Comments on: What’s Up with PMI?

by: Paul D. Giammalvo

Sat, 22 Jul 2006 12:05:12 +0000

Unfortunately, PMI’s “methodology” (they claim is is not one, despite all the incomprehensible flow charts) is nearly worthless the way they have it set up. In trying to be “all things to all sectors” they have lost all the niggly little details that make any methodology work. For years I have railed against the compromises PMI made by eliminating safety, health and the environment from the processes.

If you get the chance, check out the work of John Sterman, over at MIT’s Sloan School or check out the Santa Fe Institute www.santafeinstitute.edu. Another important source of “reforming” project management, Google on “soft systems engineering”, or visit the International Council of Systems Engineering website www.incose.org.

In a recent ENR article, they highlighted the future modeling will play using 3D Cad and simulation, and I honestly believe that will be the way of the very near future. And what better way to facilitate communications than by doing something in a simulator before actually doing it real time?

Paul D. Giammalvo, Jakarta, INDONESIA

by: Tom Welch

Wed, 05 Oct 2005 22:28:57 +0000

In most IT organizations, if the PM speaks up for his or her team, they better have their resume updated and ready to distribute.

by: Phil Rutherford

Sat, 01 Oct 2005 01:17:26 +0000

Hal,
PMI seem to have finally cottoned on to the fact that the PMBoK, by itself, is just a book - but applying what is written in the book is more than just, well, applying what is in the book. My research over the past ten years has shown that to apply the lessons of the PMBoK means taking on a whole new order of skills and knowledge, all of which center on the common denominators of communications and interrelationships.

My research continues to show that we’re entering a new order of project management. For over three thousand years, up until the 90s, we had plenty of communicating but little by way of common methodology. Throughout the 90s we had plenty of methodology but little communicating. Now we’re learning that putting the two together is the only way in which real project success can be achieved.

Phil Rutherford
Assessment and Certifications Manager
AIPM

by: Hal

Fri, 30 Sep 2005 18:49:21 +0000

Great points Amy. Recently I’ve been encouraged by the reaction the construction community has to the understanding of project as a network of commitments. There were numerous references to it throughout the presentations last week at the LCI Congress along with good audience comments about it.

by: Amy Schwab

Fri, 30 Sep 2005 15:19:52 +0000

Hal, It’s nice to see PMI finally talking about the really important aspect of communications. It appears though that the focus stays on the project manager as giver of all key information and protector of the project. As long as PMs are continually told that they could 1) have all of the relevant information and 2) be individually responsible for each person doing their job, it won’t do much to improve the state of affairs.

When PMI, (or wait, we could each do this ourselves), starts talking about the PM as the person who is responsible for creating situations where the really important conversations take place, real agreements (promises) are negotiated, and a robust network of communication filled relationships are nurtured, then I’ll feel like there has been a revolution that make the difference that will make a real difference.

Thank goodness we don’t have to wait for PMI for us to shift our projects ourselves.

by: Diana Hutchinson

Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:54:29 +0000

Hal,
I think a lot about the benefits of producing a “network of commitment” for a project. One of these days I hope we’ll see you as guest speaker for our local PMI chapter…

by: Dennis J. Cohen

Fri, 30 Sep 2005 13:17:34 +0000

PMI’s focus on the human side of project management ebbs and flows, but it never seems to become more than subtext. To treat communication as a centel process to create a network of committment would force PMI to rethink it heavy emphasis on process rather than people Robert J. Graham focused on people and relationships in the early 90’s in his classic book, Project Management As If People Mattered, but it was alwas treated as a minor theme. Even at this time research clearly showed that the human factors were the most important for project success.