Project management: Lessons learned from the all-rounder and the Berlin airport

Linda

January

2026

Project management rarely fails due to a lack of commitment or expertise. More often, it fails due to excessive expectations, unclear goals, and the attempt to meet too many requirements simultaneously. Two well-known metaphors illustrate this problem particularly vividly: the proverbial jack-of-all-trades and the Berlin airport.

Both are symbolic of projects that were intended to achieve more than was realistically achievable.

The "egg-laying wool-milk-pig" as a project metaphor:
The "egg-laying wool-milk-pig" describes a construct that is supposed to fulfill all conceivable requirements simultaneously. Applied to projects, this often means:

A product should serve all target groups.
All functions should be available from the start.
No compromises should be necessary.
Time, budget, and resources remain limited.

In practice, this way of thinking leads to complex requirements, unclear priorities, and constant shifts in objectives. Projects lose their focus and become difficult to manage.

The Berlin Airport as a Real-World Example:
The construction of Berlin Brandenburg Airport is considered one of the most well-known negative examples in project management. Regardless of political or organizational details, some fundamental lessons can be derived.

Among the key problems were:

constant changes during implementation
lack of clear decision-making structures
lack of transparency regarding project status
unrealistic time and cost assumptions

The project was not made problematic by a single mistake, but by the sum of many decisions made without clear prioritization.

Common patterns in both examples:
Whether metaphor or large-scale project – the underlying patterns are similar:

Goals are not consistently limited
Requirements increase during implementation.
Decisions are postponed or watered down.
Complexity is underestimated.

In such cases, project management becomes reactive rather than proactive. The project follows the requirements instead of leading them.

1. Overly complex goal definition

Too many requirements at once lead to vagueness and a lack of controllability.

2. Constant changes during the project

Subsequent expansions without a clear assessment increase complexity and risk.

3. Lack of decision priorities

Unclear responsibilities delay decisions and weaken project management.

Clear goal definition as a foundation.
A key lesson from both examples is the importance of clear goal definitions. A project needs a clearly defined purpose that serves as a basis for decision-making.

Helpful guiding questions are:

What specific problem needs to be solved?
What requirements are absolutely necessary?
What is deliberately excluded from the project scope?

This demarcation is not a sign of weakness, but a prerequisite for controllability.

Prioritization over completeness:
Successful project management means making decisions and setting priorities. Not everything that is desirable is also necessary.

Projects benefit when:

Core requirements are clearly defined
Optional extensions are deliberately added later.
Decisions are documented in a comprehensible manner.

This keeps the project flexible without becoming arbitrary.

1. Clear definition of the project scope

A defined scope provides orientation and serves as a basis for decisions.

2. Conscious prioritization

Core requirements are implemented before optional extensions.

3. Realistic Expectation Management

Transparent communication across borders increases reliability and trust.

Managing Change:
Changes are unavoidable in projects. However, how they are managed is crucial. Uncontrolled changes lead to delays, increased costs, and uncertainty.

A structured approach to change includes:

clear decision-making processes
Assessment of the impact on time, cost and quality
transparent communication

This ensures that projects remain manageable even when adjustments are made.

Creating realistic expectations:
Both the proverbial "jack-of-all-trades" and the Berlin airport demonstrate how damaging unrealistic expectations can be. Project management must therefore also include expectation management.

This includes communicating boundaries openly and making conflicting goals visible. Realism is not an obstacle, but a prerequisite for reliability.

Conclusion:
The greatest risks in project management arise not from a lack of will, but from a lack of clarity and prioritization. The "egg-laying-all-milk-pig" project and the Berlin airport are prime examples of projects that failed due to excessively high and unclear expectations.

Successful project management means consciously setting limits, making clear decisions, and actively managing complexity. Less scope, more focus, and realistic goals are often the more sustainable approach.