In our area of the East Coast of the U.S., as well as in other spots around the globe, summer's heat took its toll, leaving parched lawns, shriveled fruit, and pathetic-looking new plantings from the spring. The blazing sun has taken its toll with weeks of 90+ temperatures and zero precipitation. Almost every summer has a period like this in our area, and each year, people inevitably throw around the "D" word—Drought. As I studied my dying new bushes and paltry tomato crop, I was able to reflect back five years and remember a true drought. It was a stretch of dry weather that lasted for almost a year, rather than weeks, slaughtering all but the hardiest of plants. The Random House Dictionary definition for "drought" is interesting—

1. a period of dry weather, esp. a long one that is injurious to crops.
2. an extended shortage.

That differs from a "dry spell," which gets its own definition:

1. a prolonged period of dry weather.
2. a period of little or no productivity or activity, low income, etc.

As two days of substantial rain draw to a close, I'm left with the impression that despite my fear and trepidation, we're in the midst of a dry spell rather than a drought. What's the distinction? A drought leaves you with real physical harm. A dry spell is a nuisance that makes you paranoid you're heading for a drought. No one can truly sufficiently prepare for a drought. There are not enough rain barrels on the planet to cope with a shortage that lasts for major portions of a year or years. But there are enough rain barrels to get you through a dry spell.

This metaphor is appropriate when it comes to shortages on our projects. Those may include shortages of cash, of human resources, of political capital, of client goodwill, or of almost any project commodity. We suffer from regular encounters with dry spells, and, fearing droughts, react in pained dismay. Our challenge is distinguishing between the two both in terminology and in action.

As "the risk guy," I'm a firm believer that we can do a better job of labeling these problems in order to steel ourselves appropriately for drought or dry spell, and be willing to make distinctions between the two. Specifically, it's a function of warning those around us of current conditions and getting their interpretation of the signs in the environment. In order to brace ourselves appropriately, we need to establish the right environment and communicate the implications of changes to that environment.

The Dry Spell Warning System

National and state parks in fire-prone areas often have a wood plaque that reads: "Today's Fire Danger is..." The terms that follow are generally Low, Moderate, High, Very High, or Extreme. Each term has meaning to the National Weather Service. Very High means it doesn't take much to start a fire. Extreme means almost any ignition source could set the area ablaze. There are some things you simply don't do once you get above Moderate. You don't host a barbeque in the forest. You don't engage in risky behaviors.

We can set up similar systems for our own dry spells. By letting team members and management know when we're shifting to lower consumption rates and less risky behavior, we also communicate when we have the potential for serious trouble because of the shortage associated with the commodity in question.

For resources (human or material), we can set the criteria:

• Low concern might exist when all resources are available and at our disposal.
• Moderate might stand when resources are available but conflicts potentially limit their ongoing availability.
• High might exist when they are currently over-assigned or over-committed.
• Very High could be when their availability to our projects is already reduced, very limited, or in decline.
• Extreme may exist when there are less than 50% of resources available versus what's needed.

For political capital:

• Low concern might exist when the project is popular with all available stakeholders.
• Moderate might stand when the project is perceived favorably, but some of the stakeholders have concerns about the team or project performance.
• High might exist if there are distinct groups that are opposed to the project, the approach, or the performers.
• Very High could be when such groups are already vocal and active.
• Extreme may exist when there are virtually no supporters of the project in the body of stakeholders.

Note that we could establish criteria for almost anything, and establish the points to watch as the project progresses from Low to Moderate to High (or improves from High to Moderate to Low). The beauty of such systems is that they clarify what constitutes a trend or change. If we're going from Low to Moderate, we might advise management that we have a shared understanding that their support may be helpful in keeping the project from "flaming out." They may be able to provide support by increasing the resources or providing moral support.

From Dry Spell to Drought

With dry spells, it's a matter of predicting future behavior. With droughts, it's a matter of time to recover. It's not a risk, it's an issue—a risk that has come to fruition. It's a whole different state of being.

What issues can drive us to formally be in a drought? Stream levels, precipitation, reservoir levels, groundwater levels, or soil moisture can all provide the warning signs. On these, just as the weather forecasters can tell you what it might take to overcome a drought, we should be looking for what it will take for us to overcome an existing problem in our project environments. What problems might serve as evidence of a project drought?

• Resource levels
• Stakeholder reaction
• Schedule delays
• Cost variance

As issues managers, we can respond when the expenditure of resources, political capital, or community goodwill hits crisis levels. Before it ever happens, we ask, "What would we do if the worst case scenario happened?" For community goodwill, for example, what would we do if we wound up as pariahs in the local media? If we establish our contingency strategies for the areas of great concern before they come to pass, we are at least ready to take the first steps toward survival through the driest of times. And while we may not be able to completely resolve the situation, we may be able to weather the storm (or lack thereof).

The metaphor here is critical. If we know what constitutes crisis levels and how we'll react, then we know when we're still in trouble and when the crisis has passed. In my community of Frederick, Maryland, 2001-2002 was our drought year. From early '01 until August '02, dry weather prevailed, prompting building moratoriums and calls for severe water restrictions. From August through January '03, the clouds broke forth and the rains came and came and came. On February 21, 2003, the almost comical headline "Drought Rules Lifted as Flooding Looms" appeared in the Frederick News-Post. As project managers, we need to be sufficiently proactive to ensure that we not only know what we'll do to response, but also how we'll know it's time to declare victory and move beyond our concerns. That's when we've truly mastered the challenging art of "drought management."

If we know what constitutes trouble, we also should inherently understand what constitutes success over those troubles. In Frederick, it became a running joke as the floodwaters rose that the drought might someday come to an end. As project managers, we are truly successful not only when we plan for the worst, but when we know when the worst has passed.