Last week, the Helsingin Sanomat newspaper released a great tool for making your own bullshit bingo. This online resource even lets you add terms to bingo cards for fields like media, IT, government, and business in general. Clearly we also need a card for project management. If I were making one, I’d start with these terms: project methodology, development program, coordinator, objective, implementation, developing performance, development know-how, engagement model, best practices, network of experts, project application, resources, functioning pattern, deliverable, operating environment, peer community. Projects aim to do something in real life; that’s why they should describe their actions concretely, not vaguely. Managers justify such murky project language by saying it simply fulfills the sponsor’s requirements. Similarly, sponsors supposedly require the abbreviation of the project’s name, which explains freakish labels like VeTeVT, eEtu, PEPPIII, JoPe. If I were a sponsor, I would urge plain language instead of obscure project-management jargon.