Waching daily Aug 7 2018

Christine Lampard halts live interview as Lorraine is interrupted by drilling

Christine, 39 – who is filling in for Lorraine Kelly over the summer – welcomed Made In Chelsea's Ollie Locke, Jamie Laing and Olivia Bentley onto Lorraine today.

The Made In Chelsea cast discussed their dramatic 16th series, which kicks off tonight.

But Christine was forced to halt the interview as loud drilling could be heard in the background.

"I have to say, can you hear drilling?" she asked.

"I have to say, can you hear drilling?" Christine Lampard "I'm sure you can all hear it at home.

I don't know where it's coming from! "We are trying to stop it in case it's annoying you at home because we don't want you to be put off.

"We're listening to Made In Chelsea and we hear a drill somewhere.

Anyway we'll try and ignore it.".

Ever the professional, Christine continued with the interview.

Made In Chelsea kicks off with a summer special in Croatia.

And of course, they've brought all the drama from SW3 with them.

Celebrity Big Brother star Sam Thompson ends up in a spat with Liv and Harry Baron.

Meanwhile, Jaime continues to woo his girlfriend Heloise Agostinelli.

Lorraine airs weekdays at 8:30am on ITV, while Made in Chelsea returns tonight at 9pm on E4.

For more infomation >> Christine Lampard halts live interview as Lorraine is interrupted by drilling - Duration: 2:35.

-------------------------------------------

Is political correctness skewing the purpose of Monitoring and Controlling processes? - Duration: 14:17.

Hello, Mounir Ajam, in this video. I'm going to talk a topic maybe with a bit of a fun way

but at least a serious matter as well, and I call that I call it the PMBOK Guide and political correctness.

Now, what do I mean by this?

Well some of the terminology we use in the PMBOK GUide, but save it for later.

Let me just talk about, first a concept that

we have talked about maybe before and is well-known is that the concept of the process group is,

that basically remember the Plan,

Do, Check, Act.

Or, in the project management world, or PMI world that is planning,

executing,

monitoring,

and controlling.

And remember,

PMI grouped these two groups, put them together.

Now, the reason I want to bring this forward first is because to highlight

what do we mean by the monitoring and controlling process group?

Obviously, what we are saying here is that once we start working on a phase, or project, or stage, or anything,

we should execute work in according to plan,

we must monitor the performance to determine if there are deviations, if there deviations

we control, we take action. So in a way monitoring is about observing, checking,

the work that is being done and to analyze or track to see if it comply with the plan and if it is not

Or maybe some corrective or preventive action need to be done that what we do control. So monitor is

monitor, control is action.

Okay? Clear?

I hope it is.

Move on!

So in a way what we are saying the purpose of the monitoring and controlling process group is to help us monitor, performance

to check how are we doing in

according to plan, and then take the necessary action whether they are defect repair,

preventive action, or corrective action, to try to adjust and get back to plan.

All right, cool so far, no problem.

When we come to the PMBOK guide and the names of the process,

obviously an integration we have what we call the monitor and control

project

work that is part of integration.

From this we have the other knowledge areas, we have control

scope

control cost, control

schedule,

control quality

and; ... now notice before I move on,

notice they use the word control.

Now again, if we want to think about accuracy of terminology

Is it the correct terminology here? I mean over here we have monitoring control. I'm just being focusing on semantics here.

So allow me, you know, maybe the point of this video will become clearer in a few minutes

but at this stage right now if we're talking about monitoring control then why are we using the word control here? And

Does it mean that we are controlling without monitoring obviously not possible, right?

I cannot take control action unless I monitor performance and analyze performance.

Now are we trying to save ink here and

instead of saying monitor & control scope, monitor & control cost, monitor & control schedule. We use the word control maybe

Again, I'm I'm not one of those people who like to go deep into the PMBOK Guide and understand every word

but these are the terminology used the way I see it the way I understand it in real life, it means

this is I need to monitor the performance before I can control.

So to me, I look at this all of all of these as [monitor &] control.

Now we come to

this side and in the sixth edition notice we now we have something called monitor

risks.

Hmm now here we have the word control does it mean we control without monitoring; and

here is monitor risks. It used to be in the previous edition control risks.

So I have to ask the question here in the fifth edition and before was the word control

correct, or was it wrong? And why did we change it?

Well the argument we hear, why we monitor risks, and

monitor

communication, and monitor

stakeholder engagement.

Notice on this side, we're using the word monitor, monitor, again, what does it mean?

Yeah, and if monitor is the right word as

all those who follow PMI blindly tell us yeah is the right word then was it was it wrong before? I

mean was the word control before and here, for example, we have manage stakeholder and we don't manage stakeholder.

Wait a minute. What do you mean you don't manage? Yeah, maybe I'm not managing my boss, but in a way I'm managing the relationship;

Okay? And I need to do something.

Now again, I'm not ... here I'm starting to go beyond being semantic. Yeah, obviously these terms were used before

so now what does it mean? Let's let me focus on this one here monitor communication. What does it mean?

Remember, this is the monitoring and controlling process group. So if I'm monitoring communication and I discovered there is an error in our communication plan,

what do I do?

I'll say well wait wait, wait, wait, my job is only to monitor. I'm not going to do anything about it.

Well, of course we're going to do something about it.

If you discover a deviation from plan,

maybe we're not complying with the plan, or maybe there is an error in the plan, don't we need to take corrective

Action to fix it?

I mean I might be loony here, or losing it, or maybe I don't understand the new thinking of the project management or the advancement

that PMI is bringing to us in the PMBOK Guide.

I don't understand this terminology.

Okay, what does it mean?

Same thing with monitoring risk. What is monitoring risks? Again,

if you look at the old addition while monitoring, control risk used to be including what? To monitor that the risk action plan have been

implemented, were they effective and if they were not to take corrective action.

If one risk management response strategy didn't work come up with an alternative strategy that's control action.

This is why I call this political correctness. Why are we changing the terminology here?

Yeah, and why can't we say that we don't monitor risk or we don't control or we don't control communication again?

What is the meaning the word control?

And here we start to get this argument, I you know because these are people at least these are people related

Yeah, and of course the fun part is where is the control team process?

Right?

Well, it doesn't, is not there.

Well, how about okay, maybe we don't control people. How about monitor team?

Oops, not there.

Why?

Yeah, this political correctness that basically tell us when it come to people we don't have dictatorship.

We don't

control people like the army.

We don't control people like an autocratic boss that will order people around or order communication. Come on guys,

wake up. Yeah that has to be realistic here. Don't just trust the PMBOK. I mean, obviously, I'm not against the PMBOK here

this is nothing wrong with the PMBOK just the volunteers who are adding this because of some kind of crazy political correctness or

craze or whatever you call it. Because we use this terminology before

so it is like the first five editions this terminology was wrong and all of a sudden now we walk up and say ah

for 20 years. We've been using the wrong terminology now

we are correcting the terminology? Or is this the wrong terminology and we need to adjust it?

Now let me focus before I go there

I'm going to stay with the communication or stakeholder engagement if we discover our strategy is not working, if

monitoring the stakeholder engagement discover that we have some stakeholders who are not engaged and we need to get them engaged.

What do we do? We must take action to correct.

Some people said well, but that is in the execution and the managing the stakeholder engagement.

But make up your mind. Yeah, look I've worked in one company years ago, they used to have instead of having project management plan,

they used to call it project management and control plan.

Why because they see management as the oversight and control as a control action.

So they separated them and they even put in the plan project management and control.

So it's up to us right now is the project

management plan that the PMBOK Guide talked about and other sources talk about. Is it only about management or management control?

Okay, and you could use the word management,

to mean management control in that case. We do not need the control process group last merge it

with executing and then we'll have executing and control instead of instead of executing process group and monitoring and controlling process group,

let's have an executing and controlling process group. And as we do work we control, we do work

we control, we do work we control, we manage we control, okay?

So here ......... what I'm trying, the message that I'm giving you is more than semantics.

Now let's talk about control the team.

And

I love this again. I hear the argument

we are not in the army, or we're not a dictatorship, or we don't control the team. Guys

I'm not talking here about controlling puppets,

control is not about

dictatorship, or

hierarchy of command and demand.

Control is about the purpose of monitoring and control, the purpose of monitoring and control, the plan-do-check-act,

Is to monitor performance to see how are we doing if everything is great

thumbs up. If something is not working, we need to take action to correct that is what control is about.

So let's say we are working on a project, and we discover the staffing level we have is wrong,

we don't have enough resources on the project. What do we do?

Yeah, I sorry we don't have a control team process, we only manage the team.

We manage and develop the team. Okay, we manage and develop the people that we have assigned to the job,

but we discover we don't have enough people. What do we do?

We don't do anything we just monitor.

Sorry, no monitor even.

There is no even monitor or control of the team. We just manage the team.

Am I going crazy here or loony I don't know maybe I am yeah.

Maybe Dubai, you know, the 40 plus heat is getting to my head.

Maybe you know, my gray hair impacting my brain.

I don't know. You think about this. You decide what you think is logical and is not logical. To

me, in the CAMMP model, we do have control team and I assure you it is not about dictatorship.

I assure you is not about puppet and you know pulling the string of ....

the puppet or muppet or whatever you wanna call them. It's about monitoring performance.

If we have too many people on the team

we have to let go some of them, or a reassign them to other project. If we don't have enough, we need to take corrective

action to bring more. If we have team members that are disruptive or not performing we have to basically talk to them,

mentor them,

coach them, supervise them, fire them if we have to. Yeah, we have to do something!

So the way I always teach, or I don't like the word teach, the way

I always, when I deliver my classes on the PMBOK, I say ignore what these words says [say].

Maybe I'm violating the holy book here. Yeah to me is what makes sense. What makes sense is regardless

what area you are in, and of course we have other areas here, we have procurement we have health and safety,

We have physical resources.

You monitor performance, you always monitor performance, day in, day out, you

monitor, you check, you validate, and if there are

deviations,

we will, basically,

make the corrective action.

That's probably about everything I want to say here about

the political correctness. I don't know what else to call it

so forgive me for calling it that way because I don't see it any other way.

I mean obviously, there are a lot of topics on the PMBOK I can touch on I can talk about but this

one I just want to focus on the terminology of the control, monitoring in controlling processes.

Thank you

For more infomation >> Is political correctness skewing the purpose of Monitoring and Controlling processes? - Duration: 14:17.

-------------------------------------------

The Bachelorette 2018 Proposal: Who Is Becca Kufrin's Fiance? | Heavy.com - Duration: 4:54.

The Bachelorette 2018 Proposal: Who Is Becca Kufrin's Fiance? | Heavy.com

On the finale episode of The Bachelorette, star Becca Kufrin said that she liked that her relationship with contestant Garrett Yrigoyen didn't happen overnight.

She said she enjoyed the fact that it evolved.

She also told Yrigoyen that she feels a little bit of home with him and that he reminds her so much of her father, who died of cancer in 2009.

With Blake Horstmann, she said she felt an instant connection and that she had fallen in love with him weeks before the finale.

So, which one of them did she pick.

Read on below for the live recap of the proposal, along with the heartbreak of the runner-up. BEWARE OF MAJOR SPOILERS.

Becca Kufrin had difficulty choosing which man to be with, but said that, ultimately, she went with the person she said she couldn't picture her life without.

Kufrin said she found her partner, as well as herself, through this journey.

Blake Horstmann was the first person shown proposing to Kufrin and she ended up rejecting him, saying that Yrigoyen was a better fit.

Horstmann appeared blind-sided and crushed by the break up.

Horstmann was shown bawling into a towel after he walked away, as Kufrin also cried to the cameras, saying she thought it would be Horstmann for so long.

Horstmann was then shown live in the studio for part of the live segment of the finale, with host Chris Harrison.

He said that he never thought he would hear "no" when he proposed.

Horstmann and Kufrin came face to face during the live segment and were very friendly, seemingly having no hard feelings.

After sending Horstmann home, Kufrin tearfully told the cameras that Yrigoyen is "the one for her." She said that Yrigoyen would stand by her every day and she could picture him being the father of her children.

Crying to the cameras prior to the finale, Yrigoyen said that he couldn't wait to give her a lifetime of happiness.

Yrigoyen started out with compliments and a big hug.

He then said that he and Kufrin had talked about their future together, and that he loves her so much.

He said that she is his world.

Then, Kufrin interrupted him, saying she started out this journey, not knowing what to expect from the experience.

She then brought up when she gave him her first impression rose.

She also started to cry when she told him how much he reminded her of her father.

And finally, Kufrin told Yrigoyen, "I love you," explaining that she was waiting for the right person to say those three words to at the end of her Bachelorette journey.

Yrigoyen was overjoyed and picked her up in the air before getting down on one knee and presenting her with her Neil Lane engagement ring.

When Kufrin said "yes," Yrigoyen exclaimed, "Gimme that finger!".

Kufrin gave Yrigoyen her final rose, saying, "from the first impression rose to the final rose.

" The two then danced and joked to the cameras that they are "off the market".