PMI Audits may be random, but are they fair?

“One day I will write at more length about this experience...”

lol :D

Thanks Najam, fingers crossed.

Thanks Riyadh :-)

My PMP application didn't mention Agile and the experience I used was taken from several years ago. My PMI-ACP application was fine and had more than enough Agile experience and there was more that I could have used. I don't think the system parses through the application text and then an alert is raised. According to them, it's a completely random audit. Antagonism may occur if I was audited three out of three times; something I will probably be testing in the future. I think the odds of fair and just audits after 3 strikes would probably cause anyone to have a drop in advocacy. Regarding supervised chats and affecting exam results, I have never been shy to speak my mind and never will be.

Sante, I know you are a brave man, I was just worried about you because we here care for you and I'm glad you didn't mind it.
I see the point of Bruce Garrod is very valid and it definitely has impact on audit. If you look back at both application you might have used same style and wording which trigger the audit, may be in future change wording on your third application.

Hi Karl, a similar thing happened to me on the PMP exam audit. And yes, using the terms PMI uses in the exam content handbook helped me as my original application used generic terms, and that seemed to do the trick. Although it was a hassle chasing two references from two different countries. I would be very interested if you (like me) get audited a third time, as this will be in my opinion way over the top and I will definitely be writing about it. So please keep me updated on that.

That's Interesting. I applied for the PMP some 6 years ago. I can't remember how I phrased my application, but I probably opted for the specific descriptive over a generic description. This might be how the artificial intelligence is programmed - if there is any at all. Though, without any information from PMI on how the audit is triggered, it's hard to make a judgement. I can't see the PMI releasing any information about how an audit is triggered as this would be a shot in their own foot. They need to protect their image and product. If I was in their shoes I would also audit anybody attempting to switch certifications. I should have seen it coming. In any case, I found the audit process rather flimsy. I wonder if the process will ever change.

But I shall follow your suggestion if I ever decide to take out another certification. Generic. PMBOK terms. Cheers!

Bruce I believe in your points the wording of application definitely has impact on the audit, it must be stated according to PMBOK guide.

This is true Bruce, about using PMBOK terms. I found that using the language and terminology in the Exam Content Outline is the key. When I use my own words to mean the same thing, my PMP didn't pass. As soon as I used the terms in the exam content outline, it passed. Still my issue isn't the audit process, it's the "randomness" of selected someone twice or more than twice.

Hi Riyadh. I appreciate your words. Actually this audit I did the exact opposite, because I learned from the first audit. My wording couldn't have been crafted any better, highlighting my Agile project experience whil ensuring to use the terminology as per the Exam content outline, and still I got audited. The crazy thing is they also requested proof of my REP training course, when PMI has already awarded my 21 PDUs using the same course previously.