Back in 2017, Mary Elizabeth and I recorded a Project Management Debate episode that still feels current.

The motion was simple but controversial: “Percent complete is not a good indicator of project status and progress.”

Eight years later, I’d argue this debate matters even more. Not because percent complete is always wrong but because the definition of success has always been greater than one variable.

Most executives don’t actually want percentages, they want confidence. They want to know:

- Are we on track in reality, not in a spreadsheet?

- What’s at risk that isn’t obvious yet?

- Where will this slip hurt the business?

Percent complete feels precise but sometimes this is a trap. When schedules are poorly structured, when tasks are vague, when optimism creeps in (and it always does), percent complete becomes a comfort metric. It reassures without informing. It smooths over uncertainty instead of exposing it.

On the other side of the debate, there’s a fair counterpoint: With strong planning, disciplined breakdowns, and the right reporting models, percent complete can be useful.

This episode explores judgment and whether we’re honest with ourselves and stakeholders about what we really know.

🎧 I’m resurfacing this PM Debate throwback because the question still deserves airtime.

So let me ask you: Do you trust percent complete on your projects? Or do you rely on something else to tell you the real story?

Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Get full access to Project Management Matters at philipdiab.substack.com/subscribe