PMBOK Guide 7th Disaster Waiting to Happen?

Great question, Luis, I would change it slightly to

Was the market interested in this "revolution"? Or is it.

A 2019 study of PwC found that of 100% value created by projects in UK, only 5% came from IT, which is the bastion of agile. Construction, services, government, healthcare all have more than 10%. IT is characterized by small projects and many people looking for help in making ideas a reality, so the voice is loud. So is it about democracy or value creation?

Yes, we live in an age of increasing speed of change. We have yet to find an answer how to deal with it. In the moment it is 'whatever works'.

Hello Daire,

the statistic is about value created, not cost spent.

Why do you think IT is most efficient? Not sure if IPA or Glaxo agree with your assessment.

Dear Luis,

I am a little surprised that contributors to your question do not bear in mind such aspects as evolution of processes, increase awareness of project management, huge leaps in technology in that last decade, greater desire for efficiency, higher skilled workforce, new trends, new horizons and opportunities and consolidation and rationalization in global markets and business when they approach discussing the topic of PMBOK Version 7.

The PMBOK has greatly evolved over the years in keeping with what is happening in the workplace NOT what is happening in the classroom.

It seems that a lot of people want to get their foot in, leave a mark and contribute very little in relation to PMBOK. I have noticed that the seasoned project managers who have delivered numerous projects over the last decades are not perturbed by PMBOK as they see it as a reference and guide to their already expansive practical knowledge to project managers.

The project managers who seem to have a problem with PMBOK V7 are the ones who are using the standard and framework as their centerpiece for their experience and training in project management.

As a result they feel the need to complain now just in case things don't 'go right for them' in the project management world and then they can all blame the big change in PMBOK from Version 6 to PMBOK version 7 as causing all the problems.

If this is their strategy then they are going to find operating in project management world using all the knowledge from a book a challenge.

There is no substitute for real world experience and before people knock it they should a least know the content and context before commenting.

Daire

Some state that PMI should have put the full PMBoK ed7 draft for review and not just 'the standard'.

Fact is, it always was only 'the standard' as exposure draft, since this step is required for standards to be accepted by ANSI. Just checked the exposure draft of ed6: it had 24 pages.

Actually Thomas there were 2 exposure drafts with the Sixth Edition update. One for The Standard of Project Management and the other for the PMBOK(R) Guide - Sixth Edition.

At the time PMI was attempting to speed up the process for developing standards and guides. You are correct that the ANSI process requires a full exposure draft for Standards. This does not extend to Guides. However, with the Sixth Edition update when PMI was considering they would only expose the Standard, the PMI Board felt this change would be too large and insisted that bot documents go through exposure draft. The released the Standard first, then the Guide later. There were many comments against the Standard asking what happened to the Knowledge Areas, the Tools & Techniques, the front chapters, etc. The Standard does not contain this content. From these comments you can see the PM community expected to see the PMBOK(R) Guide, not just the Standard. This problem has been around since the Third Edition because everyone was thinking the entire PMBOK(R) Guide was the Standard. It is not and never has been since the Third Edition.

This whole point is one point that is distressing me. With PMI going back to making the Standard the first three chapters in the Guide, they will be regressing back to the old problem of people confusing The Standard for Project Management with the PMBOK(R) Guide. With the Sixth Edition they finally broke that paradigm.

It is sort of like the debate over process groups. Ever since they were first formulated with the 1996 Edition of the PMBOK(R) Guide they have constantly promoted that the process groups are NOT a life cycle. Just look at the amount of text in each subsequent edition devoted to explaining process groups are not life cycles. The PM community still thinks the opposite.

Daire, your generalization "The project managers who seem to have a problem with PMBOK V7 are the ones who are using the standard and framework as their centerpiece for their experience and training in project management." is either very simplistic or offensive for those that dare to raise their voice against a move imposed from PMI offices.

I do not have a training business, I'm a practitioner that delivered successful programs of over 100M in IT - my experience is in the field, not in the classroom. I also dedicate my time to contributing back to the profession - including participating in standards development (just open any PMBOK written this century and you'll find my name in the appendix).

And I also have a problem with the new Standard as exposed for public comments - and not with PMBOK 7 as the actual Guide was not even exposed for comments.

Comments about the topic of discussion are welcome, but attacking people because they have a different opinion is unprofessional - and against PMI's own Code of Ethics.