Pam YoungBusiness Development Executive| IBMDanbury, Ct, United States
What happened to transparency and stakeholder input?
...
2 replies by Antonio Amaral and Stéphane Parent
Oct 20, 2019 3:32 PM
Antonio Amaral
...
I'm sure some of those inventive icons stand for those principles, so there. :D
Oct 24, 2019 12:28 PM
Stéphane Parent
...
PMI did engage members of its community to pariticpate and share in the rebranding experience.
In hindsight, I wonder if their choice of members, based on their previous contribution, could have skewed the perspective? I suspect a lot of the high-contribution members represent a very specific slice of the total membership.
Of course, you would expect them to voice their opinions but would they be a fair representation of the whole?
What happened to transparency and stakeholder input?
I'm sure some of those inventive icons stand for those principles, so there. :D Saving Changes...
Doug OatesStrategic Technology Officer| Colorado State PatrolLakewood, CO, United States
This seems to detract from continuity and strong brand image identification the PMI has invested in for many years. "Rebranding" is often an excuse for not tending to what is "under the hood." I hope there is a well advertised survey to all members giving us a chance VOTE to return to the previous logo. On a subjective opinion, the multi colors and fonts seem low rent and far less mature looking than the previous logo. Just announcing this in PM Insight a few months ahead doesn't seem sufficient for the significance of this change. Saving Changes...
Good insights either way, regardless which opinion you carry. Saving Changes...
Mateus FigueiraHead of HR Projects and Planning| Boehringer IngelheimMilano, Milano, Italy
Change is good. Always? Not sure. I liked the older one better, it was more serious and representative. I wish this was discussed/better communicated with the members beforehand. Saving Changes...
Stéphane ParentSelf Employed / Semi-retired| Leader MakerPrince Edward Island, Canada
Oct 20, 2019 2:58 PM
Replying to Pam Young
...
What happened to transparency and stakeholder input?
PMI did engage members of its community to pariticpate and share in the rebranding experience.
In hindsight, I wonder if their choice of members, based on their previous contribution, could have skewed the perspective? I suspect a lot of the high-contribution members represent a very specific slice of the total membership.
Of course, you would expect them to voice their opinions but would they be a fair representation of the whole?
...
2 replies by Jackson Bruno and Kiron Bondale
Oct 25, 2019 12:00 AM
Jackson Bruno
...
I think the engagement was way too limited, a brand change like this requires broad consultation from the membership.
Looking from the outside I can see several areas with severe shortcomings:
- Communications
- Engagement
- Change Management
- Alignment between Global and Chapters
- PLANNING!!!!!
To me the WORST offender is Change Management, PMI failed to create awareness, desire and knowledge...
although Planning is another hot topic!
it's honestly frustrating...in and out.
BUT worst of all....I read the article from Cindy and she thinks the problem is that WE ARE FAILING to embrace change!! OMG!...
Oct 25, 2019 6:23 AM
Kiron Bondale
...
Stéphane -
For something like a brand refresh, I can imagine getting a statistically representative sample would be very challenging as it strikes at emotions more than industry alignment, age or geographic location.
What I can say is that the folks who were invited (myself included) were very candid with their feedback and for every person who was fully on board with a proposed change, there was at least one who was vehemently opposed to it.
However, all of us had been informed up front what our role was - it was not to change the course of the exercise but to be aware of it and to provide PMI's team with pilot group feedback and to be equipped to act as brand ambassadors.
Kiron
Saving Changes...
Jackson BrunoSenior Business Consultant| ConsultingWinnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Oct 24, 2019 12:28 PM
Replying to Stéphane Parent
...
PMI did engage members of its community to pariticpate and share in the rebranding experience.
In hindsight, I wonder if their choice of members, based on their previous contribution, could have skewed the perspective? I suspect a lot of the high-contribution members represent a very specific slice of the total membership.
Of course, you would expect them to voice their opinions but would they be a fair representation of the whole?
I think the engagement was way too limited, a brand change like this requires broad consultation from the membership.
Looking from the outside I can see several areas with severe shortcomings:
- Communications
- Engagement
- Change Management
- Alignment between Global and Chapters
- PLANNING!!!!!
To me the WORST offender is Change Management, PMI failed to create awareness, desire and knowledge...
although Planning is another hot topic!
it's honestly frustrating...in and out.
BUT worst of all....I read the article from Cindy and she thinks the problem is that WE ARE FAILING to embrace change!! OMG!...
...
1 reply by Stéphane Parent
Oct 25, 2019 8:09 AM
Stéphane Parent
...
I see it more as a stakeholder management decision, Jackson.
Based on Kiron's answer, I suspect the stakeholder register probably had recalcitrant members identified. The decision was probably made that little could be done to switch their support to even just neutral.
Saving Changes...
Karl TwortSenior Project Manager| Fresh EggUnited Kingdom
PMI did engage members of its community to pariticpate and share in the rebranding experience.
In hindsight, I wonder if their choice of members, based on their previous contribution, could have skewed the perspective? I suspect a lot of the high-contribution members represent a very specific slice of the total membership.
Of course, you would expect them to voice their opinions but would they be a fair representation of the whole?
Stéphane -
For something like a brand refresh, I can imagine getting a statistically representative sample would be very challenging as it strikes at emotions more than industry alignment, age or geographic location.
What I can say is that the folks who were invited (myself included) were very candid with their feedback and for every person who was fully on board with a proposed change, there was at least one who was vehemently opposed to it.
However, all of us had been informed up front what our role was - it was not to change the course of the exercise but to be aware of it and to provide PMI's team with pilot group feedback and to be equipped to act as brand ambassadors.
Kiron
...
1 reply by Stéphane Parent
Oct 25, 2019 7:57 AM
Stéphane Parent
...
It makes it sound like PMI was more interested in contingency, rather than mitigation, planning.
