Then, a post on LinkedIn triggered this post where a person posted his newly achieved certificate claiming that he is now “A Certified Project Manager.” A quick look at his profile on LinkedIn shows that this is a young professional, 3-year out of college, and his experience has been pure engineering; technical roles, not a project management role.
This post is mostly about thinking out loud and sharing our thoughts with you. Balancing these feelings is tough.
I have been working on two books:
- The first was about the PMBOK Guide (and ISO 21500) but mostly about how to apply these guides in the real world, and
- The second book is a re-write of a book we self-published two years ago (Redefining the Basics of Project Management), which focus on The Customizable and Adaptable Methodology for Managing Projects™.
In discussions with a publisher, we have considered merging these two books to deliver a well rounded book. Below, is the structure and high-level content of this book. What do you think? Continue reading
I cannot help it seeing the PMI huge focus in recent months on benefits realization and benefit management. It is like PMI discovered a way to go to Mars and back in one week. Continue reading
I have been using the PMBOK Guide since 1996 and I used the original consolidated version to prepare for the PMP in the days where there were no real exam prep books. I became a PMP in 1998 and since that time, I had been contributing to the updates of the guide. However, in recent years, I did not contribute much for many reasons. Continue reading
This will be a very short post and maybe more on the light side
Technically, in the new sixth edition of the PMBOK Guide, per the exposure draft, there are only four process groups not five.
Well – let us agree first on the definition of a group. Would you agree that a group of something (gadgets) means there is more than one gadget? At least two gadgets are necessary to form a group?
Do you agree?
If you agree – then back to PMBOK Guide.
The closing process groups consist currently of two processes (per the 5th edition). There is a close procurement process and close project or phase process. For some reason, the 6th edition combined these two processes. This subtle change results in having only ONE closing process. In that case – there closing process group consists of one process —– which means it is no longer a group.
Consequently, if the 6th edition kept this situation, then we will have four process groups and one closing process.
I hate to be an academic sometime – but unless for old-time sake we keep using the term “closing process group” then PMI needs to inform Webster or Oxford dictionary to change the definition of a “group” to means: a group is a collection of 2 or more ‘gadgets’ except for PMI it could be one. 🙂 🙂
Let us expand on the question: how to build a universal methodological approach, for managing projects that is flexible enough to adjust for project type, domain, classification, or a learning platform (international standard)?
First, let us include some definitions. Continue reading
Did some of the project management associations and organizations screw up the role of the project manager?
Are they (or some of them) making the role of the project manager as the jack-of-all-trades and the master of none?
Or, are some of these organizations confused about the role of the project manager and cannot make up their mind of what this role is about. Continue reading
This article was also published on Mr. Mounir Ajam personal blog site, because it is a personal opinion. It is a follow up to the previous post.
However, we decided to share it here as well although it is not a SUKAD blog article.