PMBOK Guide 7th Disaster Waiting to Happen?

Dear George
Thanks for your comment.

I am curious to know what was the answer they gave you

Will you share with us? Please

I sincerely hope that it is not a standard repeated message for everyone, that any computer would do it better

Dear Dave,

What do you expect your letter to achieve and what changes would you like PMI to make to the PMBOK Version 7 that would ease your worries.

Daire

Daire.

There were 5 key issues I raised in my letter to the PMI BoD. I believe if PMI were to fail to address these concerns, there would be a real threat to PMI’s credibility, membership numbers, certifications, ‘reputation’, and trust as a member association. This is not just a ‘global solutions/standards program’ issue. PMI would not exist were it not for its Body of Knowledge (BOK) and practitioners. Take the BOK away and PMI would be nothing; the BOK permeates and influences everything PMI does. Loss of credibility for the BOK will undermine and ultimately destroy the association.

The concerns with the recommended actions addressed in my letter include:
1. Inadequacies with the updated version of The Standard for Project Management
• Separate The Standard for Project Management and the PMBOK® Guide-Seventh Edition into 2 separate documents drafted specifically for their intended purpose. This would allow each document to stand on its own while staying aligned.
• Rewrite The Standard for Project Management as a succinct rather than textbook style document more in line with a Standard. The Standard can pull from the same general content as discussed in the Guide but would be written more as a summary of the content rather than a textbook discussion.
• Put missing standard-critical content contained in the Guide also in the Standard, i.e., high-level discussion on the ‘what’s and why’s’ for project life cycles, Project Delivery Principles application, performance domains, and tailoring

2. Inadequate explanation for how the Project Management Principles were developed for inclusion in The Standard for Project Management
• Add an appendix in the PMBOK® Guide-Seventh Edition (possibly titled “How the PM Delivery Principles Were Identified”) describing the research (PMI internal, external, market, business, or academic), literature reviews, and focus group analysis that:
o identified the Project Delivery Principles,
o evaluated how these principles match up or align with principles found and described in other published standards, disciplines, or professions, including general management,
o describes how these principles were vetted to substantiate the claim they are the 12 Project Delivery Principles, and
o describes what backs up these principles as having a broad consensus within the PM community.

3. Need for a second exposure draft review for The Standard for Project Management-Seventh Edition
• Rework the Standard as outlined in recommended action #1 and incorporate the changes for the adjudication decisions for the 5,000+ comments received from the first exposure draft. Then release a second exposure draft for The Standard for Project Management. This would provide a means of confirming whether the changes made truly address the concerns raised during the initial exposure draft

4. Need for a full exposure draft review for the entire PMBOK® Guide-Seventh Edition
• After The Standard for Project Management is stripped from the PMBOK® Guide so it can be a standalone document and chapters 1-3 reworked to better fit the purpose of the Guide, incorporate these chapters back into the Guide. Then conduct a full exposure draft for all 6 chapters of the PMBOK® Guide. This will attain wide public review and comment on the new Seventh Edition

5. Quality issues surfacing as a result of fast product development
• Accept that due to the concerns being raised and the lack of consensus around the updated Seventh Addition, the Q4-2020 planned release date is not feasible if a quality product is to be delivered. Refocus the effort to producing high quality, broad consensus documents and reevaluate the schedule needed to accomplish this outcome.

For time being I got a standard response "thank you for your concern, your message was forwarded to PMI staff that will respond within 5 business days". I'll keep you guys posted if I get any meaningful response.

Dear George,
Somethig like this happened in this forum some two years back.
A valuable member benefit "Books 24X7" which had some 250 e-books were moved to market place ostensibly based on user statistics. There were spririted discussions and some felt PMI was getting detracted from its core values. Nothing really happened except a terse statement from a PMI employee reiterating the management decision. Lets see what happens to your letter. Its not that decisions should be cast in indelible metal. Flexible approaches are always good.

Daire.

There were 5 key issues I raised in my letter to the PMI BoD. I believe if PMI were to fail to address these concerns, there would be a real threat to PMI’s credibility, membership numbers, certifications, ‘reputation’, and trust as a member association. This is not just a ‘global solutions/standards program’ issue. PMI would not exist were it not for its Body of Knowledge (BOK) and practitioners. Take the BOK away and PMI would be nothing; the BOK permeates and influences everything PMI does. Loss of credibility for the BOK will undermine and ultimately destroy the association.

The concerns with the recommended actions addressed in my letter include:
1. Inadequacies with the updated version of The Standard for Project Management
• Separate The Standard for Project Management and the PMBOK® Guide-Seventh Edition into 2 separate documents drafted specifically for their intended purpose. This would allow each document to stand on its own while staying aligned.
• Rewrite The Standard for Project Management as a succinct rather than textbook style document more in line with a Standard. The Standard can pull from the same general content as discussed in the Guide but would be written more as a summary of the content rather than a textbook discussion.
• Put missing standard-critical content contained in the Guide also in the Standard, i.e., high-level discussion on the ‘what’s and why’s’ for project life cycles, Project Delivery Principles application, performance domains, and tailoring

2. Inadequate explanation for how the Project Management Principles were developed for inclusion in The Standard for Project Management
• Add an appendix in the PMBOK® Guide-Seventh Edition (possibly titled “How the PM Delivery Principles Were Identified”) describing the research (PMI internal, external, market, business, or academic), literature reviews, and focus group analysis that:
o identified the Project Delivery Principles,
o evaluated how these principles match up or align with principles found and described in other published standards, disciplines, or professions, including general management,
o describes how these principles were vetted to substantiate the claim they are the 12 Project Delivery Principles, and
o describes what backs up these principles as having a broad consensus within the PM community.

3. Need for a second exposure draft review for The Standard for Project Management-Seventh Edition
• Rework the Standard as outlined in recommended action #1 and incorporate the changes for the adjudication decisions for the 5,000+ comments received from the first exposure draft. Then release a second exposure draft for The Standard for Project Management. This would provide a means of confirming whether the changes made truly address the concerns raised during the initial exposure draft

4. Need for a full exposure draft review for the entire PMBOK® Guide-Seventh Edition
• After The Standard for Project Management is stripped from the PMBOK® Guide so it can be a standalone document and chapters 1-3 reworked to better fit the purpose of the Guide, incorporate these chapters back into the Guide. Then conduct a full exposure draft for all 6 chapters of the PMBOK® Guide. This will attain wide public review and comment on the new Seventh Edition

5. Quality issues surfacing as a result of fast product development
• Accept that due to the concerns being raised and the lack of consensus around the updated Seventh Addition, the Q4-2020 planned release date is not feasible if a quality product is to be delivered. Refocus the effort to producing high quality, broad consensus documents and reevaluate the schedule needed to accomplish this outcome.

Too doughty to be dimissed easily.

If we are going to ask PMI to be more agile with their publications, we need to also accept its implications.

We should be involved in multiple iterations of the exposure drafts, or release candidates. At one point, one of the candidates will be published. It will not be perfect but it will deliver needed value.