PM World Today Letters To The Editor
Letters to the Editor are comments on the Editorials, Viewpoints column or other project management notices that appear in issues of the Project Management World Today.
Monday, January 17, 2005
Comment: State of the Art of Project Management: 2003
Wednesday, January 12, 2005
State of the Art of Project Management: 2003, Part 3 by Russ Archibald
http://www.pmforum.org/library/papers/2004/0506papers.htm#02
Russ
In your paper, you quoted some very interesting numbers about the proliferation of REP's. Last update I had from PMI showed over 1,000. IF you plot the growth of the number of REP's against the growth of PMP's you will see a very disturbing trend- The growth of REP's far exceeds that of the number of PMP's. Even making the assumption that not all REP's train for the PMP Exam, the argument can certainly be made that the growth of REP's exceeding that of the number of people taking PM Training is NOT a sustainable situation. Interesting to note that in this same issue, Tom Osenton of "Death of Demand" fame has weighed in as well.
Bottom line- PMI needs to become yet more stringent on the criteria for REP's AND it would be far better if PMI were to get out of the training business. For a not-for-profit organization to be using their tax exempt status to compete against members who provide this kind of training for a living is questionable at best.
Paul Giammalvo
State of the Art of Project Management: 2003, Part 3 by Russ Archibald
http://www.pmforum.org/library/papers/2004/0506papers.htm#02
Russ
In your paper, you quoted some very interesting numbers about the proliferation of REP's. Last update I had from PMI showed over 1,000. IF you plot the growth of the number of REP's against the growth of PMP's you will see a very disturbing trend- The growth of REP's far exceeds that of the number of PMP's. Even making the assumption that not all REP's train for the PMP Exam, the argument can certainly be made that the growth of REP's exceeding that of the number of people taking PM Training is NOT a sustainable situation. Interesting to note that in this same issue, Tom Osenton of "Death of Demand" fame has weighed in as well.
Bottom line- PMI needs to become yet more stringent on the criteria for REP's AND it would be far better if PMI were to get out of the training business. For a not-for-profit organization to be using their tax exempt status to compete against members who provide this kind of training for a living is questionable at best.
Paul Giammalvo
Sunday, January 09, 2005
John Schlicter Comments on David Pells Editorial On Alternative PM Futures
David Pells,
You write this month about alternative futures for project management, (Alternative Futures for Project Management http://www.pmforum.org/editorials/2005/bmipmaf.htm ) specifically calling out psychology, organization development, and social engineering.
Sociologist Richard Scott has commented that more so than other types of collective actors, the professions exercise control by defining social reality - by devising ontological frameworks, proposing distinctions, creating typifications, and fabricating principles or guidelines for action. This is, in fact, what PMI has done (and principally what it does).
I also quite agree with you and others that an exciting area of study is how project management occurs and enables organizations seen as complex adaptive systems. We can examine this on a large scale (for example on the scale of nation-state, as seen in "Heterarchy: Distributing Authority and Organizing Diversity" by Stark, David, in John Clippinger III, ed. The Biology of Business: Decoding the Natural Laws of Enterprise, Jossey-Bass, 1999) or in relatively smaller scales (for example on the scale of military operations, as described in "Swarming and the Future of Conflict," written by John Arquilla and David Ronfeldtfor the US Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense, within the International Security and Defense Policy Center of RAND's National Defense Research Institute), and in Paper 1999-01-5538 "Shared Plans and Situations As a Basis for Collaborative Decision Making in Air Operations" written by Norman Geddes and Carl Lizza for the 1999 World Aviation Conference).
One should also note the current work of Kathleen Carley at Carnegie Melon University (e.g. see her "Adaptive Organizations and Emergent Forms"). What's missing in all of this is a short, perspicacious, and compelling explanation (or even description) of project management's role as a smaller complex adaptive system within larger complex adpative systems that we call enterprises or sub-organizations of an enterprise. Precisely, projects deliver the change that is part and parcel to complex adaptive systems. If you or someone else is starting up some solid research in this area, count me in.
Regards,
John Schlichter
http://www.opmexperts.com
You write this month about alternative futures for project management, (Alternative Futures for Project Management http://www.pmforum.org/editorials/2005/bmipmaf.htm ) specifically calling out psychology, organization development, and social engineering.
Sociologist Richard Scott has commented that more so than other types of collective actors, the professions exercise control by defining social reality - by devising ontological frameworks, proposing distinctions, creating typifications, and fabricating principles or guidelines for action. This is, in fact, what PMI has done (and principally what it does).
I also quite agree with you and others that an exciting area of study is how project management occurs and enables organizations seen as complex adaptive systems. We can examine this on a large scale (for example on the scale of nation-state, as seen in "Heterarchy: Distributing Authority and Organizing Diversity" by Stark, David, in John Clippinger III, ed. The Biology of Business: Decoding the Natural Laws of Enterprise, Jossey-Bass, 1999) or in relatively smaller scales (for example on the scale of military operations, as described in "Swarming and the Future of Conflict," written by John Arquilla and David Ronfeldtfor the US Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense, within the International Security and Defense Policy Center of RAND's National Defense Research Institute), and in Paper 1999-01-5538 "Shared Plans and Situations As a Basis for Collaborative Decision Making in Air Operations" written by Norman Geddes and Carl Lizza for the 1999 World Aviation Conference).
One should also note the current work of Kathleen Carley at Carnegie Melon University (e.g. see her "Adaptive Organizations and Emergent Forms"). What's missing in all of this is a short, perspicacious, and compelling explanation (or even description) of project management's role as a smaller complex adaptive system within larger complex adpative systems that we call enterprises or sub-organizations of an enterprise. Precisely, projects deliver the change that is part and parcel to complex adaptive systems. If you or someone else is starting up some solid research in this area, count me in.
Regards,
John Schlichter
http://www.opmexperts.com
Archives: September 2002 October 2002 December 2002 January 2003 February 2003 March 2003 April 2003 May 2003 June 2003 September 2003 October 2003 November 2003 December 2003 January 2004 February 2004 April 2004 July 2004 September 2004 January 2005 July 2005 August 2005 February 2006 March 2006
