PMBOK Guide 7th Disaster Waiting to Happen?

George -

Given the decision to fully rewrite the Guide and the radical shift from a process-centric to a principles-centric model, I doubt a fully democratic, consensus-based approach would have yielded something good in a reasonable timeframe. Previous editions were incremental evolutions - this is a revolution.

The sections which I reviewed as part of Review Team 1 were encouraging so I'm inclined to be optimistic.

Kiron

A "standard" is not a revolutionary work - thought leaders spearhead revolutions through articles, books and speeches, convincing people to adopt innovative ideas and practices. Eventually more and more people adopt them until they become "standard".

There is no standard out there because someone wants it to be a standard - it only becomes so if accepted and followed by the vast majority.

The "standard" as exposed - because is not anchored in widely accepted practices - is simply a book in project management the same as hundreds other out there.

And last thought: I really don't think that we, as project management practitioners, should cut corners for expediency. If we do that in real life with our projects we know how they'll turn out to be - and if we know it's wrong, why would we do this with the standard that guides our activity?

Luis, thanks for posting this very productive question.

One of the reasons PMI's standards and guides has greater credibility than competing organizations is the appearance (at least) of greater consultation with practitioners and academics in the production of those standards and guides. Unfortunately, Phil's video along with many of the comments I have read here and elsewhere, suggests that PMI's stakeholder management has not met the expectations of some community members. However, we need to acknowledge that the comment period for the exposure draft is intended to allow stakeholders - like Phil - to weigh in.

Phil has a problem not only with the process, but with the product - the Draft Standard. Having worked with the PMBOK since the second edition, I have proudly paraded the sixth edition through my university and executive education classes as a volume worthy of study, even as I pointed out the weaknesses regarding leadership and people issues. I suspect that in the near-term, in my university lecturer and project management coach roles, I will continue to use PMBOK v6 as the expert guide to project management processes, and add PMBOK v7 as a second reference volume.

Craig.

Dear George
Thank you for participating in this reflection and for your opinion

Do you really believe that we will be able to change the approach?
From Principles to Processes?

I agree. It is in the right place that we can (and should) give our opinion
This community, ProjectManagement.com is not that location?

Luis,

I think there is a valid point in the video. I just completed an audit, where I could consider PMBOK 5ed has a reference in project management. The direction that was taken in rev 6 and now 7th, may push another standard up such as PRINCE2.

For those that are new to PRINCE2 an abbreviation for "PRojects IN Controlled Environments".

We will see in time, once it is released if it is not too late. If PMBOK can't use as a reference it will lose ground.

Is PMI leaving for others the opportunity to become a standard?

Let's hope

Dear Kiron
Was the community interested in this "revolution"?

Isn't the DA and Flex package enough?

Dear Vincent
Thank you for participating in this reflection and for your opinion

The PMBOK Guide is a standard, a reference in the world of Project Management

Is there any reason to go after PRINCE2?

Or is the reciprocal the true one?