I’ve been trying to bring some definition to what a seasoned, professional project manager does differently than somebody who is just starting out. I’m thinking in terms of why one PM would be worth more money than another. I’ve looked at the PMI Project Manager Competency Development Framework. There is a lot of good detail in it, but it’s more than most want to try to absorb. So, the analogy I’m using to make it easier is this: many of us are able to go outside and play a sport (soccer, baseball, etc.). However, that does not mean most of us could win against a professional sports team. We are both playing the same game, but the game is played at a much higher level on the professional team. I’d like to gather some perspectives from this forum on what you see as the differences when doing project management at that higher, professional level. Here are some examples of key differences that I am focusing on that apply to the sports analogy as well as project management:
1) Training is far more intense at the pro level, they thoroughly know the fundamentals of the game and constantly add to those skills
2) A pro brings a lot of on-the-field experience,
3) A professional can read the field better and anticipate changes better,
4) A professional team has a playbook to follow,
5) A professional knows when to adapt the play to conditions on the field,
6) A professional knows how to operate within a team,
7) etc, etc
Again, the above are just examples. My real list is growing every time I think about it. Please let me know what comes to mind when you read this list and help me add to it.
Saving Changes...
Sort By:
Ian WhittinghamManaging Director| Calixo ConsultingGolden Cross, East Sussex, United Kingdom
An interesting list of analogies, Rich. A couple more observations: (1) pro's adapt more easily to unexpected plays and quickly learn and incorporate new ones into their own style of play; (2) pro's can assimilate and handle complexity with more dexterity than beginners or amateurs. If I think of any more I'll post here. This article might also help you think of other relevant differences http://www.gantthead.com/content/articles/237349.cfm Saving Changes...
Anonymous
Interesting article... which perhaps brings up another another difference
- a pro undertands and takes advantage of the guidance of a coach Saving Changes...
George JucanManaging Partner| Organizational Perfomance Enablers NetworkWoodbridge, Ontario, Canada
Hi Rich,
I do not think that we can define such a clear cut between amateurs and professionals in project management, but really we have a progression with multiple levels on the scale. If as a community (to not use profession) we could define some objective levels in project management, then each company can decide where to draw the line where the “senior” or “professional” project manger starts.
Project Manager Competency Development Framework (PMCDF) that you referenced does not treat various “levels” of PMs – we had many discussions regarding “levels” for project managers but decided to stay (at least for this edition) with the “PMP level” project manager where we had solid research data for what the business environment (various companies around the world) considers to be a “competent” project manager. However, this is a very hot topic in the PM communities and I’m really glad you opened a discussion thread for it.
I know you’re familiar with my series on a similar topic Defining Roles for IT Governance, where in parts 2 and 3 I describe the Project Manager and the Senior Project Manager, so I will not reiterate the same here, but continue the discussion using your analogy.
The way I see it, everybody can do something (playing a sport for example), some are good at it (the interpretation of “good” would probably define levels) and some make it their life (the professionals). Now, between “good” and “professional” there is no automatic relationship: most professionals are good, but one can be good without being a professional and one can be a professional without being good. And to illustrate this I’ll also use an analogy.
I watch sometimes the events on World Poker Tour for Texas Hold’Em. Most of the time at the final table there are professional players that only play cards for a living. However, quite often you can see at the final table “amateurs” that have a regular job and play for fun making it through the hundreds of players starting the first day – which means they eliminated in the process many other “professionals” and probably make in a single event more money that some of these “professionals” will make their entire career.
In project management as well, I’ve seen “senior” project managers with 20 years of experience struggling through simple projects, and also “kids” with less then 5 years in the field successfully managing difficult projects. However, these “kids” may or may not be able to repeat the next time. So I think that the most important characteristic of a “professional” is the ability to consistently achieve success, which can also be expressed as the ability to maintain a consistent performance level – and this I think it’s valid in project management as well as in sports. The others (training, experience, playbooks etc) are only enablers of a consistent performance level, or tools to get there.
Saving Changes...
Ian WhittinghamManaging Director| Calixo ConsultingGolden Cross, East Sussex, United Kingdom
Examples of amateurs trumping professionals (or experts) abound. The ancient Mycenean script known as Linear B was successfully decoded by an amateur linguist, Michael Ventris, in 1951 after professional linguists had failed to crack it. Ventris was an architect by training. What lies behind the success of Ventris and other amateurs is that they very often have much higher levels of motivation and engagement with their chosen subjects than do professionals. Which is why they are often more successful in solving the problems that interest them than do professionals who are paid to do so. In the corporate world, this phenomenon can also occur in the guise of an 'accidental' project manager, someone who either assumes the PM role as a result of happenstance or is driven to take control in order to achieve objectives they strongly believe in. Saving Changes...
Anonymous
That's why I like this forum... different perspectives. The Pro vs Amateur is certainly another path for discussion, but one that I had not anticipated. Those terms mean too many things to too many people. I'm really more interested in what defines good, better and best... the "levels" that George brought up. Saving Changes...
Don KimPROJECT-TO-PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT EXPERT| Seeking opportunitiesSacramento, CA, United States
I think all things being equal, a general way to delineate between an amateur and a professional is that an amateur does something for free, whereas a professional gets paid to do something.
Therefore, in this example, we could say a person who manages charity projects for the Salvation Army on weekends freely as a volunteer could be considered an "amateur" PM in this capacity. But when this person does his/her work as a sr. IT project manager for a Fortune 500 company during the week, then in this capacity s/he is a professional.
On the other hand, if you use the term in a more pejorative way such as saying "s/he is an amateur", to put down his/her project management capabilities, then it gets into the difficult area of what constitutes such amateurish performance.
Some people can exhibit such poor performance, that it is easy to get general consensus about their poor abilities. Likewise, if someone displays superior PM skills, you can also get general consensus about their great abilities.
Its all the stuff in between that's harder to quantify and qualify. For example, some PMs can exhibit great technical skills, such as building out very detailed and systematic WBS, adeptness at scheduling tasks, accurately calculating the CPM, be highly knowledgeable and competent in the technical nuances of the project deliverables, etc., but can be notoriously bad at people skills, negotiation, communication, etc. This can go the other way as well.
So I guess in this regard, a real "professional" project manager is one who is paid, and has both superior technical and people skills that is applied consistently, efficiently, and effectively in his/her day to day work.
George JucanManaging Partner| Organizational Perfomance Enablers NetworkWoodbridge, Ontario, Canada
Hi Rich,
Back to the original topic, and exploring a bit more the concept of defining “levels” of PMs, I will briefly highlight / rephrase some concepts form PMI’s PMCDF. Let’s think for a minute at the 3 dimensions part of PMI’s definition of a “competent” project manger:
- 10 knowledge areas (the project manager knows)
- 5 performance units (the project manager applies the knowledge)
- 6 personal competency units (how the project manager behaves)
For each axis one can perform a personal assessment as described in Chapter 4 of PMCDF, effectively assigning a scale for each dimension and measuring the elements and criteria fulfillment by a PM, thus scoring and placing it on the scale for each dimension. Between a “junior” project manager (low scores) and a “competent” project manager (top of the scale on each dimension) there could me multiple “levels” of project managers.
To define these scales it’s an entire philosophical debate: thinking at the 3 axes as a radar type graph, is the area covered enough to define the levels? That is, could someone pass the “junior” level being strong in one area but very low on the others – e.g. knowing all the theory but not being able to apply it in real life or not being able to work with people? Or there should be some minimum scores for each axis to define the “levels” My take on it is that is a decision that rests with each company or individual applying the model, as at this time it would be pretty tough to get universal agreement to set a standard (defined as applicable “in most cases, most of the time”).
If it was difficult from junior to competent, going above it in the “expert” area becomes even more so. Does an expert need to have increased score on all axis or simply “competent” level and a spike on one direction? In fact, does an expert need increased “expertise” in all knowledge areas of just in one area? And in such case, how do you compare an “expert” in scope management with an expert in “stakeholders’ management” or in “negotiation”?
The fundamental problem is that PM levels are in most cases a subjective assessment of the surrounding community – one is a senior project manager if people around him/her treat that person as a “senior”. In my opinion it is very similar with “project success” – we objectively define it as being in time, within budget and delivering full scope, but we all know that a project is only as successful as its stakeholders consider it to be. I’ve seen projects completed in time, under budget and delivering everything promised and more, but the clients were absolutely not happy and that project manager had to leave the company because nobody would accept to work with him again. And I also saw project delivered late and over budget but everyone treating it as an outstanding success.
I guess that all we can hope is to continue the discussions to arrive to an objective definition for project manager “levels” the same as we did for time/budget/scope for project success, while recognizing that the subjective assessment will always be there when applying the objective definition to “real life”
Saving Changes...
Selva Saravana PuvananthiranDelivery Lead Senior Manager| Accenture Solutions Private LimitedChennai, Tamil Nadu, India
The way I look at a project manager is as a good leader and a good delegator.
Like George mentioned, one PM can be an expert in one area, for example, negotiation but not good in assessing risks. In that situation, if you have someone in your project team who can do that based on the information provided for that situation, then the PM should utilize that person. After all, a project execution is a team work. The success of a PM and hence the project always depend on the project team.
IMHO, in brief, a PM, who can recognize and utilize every team members' strengths towards the successful execution of the project, is really a comptent PM.
"More than any time in history mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness, the other to total extinction. Let us pray that we have the wisdom to choose correctly."
