges of conducting research in China, particularly in terms of data collection;The concept of human risk as a consistent thread in mega-project management;The strategy of reference star forecasting for making more accurate predictions by collecting data from similar projects;Warren Buffett's views on compound interest and how initial delays in a project can compound over time, leading to further delays;The concept of 'fat tails' and its impact on risk management in mega-projects;The importance of recognizing intelligent infrastructure principles when allocating infrastructure spending.You'll find Bent's faculty page here: https://www.ox.ac.uk/news-and-events/find-an-expert/professor-bent-flyvbjergHis book 'How Big Things Get Done': https://sites.prh.com/how-big-things-get-done-bookFind Bent on Twitter/X account: https://twitter.com/BentFlyvbjerg?His LinkedIn profile: https://linkedin.com/in/flyvbjerg/Links to his Papers: http://bit.ly/3YxVZVWBent's Speaker profile: http://bit.ly/41sd5W9Bent's Consulting profile: http://bit.ly/3kclBbH

Ever wondered how the world of product development can be viewed through the lens of a physicist? How the future of AI will impact our existence? What a champion poker player has to say about quitting, and what we can learn about product development from an architect? This week, we dive headfirst into those questions with four fascinating reads: 'Loonshots' by Safi Bahcall,  'AI 2041' by Kai Fu Lee and Chen Quifan, 'Quit' by Annie Duke, and 'How Big Things Get Done' by Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardner. These books have reshaped my perspective and I believe they hold interesting insights for you too. We'll explore how these books apply to new product development projects and how they can help us do it better.  I also share why I thought some were better together, read in pairs.  For those of you who love a good discussion, I'm inviting you to join my virtual book club where we can further unravel these intriguing books. Let me know if you're interested! So, tune in for a conversation that promises to be as enlightening as it is engaging!Visit the podcast blog.Support the show**FREE RESOURCES**Quality during Design engineering and new product development is actionable. It's also a mindset. Subscribe for consistency, inspiration, and ideas at www.qualityduringdesign.com. About meDianna Deeney helps product designers work with their cross-functional team to reduce concept design time and increase product success, using quality and reliability methods. She consults with businesses to incorporate quality within their product development processes. She also coaches individuals in using Quality during Design for their projects.She founded Quality during Design through her company Deeney Enterprises, LLC. Her vision is a world of products that are easy to use, dependable, and safe – possible by using Quality during Design engineering and product development.

Why almost all big projects are over budget, Oxford University Professor, Bent Flyvbjerg explains all with fascinating examples.

Episode 284 | The role power, dynamics, and psychology play in project management is profound according to Danish economic geographer Bent Flyvbjerg. He discusses the crucial elements of successful projects, the pitfalls that lead to failures, and the importance of combining optimism with realism to navigate big ventures effectively. Flyvbjerg encourages leaders to think slow and act fast, while building a culture of continuous learning and precision in forecasting. • The Unofficial Project Manager: Everyone manages projects at some point, but leaders especially have an important role in guiding projects as unofficial project managers. A Guide for Leaders— http://pages.franklincovey.com/the-unofficial-project-manager-a-guide-for-leaders-p.html

In the Sunday Book Review, I consider books that would interest the compliance professional, the business executive or anyone who might be curious. It could be books about business, compliance, history, leadership, current events or anything else that might interest me. In today's edition of the Sunday Book Review, I continue my summer exploration of books on crime. Today, the summer's top business books as curated by FT Columnist Andrew Hill.   ·      How Big Things Get Done by Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardner ·      Risky Business by Amy Finkelstein, Liran Einav and Ray Fisman  ·      Wonder Boy by Angel Au-Yeung and David Jeans ·      The Case for Good Jobs by Zeynep Ton ·      The Four Workarounds by Paulo Savaget Resource Andrew Hill: Best Summer Books: Business in FT Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

“Once you start asking questions, you generally find that training is probably less than half the solution.”- Richard “Bo” BodoHow often have you been asked by internal clients to “fix” a team or performance problem through training?   And how often has training only been part of the solution?  Today's guest highlights how important it is to ensure that L&D is helping its clients understand everything that needs to be considered or addressed in order for training to have any impact at all.My guest is Richard “Bo” Bodo. Richard “Bo” Bodo is the Director of Learning & Development for Li-Cycle. Bo has over two decades of experience creating and facilitating training for adult learners. An avid contributor to industry knowledge, Bo enjoys sharing what he has learned through speaking at conferences, writing, and creating videos. A lifelong learner, Bo holds a Master of Instruction System Design designation from the Association for Talent Development and will soon finish a Bachelor of Science degree in Instructional System Design. In this episode of Talent Management Truths, you'll discover:

July has seen extreme weather events ravage all of the world's continents, reinforcing – yet again – the urgency of collective action on climate change. In this week's episode, Mark Leonard welcomes Kate Hampton, CEO of the Children's Investment Fund Foundation and former head of policy at Climate Change Capital to delve into the complexities of that action within a competitive global landscape – marked by inequalities between the global north and south. Together, they consider possible pathways towards compromises and how to empower sustainable transitions on the way to a resilient future. How can civil society and NGOs drive global climate action? What strategies can Europeans employ to navigate a fractured multilateral landscape in the face of climate change? And how can the West and the global south work together towards sustainable energy solutions? This podcast was recorded on 14 June 2023. Bookshelf: The Big Con: How the Consulting Industry Weakens Our Businesses, Infantilizes Our Governments, and Warps Our Economies, by Mariana Mazzucato How Big Things Get Done: The Surprising Factors That Determine the Fate of Every Project, from Home Renovations to Space Exploration and Everything In Between, by Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardner

This episode of Hub Dialogues features Sean Speer in conversation with journalist and best-selling author Dan Gardner about his must-read, new book (co-authored with Bent Flyvbjerg), How Big Things Get Done: The Surprising Factors That Determine the Fate of Every Project, from Home Renovations to Space Exploration and Everything In Between.The Hub Dialogues (which is one of The Hub's regular podcasts) feature The Hub's editor-at-large, Sean Speer, in conversation with leading entrepreneurs, policymakers, scholars, and thinkers on the issues and challenges that will shape Canada's future at home and abroad. The episodes are generously supported by The Ira Gluskin And Maxine Granovsky Gluskin Charitable Foundation and the Linda Frum and Howard Sokolowski Charitable Foundation.If you like what you are hearing on Hub Dialogues consider subscribing to The Hub's free weekly email newsletter featuring our insights and analysis on key public policy issues. Sign up here: https://thehub.ca/free-member-sign-up/. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week's guest on Cleaning Up is Paddy Padmanathan, the person who may have done more than any other to usher in the age of low-cost renewables. As CEO of ACWA Power, Paddy was instrumental in reducing the cost of clean energy across the globe, continually breaking records for the price at which solar power could be delivered. From 2004 until his departure earlier this year, Paddy led the company from startup to energy giant, with an investment value of $62.6 billion. More recently, Paddy is co-founder of both Xlinks and new venture Zhero BV, developing renewable power and hydrogen projects. Michael and Paddy discussed what it took to deliver solar at a price previously thought impossible, the importance of pricing investment risk in the developing world correctly, and Paddy's vision for a faster, more interconnected path to net-zero around the globe. Make sure you like, subscribe, and share Cleaning Up. We're growing fast on LinkedIn, and we'd love for you tell your professional network about us: https://www.linkedin.com/company/cleaning-up-with-michael-liebreich/You can find everything you need to keep up with Cleaning Up here: https://linktr.ee/mlcleaningup  Links and Related Episodes Watch Episode 92 with Simon Morrish, CEO of Xlinks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6KIMswZkWA Watch Episode 124 with Damilola Ogunbiyi: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbN1Y1C0ido Watch Episode 126 with Marco Alverà: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1JvS0ArNwQ Watch Episode 128 with Prof. Bent Flyvbjerg: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mN79-5S5d5c Read Michael's latest piece for BloombergNEF on the electrification of heat here: https://about.bnef.com/blog/liebreich-the-next-half-trillion-dollar-market-electrification-of-heat/ Guest Bio Paddy Padmanathan is a seasoned engineering and energy expert with over 40 years of experience. As CEO of ACWA Power, he spearheaded its expansion from startup in 2004 to a leading private developer, owner and operator of power generation and desalinated water production plants. Headquartered in Saudi Arabia, the company now has a portfolio of 62 assets with an investment value of USD 62.6 billion, producing 38.9 GW of power. Prior to joining ACWA Power, Paddy was Vice President and Corporate officer at Black and Veatch, where he was responsible for developing privately financed power, water and wastewater projects in over a dozen countries. Paddy also serves on the Board of Directors of several companies involved in the power and water development sector across the globe, including Zhero BV, Xlinks, Ltd., and Desolenator BV. Paddy holds an engineering degree from the University of Manchester and a postgraduate qualification in civil engineering from the University of Lancaster.  

Some megaprojects, like the Empire State Building, are success stories while others, like Boston's Big Dig, flop on a massive scale. Bent Flyvbjerg, First BT Professor at Oxford and VKR Professor at ITU, Copenhagen, joins host Krys Boyd to discuss grand-scale projects and why some become famous, while others become infamous. His book, co-written with journalist Dan Gardner, is “How Big Things Get Done: The Surprising Factors That Determine the Fate of Every Project, from Home Renovations to Space Exploration and Everything In Between.”

Watch on Youtube.Mark Van Buren came to Queens University in Kington, Ontario looking for a degree in Architecture.  He stayed 8 years and ended up with Ph.D. in Civil Engineering, concentrating on water management.  He spent the next decade or so in California and Milwaukee on large water management projects, largely storm run-off systems.  Turns out the storm was in the contract delivery system and not in the pipes.  Disgruntled with the delivery process, he jumped at the chance to head back to Kingston about 20 years ago.  Since then he has risen through City Engineering ranks to become the Deputy Commissioner of Major Projects.  In that capacity he and his team just delivered the Waaban Crossing, the “third” crossing in Kingston that unites the City through the middle of the Cataraqui River.  The $180M dollar IPD project was the first IPD bridge project in Canada.  Unlike most civil structures and megaprojects, this one landed in Bent Flyvbjerg's .5% of projects:  it was on time, on budget and delivered all the benefits initially proposed.  Join us for a thoughtful hour with this unique bridgebuilder.

Megaprojects are what take society forward, whether building new transport infrastructure, creating new technology networks or decarbonising the energy system. However, according to this month's guest on The Engineers Collective, across sectors and around the world, megaprojects almost always overrun their budgets and timescales. In this episode, NCE editor Claire Smith is joined by NCE reporter Rob Hakimian as they speak to Bent Flyvbjerg, the first ET professor of major programme management at Oxford University's Said Business School and professor of major programme management at IT University of Copenhagen. He is the most cited scholar in the world on megaprojects, having authored and edited 10 books, including his brand new one, How Things Get Done, which was co-authored with Dan Gardner. Having amassed a database of over 16,000 megaprojects of 25 types and from 130 countries, Flyvbjerg has found that only around 8.5% successfully meet their time and cost projections. He tells us about the most common failures, which often happen in the earliest stages such as planning and picking the right team. He also pinpoints the factors that drive success for megaprojects, such as governance and modularity. Bent explains the challenges using projects such the Elizabeth line and High Speed 2 in the UK. The conversation also touches on decarbonising the energy system, which Flyvbjerg considers the most important megaproject in the world. Finally, we ponder whether assessing megaprojects on how they match up against their time and cost projections is as important as judging them based on their outcomes. Listen now to hear about the best practice when approaching a big project – which Bent believes can also be applied to smaller schemes, as well as home tasks such as remodelling your kitchen.

This week's guest on Cleaning Up is Bent Flyvbjerg. Bent is Emeritus Professor at the University of Oxford and is the most cited scholar in the world on the subject of megaprojects. Bent's latest book, released this year, is How Big Things Get Done, on the science of successful project delivery. Michael and Bent discussed the many, substantial implications of Bent's research for the net-zero transition, including the stark fact that solar and wind projects sit at the top of the tree when it comes to arriving on time and on budget, with nuclear languishing at the very bottom. Make sure you like, subscribe, and share Cleaning Up. We're growing fast on LinkedIn, and we'd love for you tell your professional network about us: https://www.linkedin.com/company/cleaning-up-with-michael-liebreich/ You can find everything you need to keep up with Cleaning Up here: https://linktr.ee/mlcleaningup  Links and Related Episodes Bent's latest book is How Big Things Get Done: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/672118/how-big-things-get-done-by-bent-flyvbjerg-and-dan-gardner/Watch Episode 58 with John Redfern, CEO of Eavor: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MU8TDupVvjMWatch Episode 92 with Simon Morrish, CEO of Xlinks: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6KIMswZkWAWatch Episode 116 with Tom Samson, former CEO of Rolls Royce SMR: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjThq8c3tT4Watch Episode 122 with Professor Sir Chris Llewellyn Smith: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1_gL_XXaQQ Guest Bio Bent is among the most cited scholars in the world on Project Management, Planning, Infrastructure and Cities. He has 30 years of experience as an adviser to government and business, including the US, UK, and Chinese governments and Fortune 500 companies. He has consulted on some of the largest projects in the world, from High-Speed 2 in the UK and the California High-Speed Rail project, each the largest civil construction project ever in their respective countries. Bent is the author or editor of 10 books and more than 200 papers, translated into 20 languages, including Megaprojects and Risk: An Anatomy of Ambition (2014) and this year's How Big Things Get Done. He has received numerous honours and awards, among them a knighthood and two Fulbright scholarships. Bent is chairman of Oxford Global Projects, and was formerly the Academic Director of Oxford's MSc in Major Programme Management. 

In this episode our host Joe Batir talks with Pratibha Pillalamarri, Senior Product Marketing Manager at AspenTech and David Daines, Global Alliance Manager at AWS Energy. They discuss industrial manufacturing, some of the inherent challenges, and AspenTech's Mtell solution being applied to this space. Topics covered include: What are the current ways manufacturing facilities operate What problems exist in large scale manufacturing and how those are currently handled How AI and prescriptive maintenance can extend equipment life and increase performance Which industries would benefit from AI and prescriptive maintenance monitoring What Mtell is and how it solves these challenges How increasing operational efficiencies can lead to decarbonized and more environmentally friendly manufacturing Pratibha's Book Recommendations: How Big Things Get Done by Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardner David's Book Recommendations: Good to Great by Jim Collins These show notes contain affiliate links. Show your support for this show, the information we provide, and our energy community by using these links. This episode is made possible by AWS Energy. Enjoying the show? Leave me a review here! Brought to you on the Oil and Gas Global Network, the largest and most listened-to podcast network for the oil and energy industry. More from OGGN ... Podcasts LinkedIn Group LinkedIn Company Page Get notified about industry events

O viață bună începe cu o viziune personală. Trebuie să te poți imagina pe tine într-un viitor apropiat, apoi în cel îndepărtat și să ai o idee clară nu doar despre ce vrei să faci, ci și despre ce fel de persoană vrei să fii. Despre cei nouă pași recomandați de Dale Carnegie pentru construirea unei astfel de viziuni, despre „Librăria Viitorului” și despre petreceri de pensionare povestește Dragoș în episodul 187 al podcastului Vocea Nației. (Și de parcă nu era suficient, mai vine și cu sfaturi pentru fumători. Dar dacă ne dați un like, poate vă zicem noi unde să dați skip la video.) ___ În episodul 187 din podcastul Vocea Nației: - Care e diferența dintre misiune și viziune? - Ce înseamnă să gândești de la stânga la dreapta? - De ce există o librărie cu cărți secrete, care vor fi publicate abia în 2114? - Un gând pentru când aprinzi următoarea țigară. ___ Cărți menționate: - Viața este scurtă, trăiește-o din plin – Dale Carnegie - Iubește oamenii, folosește lucrurile – Joshua Millburn și Ryan Nicodemus - În sfârșit nefumător – Allen Carr - The Good Ancestor – Roman Krznaric - Cum se fac lucrurile mari – Bent Flyvbjerg, Dan Gardner ___ Best Buy Server Config: Laptop Dell Rugged Premium Refurbished - https://www.server-config.ro/laptop-refurbished/2105-dell-latitude-5430-rugged-14-fhd-intel-core-i5-1135g7-pana-la-420-ghz-32gb-ddr4-256gb-ssd-webcam-windows-11-pro-garantie-2-ani.html

Oxford professor Bent Flyvbjerg and his team studied more than 16,000 projects—from skyscrapers to high-speed rails to Oscar-winning films—to learn the secrets of their success, and some failures.

This podcast focuses on what can be done to help major infrastructure project teams actually deliver the outcomes that are promised – and specifically whether engaging minds early will drive project success .As any casual observer of infrastructure will be aware, the track record of major project delivery is not good. In fact a new book by Oxford University professor Bent Flyvbjerg highlights that globally from his list of 16,000 projects in 136 countries over the last 30 years, just 8.5% met cost and schedule targets while just 0.5% satisfied all benefit goals.OK, I haven't audited his numbers, but they are, on the face of it, a pretty shocking set of findings – findings that seem to bear out and ring true if you consider the UK's recent project outcomes from projects such as Crossrail, Jubilee Line Extension, West Coast Mainline upgrade, Hinkley Point – the list goes on. And there are of course many more examples of smaller infrastructure projects failing to deliver. So what is going wrong? Prof Flyvbjerg highlights many, many reasons from long durations causing scope and budget creep to failure to understand technology and a propensity towards ‘optimism bias' urging professionals down the wrong paths.But primarily his conclusion – and one shared by many others in the industry given the number of industry papers and report on the subject – is poor project initiation or failure in the commissioning stage as the wrong people are left to make the wrong decisions at the wrong moment.So is that true? And if so how do we change it?Well to find out, it is my pleasure to welcome Simon Kirby, managing partner at well-known and respected trouble shooting, project delivery consultancy The Nichols Group to the Infrastructure Podcast. Simon has a several decades of experience wrestling with the challenge of delivering major projects and programmes.ResourcesThe Nichols GroupProf. Bent FlyvbjergMajor Project Association 

Pierderea capacității de concentrare nu este un eșec personal, ci rezultatul felului în care arată în prezent lumea. Prăbușirea lecturii susținute este una dintre marile cauze ale lipsei noastre de atenție. Ce se întâmplă când atenția profundă se deteriorează? Ce se întâmplă când acel nivel de gândire profundă rămâne accesibil doar unui număr tot mai mic de oameni, până în punctul în care cititul și înțelegerea unei cărți devin împreună un interes al unei minorități? Povestim mai multe la podcastul Vocea Nației cu Dragoș Pătraru. Plus un răspuns pentru cei ce au întrebat de-a lungul timpului cu ce să pornească la drum în călătoria lecturilor susținute. ___ În episodul 186 din podcastul Vocea Nației: - ce este „inferioritatea ecranului”? - ce înseamnă că „mediul este mesajul”? - care e diferența dintre cititul pe ecrane și cititul pe hârtie? ___ Server Config: https://server-config.ro/ ___ Cărți menționate: - Utopie pentru Realiști – Rutger Bregman - Hoții de atenție – Johann Hari - Cum se fac lucrurile mari – Bent Flyvbjerg și Dan Gardner

Bent Flyvbjerg has a sobering statistic to share: 99.5% of major projects fail to deliver their targeted results on time and on budget. His new book How Big Things Get Done, coauthored with Dan Gardner, explores this phenomenon—from infrastructure projects to major sporting events to corporate transformations.Flyvbjerg, the first BT Professor of Major Programme Management at Oxford's Saïd Business School and VKR Professor of Major Program Management at the IT University of Copenhagen, is the world's foremost expert on megaproject management—a subject on which he has published prolifically.He recently joined Martin Reeves, Chairman of the BCG Henderson Institute, to discuss the patterns and drivers of the failure of big projects, as well as potential solutions that can help executives overcome these dramatic odds. For example, cognitive biases, particularly at the C-suite level, cause leaders to act too spontaneously—when they would be better off acting fast only after first thinking slowly and deliberately. They explore not only conventional project success but also how the thinking can be applied more broadly – from personal projects to climate change.Key topics discussed: 01:16 | The Iron Law of megaprojects04:03 | Patterns of failure09:02 | Solutions (think slow but act fast, think from right to left, reference class forecasting)17:28 | Continuous vs. episodic change20:47 | Tackling climate change: a megaproject?23:03 | Impact of technology25:46 | Practical recommendationsThis podcast uses the following third-party services for analysis: Chartable - https://chartable.com/privacy

Today, we talk about how big things get done. A ‘big thing' can mean a large infrastructure project, an IT project at work, or something in your personal life like a home renovation, a big adventure, or an event you're organising. The sad truth is, the vast majority – in fact, almost – big projects end up over budget, delayed, and they don't provide the planned benefits. This is something well-researched and backed up by data. It is the ‘Iron Law of Mega Projects' as you will hear. That's the bad news. The good news is that joining us on this episode of the podcast is Professor Bent Flyvbjerg who is the world's leading megaproject expert. Prof. Flyvbjerg teaches at the University of Oxford and the IT University of Copenhagen. He has consulted on over 100 megaprojects costing $1 billion or more and has been knighted by the Queen of Denmark. He is the co-author of the fantastic new book How Big Things Get Done – The Surprising Factors Behind Every Successful Project From Home Renovations to Space Exploration. Bent joins in what I think is a fabulous conversation in which he shares: ·      The Iron Law of Mega Projects; ·      Why projects ‘don't go wrong, they start wrong'; ·      Why projects are not goals in and of themselves and what we can learn from legendary architect Frank Gehry; ·      What the Tour de France teaches up about risk; ·      What lego has to do with all this; ·      Much more!    Show notes: Prof Bent Flyvbjerg How Big Things Get Done Bent on LinkedIn Thinking, Fast and Slow Availability bias Frank Gehry Pixar The Bilbao Guggenheim The Sydney Opera House Reference Class Forecasting Robert Caro on LBJ and Robert Moses The Black Swan Madrid Metro SSRN Academia.edu _ _ _ _ _ _ Like what you heard? Subscribe and/or leave a rating and review on Apple Podcasts: http://apple.co/1PjLmK Subscribe on Stitcher: http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/all-things-risk/the-all-things-risk-podcast Subscribe on Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/ben-cattaneo Follow the podcast on Twitter: https://twitter.com/RiskThings Drop us a note: allthingsrisk@gmail.com  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Our free course module “How to Set Up Any Decision for Success” from our upcoming course How to Make Decisions With Calm and Confidence

Inger's dusty in this episode, after an epic David Lodge style dinner party the night before, but her blood pressure is the best her doctor has seen in years. By the time you listen to this she'll be in Cambridge, punting or something.Jason didn't win the annual hot cross bun off, but did invite Inger into the WhatsApp group so she could share the fun this year. There is also an unexpectedly long digression about workplace exploitation, so - a normal catch up.There was nothing in the mailbag! [28:53] (although we did get a bunch of letters the day after we recorded this, so some of you still love us- thank you). In the work problems segment [30:47] we talk about the new book from Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardner called 'How big things get done', which Inger partially distilled into a Discussion Guide. It's an excellent book and Inger sees a lot of cross overs between how high speed rail projects fail and the length of time most people take to get a PhD. Enough crossovers at least to get on her ranty high horse, like - a lot. Jason listens patiently while she has All The Feelings about the PhD. Again.Moving on. Jason's been reading The Upside of irrationality, while Inger's been reading Navy SEALS romances (again) [1:14:06]. The real surprise is left for the end of this episode: the 2 minute tips section [1:17:37] which turns into an epic, agonised conversation about just how much of our jobs to delegate to ChattieG and the future of the university. It's heavy. You may need a drink or four, just like Inger did the night before. Leave us a message on www.speakpipe.com/thesiswhisperer. Email Inger, she's easy to find. You will not be able to find Jason's email (he likes it that way).Talk to us on BlueSky by following @thesiswhisperer and @drjd. Inger is sadly addicted to Threads, but cannot convince JD to join. You can find her there, and on all the Socials actually, as @thesiswhisperer. You can read her stuff on www.thesiswhisperer.com. You can support the pod by buying our Text Expander guide for academics from the Thesis Whisperer website.

This week: a discussion with Bent Flyvbjerg on the factors that lead projects to fail, whether big or small, and the research-based principles that can make them succeed. Sandra Peter (Sydney Business Insights) and Kai Riemer (Digital Futures Research Group) meet once a week to put their own spin on news that is impacting the future of business in The Future, This Week. You can find transcripts, links for the curious and more episodes on our website: https://sbi.sydney.edu.au/megaprojects-and-getting-big-things-done-with-bent-flyvbjerg/ Listen to our other podcast, The Unlearn Project. You can follow us to keep updated with our latest insights on Flipboard, LinkedIn, Twitter and WeChat. Send us your news ideas to sbi@sydney.edu.au. We read your emails. Music by Cinephonix.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This week: a discussion with Bent Flyvbjerg on the factors that lead projects to fail, whether big or small, and the research-based principles that can make them succeed. Sandra Peter (Sydney Business Insights) and Kai Riemer (Digital Futures Research Group) meet once a week to put their own spin on news that is impacting the future of business in The Future, This Week. You can find transcripts, links for the curious and more episodes on our website: https://sbi.sydney.edu.au/megaprojects-and-getting-big-things-done-with-bent-flyvbjerg/ Listen to our other podcast, The Unlearn Project. You can follow us to keep updated with our latest insights on Flipboard, LinkedIn, Twitter and WeChat. Send us your news ideas to sbi@sydney.edu.au. We read your emails. Music by Cinephonix.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The artist Ai Weiwei has always enjoyed ignoring the boundaries between disciplines, fusing art, architecture, design, collecting and social activism. He's now taken over the Design Museum in London (from 7th April – 30th July 2023), filling it with his work and collections - from millions of handcrafted porcelain sunflower seeds to Lego pieces and broken teapot spouts dating back to the Song Dynasty. The exhibition, Making Sense, explores what we value - from what we perceive to be precious or worthless, to the tensions between the past and present, as well as work made by hand and machine. The engineer Roma Agrawal invites readers to marvel at the design of many of the small but perfectly formed inventions that have changed the world. In Nuts & Bolts she deconstructs complex feats of engineering to focus on the nail, spring, wheel, lens, magnet, string and pump. The economist Bent Flyvbjerg is also interested in deconstructing things, but he's focused on ambitious multi-million pound projects to find out why the vast majority are significantly over-budget and past their deadline. In How Big Things Get Done he extolls the virtue of 'thinking slow, acting fast', and how megaprojects that are designed with Lego-building in mind are more likely to succeed. Producer: Katy Hickman Image credit: close up of Monet's Water Lilies in Lego, constructed by Ai Wei Wei - photo copyright by Ela Bialkowska OKNO Studio

Bent Flyvbjerg is the first BT Professor and inaugural Chair of Major Programme Management at Oxford University's Saïd Business School and the Villum Kann Rasmussen Professor and Chair in Major Program Management at the IT University of Copenhagen. He recently published a new book titled How Big Things Get Done, which breaks down the key elements of successful project management.  In this episode, Professor Flyvbjerg discusses how he became interested in the execution and management of mega projects and how this has become a global phenomenon. He emphasizes that successful project management is not limited to big projects but applies equally to small projects such as house renovation or wedding planning. He also shares some of the most memorable and technically interesting projects he has studied, highlighting the importance of framing problems, leading complex projects, and building teams. Enjoy!

Bent Flyvbjerg shares his insights on the key principles that distinguish successful big projects from the failed ones. Through his research and experience, he identifies important factors such as understanding the odds, planning slow and acting fast, and starting with the end goal in mind. Join us as we explore how to master the unknowns and achieve wild ambitions with Flyvbjerg's guidance. Subscribe for ad-free interviews and bonus episodes https://plus.acast.com/s/the-unmistakable-creative-podcast. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Here we go, part two of last week's recording with returning guests, Bill Bordass and Adrian Leaman. This continues our response to that Times article that was doing the rounds last week, now looking at what we should be doing, in lieu of appropriate and demanding guidance from the institutions that dictate terms.We pick up where we left off. Enjoy.Notes from the episodeThe Usable Buildings websiteThe article that sparked the episode - EPCs are a national scandal, from The Times Newly Restored: E.F. Schumacher on Film (1977)Energy Performance of Non-Domestic Buildings: Closing the Credibility GapEnergy Performance in Use Government PolicyBuilding performance evaluation in the UK: So many false dawnsBuildings the Key to Energy Conservation (1979) How Big Things Get Done: The Surprising Factors Behind Every Successful Project, from Home Renovations to Space Exploration (2023), by the unpronouncable Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardner  - 'Would have been better if they had not eulogised Gehry and toned down the hyperbole', as reviewed by AdrianThe chart that Jeff refers to again from The Energy Performance Survey of Irish HousingSleepwalking into unsustainability, a presentationThe National Retrofit Hub LinkedIn page**SOME SELF-PROMOTING CALLS TO ACTION**We don't actually earn anything from this, and it's quite a lot of work, so we have to promote the day jobs.Zero Ambitions Partners email address - zap@eiux.agencySubscribe and advertise with Passive House Plus (UK edition here too)Join ACANJoin the AECB Email Alex and Dan about websites, branding, and communications - zap@eiux.agency; Everything is User Experience**END OF SELF-PROMOTING CALLS TO ACTION**

Emma welcomes back Bent Flyvbjerg to talk about his new book, How Big Things Get Done: The surprising factors behind every successful project, from home renovations to science exploration. Bent formulated the ‘iron law of megaprojects', which contends that $1bn-plus megaprojects will almost always blow their budget and schedule and yield fewer benefits than promised. His new book outlines how the data shows this is no mystery; it's usually the result of terrible forecasting and planning. The good news is that he explains how every project from a house renovation to the building of a new nuclear power station could be done far more successfully. Listen to Bent's first appearance on the APM Podcast here. Contact: apmpodcast@thinkpublishing.co.uk

Decouple correspondent, Angelica Oung, joins me for a review of Bent Flyvbjerg's new book which examines the lessons that can be learned from the failures and successes of mega projects. https://twitter.com/dr_keefer/status/1627709184123740161?s=46&t=Q7nak44UxDdAvVJ7V61RsQ

Big projects can mean big headaches, whether it's a home renovation or building a new transit line. Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardner talk to us about their book How Big Things Get Done, which looks at how ambitious projects can go off the rails.

Bent flyvbjerg is a Professor and Chair of Major Programme Management, Said Business School; Fellow of St Anne's College. Professor Flyvbjerg's research focuses on the better management of megaprojects, including the Olympic Games, and cities. He is the most cited scholar in the world in megaproject planning and management, and among the most cited in social science methodology. He is the author or editor of 10 books and more than 200 papers in professional journals and edited volumes. His publications have been translated into 19 languages. In this conversation today, we discuss Prof Flyvbjerg's latest book: How Big Things get done. Buy here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Big-Thin... Connect with Bent: https://twitter.com/BentFlyvbjerg Connect with us: https://www.youtube.com/c/FreedomPact​ (video interviews) https://freedompact.co.uk/newsletter​ (Healthy, Wealthy & Wise Newsletter) https://instagram.com/freedompact​ https://twitter.com/freedompactpod

My guest today is Bent Flyvbjerg, the first BT Professor and inaugural Chair of Major Programme Management at Oxford University's Saïd Business School and the Villum Kann Rasmussen Professor and Chair in Major Program Management at the IT University of Copenhagen. He has pioneered research in behavioral science, including power bias, strategic misrepresentation, optimism bias, the planning fallacy, and reference class forecasting. He is the founder and co-founder of a dozen highly successful research groups, degree programs, and startups. The topic is his book written with co-author Dan Gardner: How Big Things Get Done. In this episode of Trend Following Radio we discuss: The greatest achievement as an entrepreneur Identifying the psychology Perspective in an execution chasm Democracy The key to success Jump in! --- I'm MICHAEL COVEL, the host of TREND FOLLOWING RADIO, and I'm proud to have delivered 10+ million podcast listens since 2012. Investments, economics, psychology, politics, decision-making, human behavior, entrepreneurship and trend following are all passionately explored and debated on my show. To start? I'd like to give you a great piece of advice you can use in your life and trading journey… cut your losses! You will find much more about that philosophy here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/trend/ You can watch a free video here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/video/ Can't get enough of this episode? You can choose from my thousand plus episodes here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/podcast My social media platforms: Twitter: @covel Facebook: @trendfollowing LinkedIn: @covel Instagram: @mikecovel Hope you enjoy my never-ending podcast conversation!

My guest today is Bent Flyvbjerg, the first BT Professor and inaugural Chair of Major Programme Management at Oxford University's Saïd Business School and the Villum Kann Rasmussen Professor and Chair in Major Program Management at the IT University of Copenhagen. He has pioneered research in behavioral science, including power bias, strategic misrepresentation, optimism bias, the planning fallacy, and reference class forecasting. He is the founder and co-founder of a dozen highly successful research groups, degree programs, and startups. The topic is his book written with co-author Dan Gardner: How Big Things Get Done. In this episode of Trend Following Radio we discuss: The greatest achievement as an entrepreneur Identifying the psychology Perspective in an execution chasm Democracy The key to success Jump in! --- I'm MICHAEL COVEL, the host of TREND FOLLOWING RADIO, and I'm proud to have delivered 10+ million podcast listens since 2012. Investments, economics, psychology, politics, decision-making, human behavior, entrepreneurship and trend following are all passionately explored and debated on my show. To start? I'd like to give you a great piece of advice you can use in your life and trading journey… cut your losses! You will find much more about that philosophy here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/trend/ You can watch a free video here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/video/ Can't get enough of this episode? You can choose from my thousand plus episodes here: https://www.trendfollowing.com/podcast My social media platforms: Twitter: @covel Facebook: @trendfollowing LinkedIn: @covel Instagram: @mikecovel Hope you enjoy my never-ending podcast conversation!

We start this episode with some interesting things worth knowing about your credit card including what your options are when the credit card company raises your interest rate. https://motuscc.com/credit-card-processing/9-interesting-credit-card-facts-and-stats/  No one likes to be scammed or taken for a fool. In fact we keep our antenna up so make sure that doesn't happen. Maybe though, we are being too vigilant. By being so skeptical and wary of situations and opportunities, we may miss out on some very rewarding ones according to Tess Wilkinson-Ryan. She is a University of Pennsylvania law professor and psychologist and author of the book Fool Proof: How Fear of Playing the Sucker Shapes Our Selves and the Social Order--And What We Can Do About It (https://amzn.to/3jMqrfo). Listen as she explains how to put the fear of being taken for a sucker into perspective and feel a lot better for doing so.  Can you name a big project that has ever been finished on time and under-budget? Think about any construction project at home or even any government project to build a road or a bridge. It seems it always takes longer and costs more than was projected. Why is that? Why can't anyone seem to get it right? Well, actually some people can. That is what Bent Flyvbjerg is here to explain. Bent is a professor at Oxford and considered one of the leading experts on topic. He has consulted on over one hundred projects costing $1 billion or more and he is author of the book How Big Things Get Done: The Surprising Factors That Determine the Fate of Every Project, from Home Renovations to Space Exploration and Everything In Between (https://amzn.to/3YxwnHX). Why do kids who grow up in the same family, with the same parents and the same rules often turn out so differently? Listen as I explain one leading psychologist's explanation that should come as good news to parents. Source: Dr. Wes Crenshaw author of the book Dear Dr. Wes: Real Life Advice for Parents of Teens (https://amzn.to/3RIO6dx). PLEASE SUPPORT OUR SPONSORS! Visit https://NJM.com/podcast for a quote to see how much you can save on your auto insurance! Dell Technologies' Presidents Day event is here! The savings start now on select sleek XPS laptops and more powered by 12th Gen Intel® Core™ processors. Don't forget special pricing on the latest monitors, docks and accessories, plus free shipping on everything and monthly payment options with Dell Preferred Account.  Just call 877-ASK-DELL for these limited-time Presidents Day deals! With With TurboTax, an expert will do your taxes from start to finish, ensuring your taxes are done right (guaranteed), so you can relax! Feels good to be done with your taxes, doesn't it? Come to TurboTax and don't do your taxes. Visit https://TurboTax.com to learn more. Intuit TurboTax.  Did you know you could reduce the number of unwanted calls & emails with Online Privacy Protection from Discover? - And it's FREE! Just activate it in the Discover App. See terms & learn more at https://Discover.com/Online Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Part 2: Are you tired of hearing about big cleantech projects that never seem to come to fruition? Join us as we sit down with Bent Flyvbjerg, first BT Chair of major program management at Oxford, co-author of the upcoming book "How Big Things Get Done," and leading expert in the field of project management. He'll share his extensive research and data analysis on the methods and strategies used to successfully plan, execute and deliver large, complex projects such as infrastructure and transportation. Not only will he provide insights on how to overcome common challenges and pitfalls, but he'll also present a set of heuristics, or rules of thumb, that can be used to simplify and improve decision-making in large projects. Find out why wind and solar projects deliver to schedule, budget, and benefits so often, and nuclear projects so rarely. Tune in to gain a deeper understanding of what it takes to successfully deliver big cleantech projects.

Are you tired of hearing about big cleantech projects that never seem to come to fruition? Join us as we sit down with Bent Flyvbjerg, first BT Chair of major program management at Oxford, co-author of the upcoming book "How Big Things Get Done," and leading expert in the field of project management. He'll share his extensive research and data analysis on the methods and strategies used to successfully plan, execute and deliver large, complex projects such as infrastructure and transportation. Not only will he provide insights on how to overcome common challenges and pitfalls, but he'll also present a set of heuristics, or rules of thumb, that can be used to simplify and improve decision-making in large projects. Find out why wind and solar projects deliver to schedule, budget, and benefits so often, and nuclear projects so rarely. Tune in to gain a deeper understanding of what it takes to successfully deliver big cleantech projects.

Are you tired of hearing about big cleantech projects that never seem to come to fruition? Join us as we sit down with Bent Flyvbjerg, first BT Chair of major program management at Oxford, co-author of the upcoming book "How Big Things Get Done," and leading expert in the field of project management. He'll share his extensive research and data analysis on the methods and strategies used to successfully plan, execute and deliver large, complex projects such as infrastructure and transportation. Not only will he provide insights on how to overcome common challenges and pitfalls, but he'll also present a set of heuristics, or rules of thumb, that can be used to simplify and improve decision-making in large projects. Find out why wind and solar projects deliver to schedule, budget, and benefits so often, and nuclear projects so rarely. Tune in to gain a deeper understanding of what it takes to successfully deliver big cleantech projects.

Are you tired of hearing about big cleantech projects that never seem to come to fruition? Join us as we sit down with Bent Flyvbjerg, first BT Chair of major program management at Oxford, co-author of the upcoming book "How Big Things Get Done," and leading expert in the field of project management. He'll share his extensive research and data analysis on the methods and strategies used to successfully plan, execute and deliver large, complex projects such as infrastructure and transportation. Not only will he provide insights on how to overcome common challenges and pitfalls, but he'll also present a set of heuristics, or rules of thumb, that can be used to simplify and improve decision-making in large projects. Find out why wind and solar projects deliver to schedule, budget, and benefits so often, and nuclear projects so rarely. Tune in to gain a deeper understanding of what it takes to successfully deliver big cleantech projects.

In this episode of The Thinking Leader Bryce Hoffman and Marcus Dimbleby talk with Bent Flyvbjerg, the world's leading megaproject expert, economic geographer, and the first BT Professor at Oxford University. They discuss the problem with big projects and small projects. They explore the ‘iterate and simulate' process and how it can help navigate the early stages of a project. They discuss the psychology behind why we are hardwired to jump into projects without fully considering all potential risks and pitfalls. Bent explains the planning fallacy and how its concepts can impact our ability to accurately estimate the duration and cost of a project. He also goes into detail about the concept of continuity and the value of experience when it comes to managing projects. Bent, Bryce and Marcus also touch on the topic of power bias and how it can amplify cognitive bias, and discuss strategies for mitigating these biases and ensuring that projects are successful. In this episode you will learn: How to use the iterate and simulate process to navigate the early stages of a project Why we are hardwired to jump into projects without considering risks The planning fallacy and how it impacts project management How continuity and experience can give you an advantage in identifying problems and finding solutions How power bias can amplify cognitive bias and learn strategies to mitigate it Find more information on Bent's book, How Big Things Get Done, here: https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/672118/how-big-things-get-done-by-bent-flyvbjerg-and-dan-gardner/ Want to find out if you're a Red Team Thinker? Click here to take a free assessment and get your personalized report: https://www.redteamthinking.com/rttassessment Visit our website: https://redteamthinking.com Watch this episode on YouTube: www.red-team.tv Follow us on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/redteamthinking/ Connect with Bryce: https://www.linkedin.com/in/brycehoffman/ Connect with Marcus: https://www.linkedin.com/in/marcusdimbleby/ Bestselling business author Bryce Hoffman and agility expert Marcus Dimbleby talk about decision making, strategy, resilience and leadership with some of the world's best CEOs, cognitive scientists, writers, and thinkers in this weekly podcast. Each episode offers new ideas and insights you can use to become a better leader and a better thinker – because bad leaders react, good leaders plan, and great leaders think!

*Husk at tilmelde dig podcastens nyhedsbrev. Det gør du her: https://bit.ly/3UF8dKB*Langt de fleste projekter bliver forsinkede, de er dyrere, end vi regner med, og de lever ikke op til de fordele, som vi havde planlagt. Årsagerne er komplekse, men dog forudsigelige. I dag får du professor Bent Flyvbjergs 10 psykologiske årsager til, hvorfor projekter kikser.Dagens lazy edition er baseret på blogindlægget af samme navn. På lige under 22 minutter får du Flyvbjergs top-10 i kondenseret form. Og du får også serveret de 5 ting, du kan gøre ved faldgruberne i praksis.Undervejs vi bl.a. forbi månelandingen, et skandaløst koncerthus og nordamerikanske dæmninger …Du finder Bent Flyvbjerg her https://pure.itu.dk/portal/da/persons/bent-flyvbjergDu finder Bent Flyvbjerg på LinkedIn her https://www.linkedin.com/in/flyvbjerg/

Projetos maiores parecem ser mais robustos e mais resistentes a problemas, não é mesmo? Pois é... só parecem! Os dados mostram que é exatamente o contrário! Quanto maior o projeto, menor o fator que pode levá-lo ao fracasso! Mas de onde vem essa fragilidade dos grandes projetos? Nesse episódio eu comento conclusões das pesquisas do prof. Bent Flyvbjerg sobre megaprojetos, em que fica demonstrado grandes projetos são frágeis quando expostos a riscos relativamente pequenos. Dê um play e depois me conte se isso faz sentido para você! O livro do prof. Bent que usei como base é esse aqui: https://www.amazon.com.br/Oxford-Handbook-Megaproject-Management/dp/0198831102/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1663065979&sr=8-10&_encoding=UTF8&tag=andrechoma-20&linkCode=ur2&linkId=801973a3e6f403da0387bb61d2d36127&camp=1789&creative=9325 E também citei o livro do Edward Merrow sobre Megaprojetos: https://www.amazon.com.br/gp/product/B004V4FGQY/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_hsch_vapi_tkin_p1_i0?&_encoding=UTF8&tag=andrechoma-20&linkCode=ur2&linkId=a6e527130ec1a95dacca50bd0610c79d&camp=1789&creative=9325 Esse Podcast tem o apoio de Teams Ideas by Prosperi (https://www.teamsideas.com/), da Technique Engenharia (http://www.technique.eng.br/) e da GSUP / Nexos (http://www.gsupgroup.com/). Tem curtido o nosso conteúdo? Que tal tornar-se membro do Capital Projects Podcast, apoiando o canal? Assim, podemos continuar crescendo e ajudando tantos profissionais da Gestão de Projetos! Acesse o link e confira os planos: https://lnkd.in/d8QQ6twk Acompanhe também as minhas redes: @andre_choma e https://linktr.ee/andrechoma #capitalprojectspodcast #capitalprojects #projetosdecapital #projectmanagement #gestaodeobras #constructionmanagement #planejamento #construção #engenharia #projectmanagementinstitute #podcast #gestao #projetos #gestaodeprojetos #andrechoma #gerenciamentodeprojetos #PMI #gestãodeprojetoseobras #megaprojects #megaprojetos #grandesprojetos

I dag skal du møde verdens mest citerede projektledelsesforsker, Bent Flyvbjerg. Og du kan godt glæde dig: Udover at være professor på ITU og Oxford er han nemlig en fænomenal formidler. Bent forsker i, hvorfor store projekter kikser, og hvad man kan gøre for at undgå at blive en del af den statistik.I dagens episode får du svaret på: - Hvad 'jernloven om store projekter' er - Hvorfor min datter på 6 er bedre til at estimere projekter end de fleste ingeniører - Hvordan man lærer af sine projekter (vi kan faktisk kun blive bedre, end vi har været de seneste 100 år …) - Hvorfor direkte løgne er så udbredte i projektledelse - Hvad der karakteriserer teams og ledere, som får succes med deres projekter - Hvilke projekter du skal løbe skrigende væk fra - Hvad den største risiko for store projekter er - Hvordan Bent lykkedes med at projektstyre opbygningen af 20.000 skoler i Nepal – og hvad de helt konkret gjorde for at blive færdige 7 år før tid - Hvorfor det er åndet at skræddersy ting - Hvad i alverden man skal gøre, når et projekt er ved at gå galt.

Você sabe o que são as VIPs em Projetos de Capital? Será que são os Diretores Executivos? O Cliente? O Patrocinador? Muitos conhecem as VIPs pelo termo usado para Pessoas Muito Importantes, pela sigla da língua inglesa. Mas em Projetos de Capital, a sigla VIP significa Value Improving Practice - ou Prática de Melhoria (ou Incremento) de Valor! Essas práticas podem melhorar ainda mais a performance e os resultados dos projetos de capital, mas poucos profissionais têm experiência na aplicação, ou conhecem de fato o que são as VIPs. Para explicar esse tema, eu trouxe o Guilherme Lima, um profissional de ampla experiência em projetos de capital. Guilherme É Engenheiro Civil, Analista de Sistemas e Mestre em Sistemas de Informação e Gestão do Conhecimento. É especialista em Megaprojetos e PMOs, tendo atuado com grandes projetos no Brasil e em diversos outros países, em indústrias como Petroquímica e Mineração, dentre outras! Nesse episódio, além das VIPs, ele comenta sobre os livros abaixo, que valem a pena conferir: VIPs (Value Improving Practices) - Práticas de Melhoria de Valor em Grandes Empreendimentos, da Editora Brasport (do qual o Guilherme é um dos co-autores); Industrial Megaprojects - de Edward Merrow, da Editora Wiley The Oxford Handbook of Megaproject Management - de Bent Flyvbjerg, da Oxford University Press E você? Já participou da aplicação de alguma VIP? Comente aí, e vamos juntos!

When a major earthquake hits California, it has to rebuild - but at what cost? A sunny afternoon in October, 1989. In San Francisco's Candlestick Park stadium, a pair of local sporting rivals are about to go head to head - the Oakland Athletics against the San Francisco Giants. But before the first ball is pitched, the game is interrupted - by a major earthquake. A section of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge - the major transport connection for the two northern Californian cities - crumbles, killing one person. And across the Bay in West Oakland, a double decker freeway collapses. 42 lives are lost. In the months and years that follow, San Francisco and West Oakland face a seemingly simple question - how to rebuild. Two major projects emerge. But with very different results. While one brings a community together, the other becomes a political battleground. By examining the Iron Law of Megaprojects - which reveals how major infrastructure problems, far from being a silver bullet, become money-draining, ego-flattering albatrosses that overrun and under deliver - Matthew asks whether a simpler, more streamlined way to create the spectacular is possible. And in the end, is the pursuit of creating something sublimely beautiful even worth it? With Darrell Ford, member of the West Oakland Citizens Advisory Board; Steve Heminger, former executive director of the San Francisco Bay Area's Metropolitan Transportation Commission; Bent Flyvbjerg, Professor and Chair of Major Programme Management at Saïd Business School, University of Oxford; Yael Grushka-Cockayne, Professor of Business Administration at the Darden School of Business, University of Virginia; Dr Karen Trapenberg Frick, Associate Professor in the Department of City and Regional Planning at UC Berkeley. With thanks to Ms Margaret Gordon, co-founder and co-director of the West Oakland Environmental Indicators Project. Presenter: Matthew Syed Producer: Eleanor Biggs Series Editor: Katherine Godfrey Executive Producer: Max O'Brien Music, Sound Design and Mix: Nicholas Alexander Theme Music: Seventy Times Seven by Ioana Selaru A Novel production for BBC Radio 4

In this final episode of the Project Innovators season, Project journal editor Emma De Vita speaks to Bent Flyvbjerg, the first BT professor and inaugural chair of major programme management at the University of Oxford's Saïd Business School. Bent is one of the big names from the world of project management. He works for the better management of megaprojects and this is the subject which we delve into here, from optimism bias when it comes to cost and benefits estimation to strategic misrepresentation by project champions (otherwise known as bending the truth to secure the go-ahead on a megaproject). The solution? In part, a technique called reference class forecasting. Bent spoke to The APM Podcast in mid-March, when he shared his knowledge, expertise and practical advice on how megaprojects, and projects more generally, can be better planned and managed. Don't forget to rate and review us wherever you get your podcasts.

Bent Flyvbjerg of Oxford University speaks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the political economy of megaprojects--massive investments of a billion dollars or more in infrastructure or technology. Flyvbjerg argues that such projects consistently end up costing more with smaller benefits than projected and almost always end up with costs that exceed the benefits. Flyvbjerg explores the reasons for the poor predictions and poor performance of giant investment projects and what might be done to improve their effectiveness. Actually released 25 May 2015.

Governments around the globe are initiating mega projects to revive their economies. It is in all our interests that these megaprojects are well managed. I am talking with Prof Bent Flyvbjerg about Post-Pandemic challenges: Managing megaprojects.I am Dr Sabine Dembkowski, Founder and Managing Partner of Better Boards. We make the boards of the most ambitious organisations more effective. Our mission at Better Boards is to contribute to creating better boards. We do this by providing clients with an evidence-based approach for board evaluations and board development programmes. To fulfill our mission, we give a voice to all who are care about creating better boards. Every 1st and 3rd Thursday of the month, I speak with those that service boards about topics that are ranked high on the agenda.In this episode, I am delighted to talk with Prof Bent Flyvbjerg.Bent Flyvbjerg is the first BT Professor and inaugural Chair of Major Programme Management at Saïd Business School and a Professorial Fellow of St Anne's College.Flyvbjerg is the most cited scholar in the world in megaproject management. He serves as advisor and consultant to government and business, including the US and UK governments and several Fortune 500 companies. He is an external advisor to McKinsey and other consultancies. He has worked on some of the largest projects in the world, on all aspects from front-end planning, delivery, and rescue of failing projects.How can we help you and your board to become more effective? We at Better Boards are always delighted to hear from you. Get in touch. You can best reach us at info@better-boards.com. 

Why are most of us so bad at planning for the future? Whether saving for our retirement, managing workloads and deadlines, or budgeting for a major infrastructure project, we humans often fail miserably. Is it because we're incompetent, even irresponsible? Or is there something psychological getting in the way? We explore some of the most common planning pitfalls, from Olympic Games that go way over budget to short-term corporate incentives, and ask how individuals and businesses can avoid them. Contributors: Peter Ayton, professor of psychology at City, University of London; Bent Flyvbjerg, Chair of Major Programme Management at the University of Oxford; and Sarah Williamson, CEO of FCLT Global. (Picture: A woman looking out over the Grand Canyon. Credit: Getty Images)

Phil & Matt start this episode by talking about their favorite writing implement: pens. Phil is reminded of the West Wing, again. While retelling the story of how we got our first unsolicited podcast advice, we had to do our first content edit after Phil told the listener to !@#$ off... Fortunately, the show moved on to things that actually matter. Conferences & Making SSH Matter (16:10) As academic conference season gets off to a start, Matt & Phil talk about how and why academics share their goods in public. If you’re looking for a large academic gathering of SSH like-minded folks, check out Congress 2017 organized by the Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences. Phil makes the claim that academics go to conferences to network, receive and and offer feedback on work, and contribute to publicizing SSH. Respect the time limit allotted, and practice before you present. It’ll make for better conferences all around. Conferences are also great places to network across disciplines. Matt & Phil start to talk about relevance, and how SSH can be made to matter. Phil discusses Bent Flyvbjerg’s “Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and How It Can Succeed Again” (Cambridge University Press, 2001). Matt get’s going on the inability of fully understanding how biases impact our observations. Phil tries to tie Flyvbjerg’s approach back to conferences, arguing that speaking publicly about values, power relations and biases is important work.  Recommendations (59:50) Matt recommends NPR’s Fresh Air with Terry Gross. If you have trouble falling asleep or staying asleep, Phil recommends the podcast Sleep with Me. And, Matt & Phil both recommend to be nice to one another.    Concluding thought: “I’ve learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel” -Maya Angelou -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Follow Semi-Intellectual Musings on Twitter: @The_SIM_Pod Email Matt & Phil: semiintellectual@gmail.com Subscribe to the podcast: https://thesim.podbean.com/feed/ For full show notes: https://thesim.podbean.com/e/Conferences-Making-SSH-Matter iTunes: https://goo.gl/gkAb6V Stitcher: https://goo.gl/PfiVWJ GooglePlay: https://goo.gl/uFszFq   Please leave us a rating and a review, it really helps the show!   Music: Song "Soul Challenger" appearing on "Cullahnary School" by Cullah Available at: http://www.cullah.com Under CC BY SA license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

Bent Flyvbjerg of Oxford University speaks with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about the political economy of megaprojects--massive investments of a billion dollars or more in infrastructure or technology. Flyvbjerg argues that such projects consistently end up costing more with smaller benefits than projected and almost always end up with costs that exceed the benefits. Flyvbjerg explores the reasons for the poor predictions and poor performance of giant investment projects and what might be done to improve their effectiveness.

JPER co-editor Michael Brooks interviews authors Heather Campbell, Matti Siemiatycki, Ann Forsyth, and Bent Flyvbjerg about their articles for the Symposium in the June 2012 issue.