Project Management Guru - Vicki Wrona on PMI Standard and Exam Changes Announced - Novemeber 13, 2008
In case you have not received word, yet, there are exciting things happening within the PMI world (http://www.pmi.org/).
First, four new standards will be available to the public in late December. They are:
· PMBOK® Guide - 4th edition (Project Management Body of Knowledge)
· OPM3® - 2nd edition (Organizational Project Management Maturity Model)
· The Standard for Program Management – 2nd edition
· The Standard for Portfolio Management – 2nd edition
By updating and introducing these simultaneously, care was taken to coordinate information across all standards and to consistently apply terminology used across the volumes.
Second, PMI has announced new exam dates along with some changes from the way the transition from one version to the next was handled in the past.
The exam date changes are as follows:
· PMP (Project Management Professional) June 30, 2009
· CAPM (Certified Associate in Project Management) July 31, 2009
· PMI-SP (Scheduling Professional) August 31, 2009
· PMI-RMP (Risk Management Professional) August 31, 2009
· PgMP (Program Management Professional) August 31, 2009
One change from previous years is that PMI will not grandfather, allowing people to take the old exam for a set period of time after the cutover date. This time, only the current exam will be available once the exam change date has passed. This means that if someone needs to retake the exam after cutover because they did not pass, or if they need time to complete an audit which goes beyond the cutover date, that person cannot take the older version exam but has to take the newer exam.
This is significant. Last time PMI updated the PMBOK® Guide to the 3rd edition, some high-demand cities experienced exam centers that were sold out for months prior to the final ‘old’ exam offering. Many people counted on and used the extension time. This time, that is not an option. This means that proper planning is key to ensuring enough time to get an application accepted, pass a possible audit, and allow for possible retakes. I wouldn’t wait until the last minute.
Another factor to remember is that many people have submitted applications and been accepted by PMI but have procrastinated on taking the exam. They could potentially flood the testing centers as the cutover date (or the one-year anniversary of their application) draws near. This could make it more difficult to schedule the exam in time and potentially when you want.
Good luck to you whenever you choose to take one of the exams! A future posting will list the changes from the 3rd edition PMBOK® Guide to the new 4th edition.
Vicki Wrona, PMP®is the founder and President of Forward Momentum, LLC, an 8(a) consulting and training company found at http://www.forwardmomentum.net/. She has been managing projects and mentoring project managers for the past 20 years in both the private and public sectors. She developed Global Knowledge’s PMP® Exam Prep Boot Camp class, part of the program that won PMI’s ® Professional Development Product of the Year Award in 2007. She served on PMI’s® PMBOK® Guide 4th edition creation and review team. She can be reached at vwrona@forwardmomentum.net.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Press Alert Global Knowledge -Cary, North Carolina – Nov 13 2008 - $1000 Off Business Training – Hot Seats
Cary, North Carolina – Press Alert, Nov 13,008
Business Training including PMP and ITIL from Global Knowledge the World Leader in Business Training - Save $1000 with the Hot Seats Program
Global Knowledge, the worldwide leader in ITIL, Project Management and Business Training, today announced the immediate availability of “Hot Seats”. Students can save $1,000 on Business Training such as ITIL and Project Management with the Hot Seats program. “Hot Seats” are the one or two remaining classroom seats that have not yet filled on guaranteed to run sessions. Te Hot seats program works much in the same way as a major airline company that sell the last seat remaining on a flights at a reduced price in order to fill the airplane to capacity. Hot Seats are only offered on specific courses and run for exact dates and locations only. Please see the chart below for details on Hot Seats for Business Training. To take advantage of the offer students must call 1-800-COURSES to register! Click here to see all Hot Seats.
IT Project Management - Start date: 11/17/2008
Duration 4 Days - Hot Seat Price $1,395 - Location Atlanta, GA
PMP Training: Exam Prep Boot Camp - Start date: 11/17/2008
Duration 4 Days - Hot Seat Price $1,895 - Location Denver CO
PMP Training: Exam Prep Boot Camp - Start date: 11/17/2008
Duration 4 Days - Hot Seat Price $1,895 - Location Ottawa
PMP Training: Exam Prep Boot Camp - Start date: 11/17/2008
Duration 4 Days - Hot Seat Price $1,89 - Location San Jose CA
PMP Training: Exam Prep Boot Camp - Start date: 11/17/2008
Duration 4 Days- Hot Seat Price - $1,895 - Location Washington DC
Program Management - Start date: 11/18/2008
Duration 4 Days - Hot Seat Price $1,395 - Location Washington DC
Program Management- Start date: 11/18/2008
Duration 4 Days - Hot Seat Price $1,395 - Location Washington DC
Project Portfolio Management - Start date: 11/18/2008
Duration 4 Days - Hot Seat Price $1,395 - Location New York DC
Business Process Analysis - Start date: 11/18/2008
Duration 4 Days - Hot Seat Price $1,395 - Location Raleigh NC
Managing Projects/ Microsoft Office Project 2007 Boot Camp - Start date: 11/18/2008
Duration 4 Days - Hot Seat Price $1,895 - Location Washington DC
ITIL Training: Service Capability: Service Offerings & Agreements - Start date:11/17/2008
Duration 5 Days - Hot Seat Price $1,895 - Location Washington DC
Applied Project Management - Start date: 11/17/2008
Duration 5 Days - Hot Seat Price $1,895 - Location Dallas, TX
About Global Knowledge:
Global Knowledge is the largest privately held provider of training and enterprise learning services for IT and Business professionals. Delivered in classrooms, at private facilities, or over the Internet, Global Knowledge has helped Fortune 500 companies and government agencies. Global Knowledge is owned by New York-based investment firm Welsh, Carson, Anderson, and Stowe.
Global Knowledge
Media Contact – US Open Enrollment Marketing
Ruth Patterson, 919-388-1070
Ruth.Patterson @globalknowledge.com
Friday, March 28, 2008
A memorable Rumsfeld quote: Project Management-speak
A memorable Rumsfeld quote: Project Management-speak
More than ever, the political scene lately has generated some memorable and oft-repeated phrases. No, I’m not going to discuss the meaning of ‘is’ or pick on Greenspan’s ‘irrational exuberance’ or one of President Bush’s many tongue twisters. Instead, I want to discuss a quote by Donald Rumsfeld.
Donald Rumsfeld, former Secretary of Defense, in answering a question about weapons of mass destruction in 2002, patiently explained:
“As we know, there are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say, we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don’t know we don’t know.”
While this quote sounds extremely confusing, this statement doesn’t need to be explained to many of us project managers, especially those among us who have attended formal PM training and/or passed the PMP® exam. Those of us who practice sound risk management and budgeting know exactly what he is talking about.
We learn in training that known unknowns are those items that we identify on our projects which may occur. We often call these risk events or risk items. They are known because we identify them, they are unknown because we do not know if they will occur or not. For those, we apply a contingency or buffer. The unknown unknowns are those items which we don’t identify up front as risk items, whether because of poor planning or because we could not have anticipated these events. These are called unknown unknowns because they are not identified (unknown) and we don’t know whether they will occur or not (unknowns). Unknown unknowns are those items that catch us completely by surprise, and management reserve covers those, in terms of additional money or time. The unknown unknowns are a much smaller percentage of risk items than most people think, because most items should be able to be identified. This is part of good risk management and understanding your budget.
This begs the question. Was former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld a Project Manager? Stay tuned to Part 2 of this thread to explore this question.
Vicki Wrona, PMP®is the founder and President of Forward Momentum, LLC, an 8(a) consulting and training company found at www.forwardmomentum.net. She has been managing projects and mentoring project managers for the past 20 years in both the private and public sectors. She is an instructor for Global Knowledge and developed GK’s PMP® Exam Prep Boot Camp, part of the program that won PMI’s ® Professional Development Product of the Year Award in 2007. She has trained over 3,300 professionals, including over 1,600 on the PMP® exam. Currently, she is serving on PMI’s® PMBOK® Guide 4th edition creation and review team.
Donald Rumsfeld: Lessons in Project Management
In the first part of this blog, I explored a quote by former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld that sounded extremely confusing, but one which makes sense to project managers who practice sound risk management and budgeting. This installment will discuss whether Donald Rumsfeld was a project manager in his role as Secretary of Defense.
Was Donald Rumsfeld a project manager? Much of his work involved projects or temporary, unique items which should be managed like projects. Did he follow proper PM principles?
Let’s take the Iraq initiative. I don’t want to get into philosophical debate on the war in Iraq, but instead step back and take a look at it from a project management perspective. The initial military activities in Iraq seemed (from my outside and admittedly limited perspective) fairly well thought out, and the operation itself was planned and implemented. From a project perspective, so far, so good. But what was not planned was the transition from project to operation, or in other words, the plan after the initial military operation accomplishes its goals. It does not seem that there was a plan to manage the transition from one government to the next and then hand off the end product to the customer, envisioned to be a new government to the people of Iraq. The implementation and rollout seemed missing in the plan.
A good project manager thinks through all scenarios, and has a plan for each one. Proper risk management, from a PMI® perspective, would include the negative events, called threats (initiatives take longer than planned, for example) as well as the positive events, called opportunities (initiatives are more successful than planned or take less time than planned, for example). Could it be that the success of the operation happened more quickly than planned and so Rumsfeld and his team were not prepared for the implementation or transition phase? Or maybe certain parts of the initiative were taking longer than planned, in which case a contingency plan was not identified or implemented.
One way or another, it seems the overall plan was incomplete. It does not seem that the initiative was thought through to the end, taking into account various scenarios, alternatives, or nuances, including transition planning to a new status quo or an organizational change management plan to allow stakeholders (the Iraqi people) to get used to and be able to manage the new system, whatever that system may be. A good PM would have accounted for the various scenarios and been ready.
Philosophy aside, by many definitions, this project was not a success, and, as is true for many projects, for many reasons. The warning signs of imminent project failure are many. If there is interest, I’ll explore troubled projects in a future post.
Vicki Wrona, PMP®is the founder and President of Forward Momentum, LLC, an 8(a) consulting and training company found at www.forwardmomentum.net. She has been managing projects and mentoring project managers for the past 20 years in both the private and public sectors. She is an instructor for Global Knowledge and developed GK’s PMP® Exam Prep Boot Camp, part of the program that won PMI’s ® Professional Development Product of the Year Award in 2007. She has trained over 3,300 professionals, including over 1,600 on the PMP® exam. Currently, she is serving on PMI’s® PMBOK® Guide 4th edition creation and review team.
More than ever, the political scene lately has generated some memorable and oft-repeated phrases. No, I’m not going to discuss the meaning of ‘is’ or pick on Greenspan’s ‘irrational exuberance’ or one of President Bush’s many tongue twisters. Instead, I want to discuss a quote by Donald Rumsfeld.
Donald Rumsfeld, former Secretary of Defense, in answering a question about weapons of mass destruction in 2002, patiently explained:
“As we know, there are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say, we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don’t know we don’t know.”
While this quote sounds extremely confusing, this statement doesn’t need to be explained to many of us project managers, especially those among us who have attended formal PM training and/or passed the PMP® exam. Those of us who practice sound risk management and budgeting know exactly what he is talking about.
We learn in training that known unknowns are those items that we identify on our projects which may occur. We often call these risk events or risk items. They are known because we identify them, they are unknown because we do not know if they will occur or not. For those, we apply a contingency or buffer. The unknown unknowns are those items which we don’t identify up front as risk items, whether because of poor planning or because we could not have anticipated these events. These are called unknown unknowns because they are not identified (unknown) and we don’t know whether they will occur or not (unknowns). Unknown unknowns are those items that catch us completely by surprise, and management reserve covers those, in terms of additional money or time. The unknown unknowns are a much smaller percentage of risk items than most people think, because most items should be able to be identified. This is part of good risk management and understanding your budget.
This begs the question. Was former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld a Project Manager? Stay tuned to Part 2 of this thread to explore this question.
Vicki Wrona, PMP®is the founder and President of Forward Momentum, LLC, an 8(a) consulting and training company found at www.forwardmomentum.net. She has been managing projects and mentoring project managers for the past 20 years in both the private and public sectors. She is an instructor for Global Knowledge and developed GK’s PMP® Exam Prep Boot Camp, part of the program that won PMI’s ® Professional Development Product of the Year Award in 2007. She has trained over 3,300 professionals, including over 1,600 on the PMP® exam. Currently, she is serving on PMI’s® PMBOK® Guide 4th edition creation and review team.
Donald Rumsfeld: Lessons in Project Management
In the first part of this blog, I explored a quote by former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld that sounded extremely confusing, but one which makes sense to project managers who practice sound risk management and budgeting. This installment will discuss whether Donald Rumsfeld was a project manager in his role as Secretary of Defense.
Was Donald Rumsfeld a project manager? Much of his work involved projects or temporary, unique items which should be managed like projects. Did he follow proper PM principles?
Let’s take the Iraq initiative. I don’t want to get into philosophical debate on the war in Iraq, but instead step back and take a look at it from a project management perspective. The initial military activities in Iraq seemed (from my outside and admittedly limited perspective) fairly well thought out, and the operation itself was planned and implemented. From a project perspective, so far, so good. But what was not planned was the transition from project to operation, or in other words, the plan after the initial military operation accomplishes its goals. It does not seem that there was a plan to manage the transition from one government to the next and then hand off the end product to the customer, envisioned to be a new government to the people of Iraq. The implementation and rollout seemed missing in the plan.
A good project manager thinks through all scenarios, and has a plan for each one. Proper risk management, from a PMI® perspective, would include the negative events, called threats (initiatives take longer than planned, for example) as well as the positive events, called opportunities (initiatives are more successful than planned or take less time than planned, for example). Could it be that the success of the operation happened more quickly than planned and so Rumsfeld and his team were not prepared for the implementation or transition phase? Or maybe certain parts of the initiative were taking longer than planned, in which case a contingency plan was not identified or implemented.
One way or another, it seems the overall plan was incomplete. It does not seem that the initiative was thought through to the end, taking into account various scenarios, alternatives, or nuances, including transition planning to a new status quo or an organizational change management plan to allow stakeholders (the Iraqi people) to get used to and be able to manage the new system, whatever that system may be. A good PM would have accounted for the various scenarios and been ready.
Philosophy aside, by many definitions, this project was not a success, and, as is true for many projects, for many reasons. The warning signs of imminent project failure are many. If there is interest, I’ll explore troubled projects in a future post.
Vicki Wrona, PMP®is the founder and President of Forward Momentum, LLC, an 8(a) consulting and training company found at www.forwardmomentum.net. She has been managing projects and mentoring project managers for the past 20 years in both the private and public sectors. She is an instructor for Global Knowledge and developed GK’s PMP® Exam Prep Boot Camp, part of the program that won PMI’s ® Professional Development Product of the Year Award in 2007. She has trained over 3,300 professionals, including over 1,600 on the PMP® exam. Currently, she is serving on PMI’s® PMBOK® Guide 4th edition creation and review team.
Why Can’t We Just Follow Some Best Practices?
Why Can’t We Just Follow Some Best Practices?
I received a disturbing note from a friend the other day and thought I’d share it with you. His note confirms what I have been seeing, but have been reluctant to admit. This colleague is a project manager working on a project with another company and their project manager. This other PM is a PMP who is also working on his Masters in Project Management. If I were paired up with a PM with these credentials, I would be very happy indeed, thinking that this is ideal. However, my friend wrote that this person is not willing to do the most basic of project management best practices. It was difficult having a kick-off meeting, scheduling status meetings, or collecting status.
Why is that? If this were an isolated case, I could write it off to something like he just must be tired of meetings, or his organizational culture is one that doesn’t follow formal processes. But this isn’t an isolated case. He was writing me to compare notes and ask if I had seen this before. Unfortunately, I have to say ‘yes’. We all talk a good game in theory, but when push comes to shove, why can’t we follow through and do what we say we are going to do? Is it lack of management support? Overwork? A ‘get it done’ mentality?
There’s never time to plan, but always time to fix. Not enough priority or visibility until the project is in jeopardy. Why must we wait until the situation is dire to do the right thing? Can’t we learn from these experiences? I am sure a lot of PMs would like to sleep better at night, knowing they are acting proactively and with management’s support, rather than fighting an uphill battle. If you have thoughts on how to turn this trend, please write and let me know. Maybe we’ll explore this topic deeper in future postings.
Vicki Wrona, PMP®is the founder and President of Forward Momentum, LLC, an 8(a) consulting and training company found at www.forwardmomentum.net. She has been managing projects and mentoring project managers for the past 20 years in both the private and public sectors. She is an instructor for Global Knowledge and developed GK’s PMP® Exam Prep Boot Camp, part of the program that won PMI’s ® Professional Development Product of the Year Award in 2007. She has trained over 3,300 professionals, including over 1,600 on the PMP® exam. Currently, she is serving on PMI’s® PMBOK® Guide 4th edition creation and review team.
I received a disturbing note from a friend the other day and thought I’d share it with you. His note confirms what I have been seeing, but have been reluctant to admit. This colleague is a project manager working on a project with another company and their project manager. This other PM is a PMP who is also working on his Masters in Project Management. If I were paired up with a PM with these credentials, I would be very happy indeed, thinking that this is ideal. However, my friend wrote that this person is not willing to do the most basic of project management best practices. It was difficult having a kick-off meeting, scheduling status meetings, or collecting status.
Why is that? If this were an isolated case, I could write it off to something like he just must be tired of meetings, or his organizational culture is one that doesn’t follow formal processes. But this isn’t an isolated case. He was writing me to compare notes and ask if I had seen this before. Unfortunately, I have to say ‘yes’. We all talk a good game in theory, but when push comes to shove, why can’t we follow through and do what we say we are going to do? Is it lack of management support? Overwork? A ‘get it done’ mentality?
There’s never time to plan, but always time to fix. Not enough priority or visibility until the project is in jeopardy. Why must we wait until the situation is dire to do the right thing? Can’t we learn from these experiences? I am sure a lot of PMs would like to sleep better at night, knowing they are acting proactively and with management’s support, rather than fighting an uphill battle. If you have thoughts on how to turn this trend, please write and let me know. Maybe we’ll explore this topic deeper in future postings.
Vicki Wrona, PMP®is the founder and President of Forward Momentum, LLC, an 8(a) consulting and training company found at www.forwardmomentum.net. She has been managing projects and mentoring project managers for the past 20 years in both the private and public sectors. She is an instructor for Global Knowledge and developed GK’s PMP® Exam Prep Boot Camp, part of the program that won PMI’s ® Professional Development Product of the Year Award in 2007. She has trained over 3,300 professionals, including over 1,600 on the PMP® exam. Currently, she is serving on PMI’s® PMBOK® Guide 4th edition creation and review team.
A Difference of Opinion
A Difference of Opinion
I have a tool that I love to use because I find it to be extremely helpful in running my projects. I will share it with you now, partly because I really believe in this tool, and partly because I have recently seen it used ‘incorrectly’, in my opinion. This is, as my colleague and I have agreed, a professional difference of opinion, as he believes he is right, and I believe I am. I would love to get your opinion on this.
I call this tool The Flexibility Matrix. It is based on the triple constraint concept, and is a terrific tool for understanding where your main constraints really are and to open up dialogue between you, the sponsor, and the customer at the beginning of a project or at first when you take over a project, if it was not previously done. The Flexibility Matrix looks like this:
Least Flexible Moderately Flexible Most Flexible
Scope
Time
Resources/Cost
Constraint Optimize PM Control
The idea is that one ‘X’ goes in each column (no cheating!). As the project manager, try to have the following discussion with both the sponsor and customer together. If you cannot, then meet with the sponsor first and ask them which constraint (time, cost, or scope) is most flexible. Of course, their answer is always ‘none, I want them all’. After you explain to them that you will do your very best to deliver everything and that you want to deliver success so they can look good, but if push comes to shove, you need to know which of the constraints has some flexibility. An experienced or logical sponsor will understand where you are going and finally give you the answer you are looking for. Then repeat the drill with the customer. Compare the two matrices, or sets of expectations. Since you obviously cannot deliver two different set of expectations, if the two tables do not match, get the sponsor and customer together so they can decide between them the project’s true constraint vs greatest flexibility.
So far, so good. This is how I use the tool, and as I said, I love it for its ability to create an early dialogue, understand and set expectations, know my true constraints, and give me a tool to help evaluate change requests. For example, if scope is the most flexible and time is least, then I will not accept a change request that will threaten my end delivery date. Also, I will not accept a change that will increase scope because that is the one area I can decrease, if necessary.
However, I just found out that a colleague of mine uses this matrix with four constraints, listing quality as the last constraint. I disagree with this, saying that quality is not really an option. Quality means the product or service works. Asking someone to rank quality as a lower priority is, in my mind, not feasible. In his mind, if the customer is willing to create a product that will only last one year instead of three, that to him is low quality. I prefer to think of it as lower grade, in that it will not last as long. Calling this quality is, I think, misleading, and I try to avoid misconceptions whenever possible. After all, we have enough miscommunication on our projects already. What message are we sending to the team or to the customer if we say that quality has the most flexibility, that it can be sacrificed somewhat if necessary to make time and/or cost and/or scope? In our world, perception is everything. I think that is a dangerous path to walk. Yet, others do. I wonder how well it works for them.
What do you think? Have you ever used a tool similar to this? If so, have you included quality as an option? If you have, has it worked? Please write and let me know.
Vicki Wrona
I have a tool that I love to use because I find it to be extremely helpful in running my projects. I will share it with you now, partly because I really believe in this tool, and partly because I have recently seen it used ‘incorrectly’, in my opinion. This is, as my colleague and I have agreed, a professional difference of opinion, as he believes he is right, and I believe I am. I would love to get your opinion on this.
I call this tool The Flexibility Matrix. It is based on the triple constraint concept, and is a terrific tool for understanding where your main constraints really are and to open up dialogue between you, the sponsor, and the customer at the beginning of a project or at first when you take over a project, if it was not previously done. The Flexibility Matrix looks like this:
Least Flexible Moderately Flexible Most Flexible
Scope
Time
Resources/Cost
Constraint Optimize PM Control
The idea is that one ‘X’ goes in each column (no cheating!). As the project manager, try to have the following discussion with both the sponsor and customer together. If you cannot, then meet with the sponsor first and ask them which constraint (time, cost, or scope) is most flexible. Of course, their answer is always ‘none, I want them all’. After you explain to them that you will do your very best to deliver everything and that you want to deliver success so they can look good, but if push comes to shove, you need to know which of the constraints has some flexibility. An experienced or logical sponsor will understand where you are going and finally give you the answer you are looking for. Then repeat the drill with the customer. Compare the two matrices, or sets of expectations. Since you obviously cannot deliver two different set of expectations, if the two tables do not match, get the sponsor and customer together so they can decide between them the project’s true constraint vs greatest flexibility.
So far, so good. This is how I use the tool, and as I said, I love it for its ability to create an early dialogue, understand and set expectations, know my true constraints, and give me a tool to help evaluate change requests. For example, if scope is the most flexible and time is least, then I will not accept a change request that will threaten my end delivery date. Also, I will not accept a change that will increase scope because that is the one area I can decrease, if necessary.
However, I just found out that a colleague of mine uses this matrix with four constraints, listing quality as the last constraint. I disagree with this, saying that quality is not really an option. Quality means the product or service works. Asking someone to rank quality as a lower priority is, in my mind, not feasible. In his mind, if the customer is willing to create a product that will only last one year instead of three, that to him is low quality. I prefer to think of it as lower grade, in that it will not last as long. Calling this quality is, I think, misleading, and I try to avoid misconceptions whenever possible. After all, we have enough miscommunication on our projects already. What message are we sending to the team or to the customer if we say that quality has the most flexibility, that it can be sacrificed somewhat if necessary to make time and/or cost and/or scope? In our world, perception is everything. I think that is a dangerous path to walk. Yet, others do. I wonder how well it works for them.
What do you think? Have you ever used a tool similar to this? If so, have you included quality as an option? If you have, has it worked? Please write and let me know.
Vicki Wrona
Does the Mis-Use of the Project Manager Title Dilute Our Worth?
As I travel around, working with people from a large variety of private and public sector organizations in various cities, I am dismayed to see the various forms that the Project Manager title takes. Personally, I have had to overcome the perception of what a Project Manager does. Maybe you have had a similar experience. You’re at a party, someone asks you what you do, you tell them you are a Project Manager, and their face either goes blank or it lights up and they excitedly say, “Oh, like on the Apprentice?” (Heavy sigh.) Or they ask if you work in trailers at construction sites. (Some may, but not me.)
More disconcerting is when I am conducting PM training and a person approaches me and says, “I was given a project on Monday, and since I am in training all week it will be implemented before I’m even back in the office!” Or even worse, you turn in a print job at Kinko’s and the name tag of the person behind the counter has their name with ‘Project Manager’ below it. Are these last two really Project Managers? I think not.
When did the lines between project management and operational processes get so blurred? While they have always been blurred a bit, I see this as increasing. Part of it may be because of the prevalence of projects in the IT world. So many things in IT are projects. Some would say that almost everything in IT is a project. Once you have that mindset, that effort includes the smallest of activities, including help desk functions and/or customer tickets. Unfortunately, I see this over and over again.
The problem I have with this is overcoming the perception of ‘the uninformed’ as to what Project Management really is, and why I am commanding the price that I do. Or in having others appreciate the skills that you and I have, with all the complexities and nuances of our job. While many people within the corporate environment do understand (and appreciate) what Project Managers really do, many still do not. Does this mis-use of the PM title make it more difficult for us to get ahead among and with the uninformed (and there are plenty of them)? While we have made great strides in promoting project management as a profession, I think in the end, the answer is ‘yes’, another obstacle has been put in our path.
What do you think? Let me know.
by Vicki Wrona
As I travel around, working with people from a large variety of private and public sector organizations in various cities, I am dismayed to see the various forms that the Project Manager title takes. Personally, I have had to overcome the perception of what a Project Manager does. Maybe you have had a similar experience. You’re at a party, someone asks you what you do, you tell them you are a Project Manager, and their face either goes blank or it lights up and they excitedly say, “Oh, like on the Apprentice?” (Heavy sigh.) Or they ask if you work in trailers at construction sites. (Some may, but not me.)
More disconcerting is when I am conducting PM training and a person approaches me and says, “I was given a project on Monday, and since I am in training all week it will be implemented before I’m even back in the office!” Or even worse, you turn in a print job at Kinko’s and the name tag of the person behind the counter has their name with ‘Project Manager’ below it. Are these last two really Project Managers? I think not.
When did the lines between project management and operational processes get so blurred? While they have always been blurred a bit, I see this as increasing. Part of it may be because of the prevalence of projects in the IT world. So many things in IT are projects. Some would say that almost everything in IT is a project. Once you have that mindset, that effort includes the smallest of activities, including help desk functions and/or customer tickets. Unfortunately, I see this over and over again.
The problem I have with this is overcoming the perception of ‘the uninformed’ as to what Project Management really is, and why I am commanding the price that I do. Or in having others appreciate the skills that you and I have, with all the complexities and nuances of our job. While many people within the corporate environment do understand (and appreciate) what Project Managers really do, many still do not. Does this mis-use of the PM title make it more difficult for us to get ahead among and with the uninformed (and there are plenty of them)? While we have made great strides in promoting project management as a profession, I think in the end, the answer is ‘yes’, another obstacle has been put in our path.
What do you think? Let me know.
by Vicki Wrona
Get Those Rules and Requirements, Part 2
The elicitation, documentation, verification and validation of business requirements is a set of processes that links the IT Service Management Lifecycle (ITSM) with other lifecycle approaches to such as Project Management (PMBOK), Business Analysis (BABOK), and System Development Lifecycle (SDLC). Each of these approaches seeks to identify and understand the business’s vital business functions, internal and external drivers and critical success factors with the goal of matching projects, products and services to defined business objectives.
An IT Service provider may well choose to begin an ITSM implementation with a business analysis to create a baseline “picture” of the business rules and requirements. This point in time understanding can help the IT Service provider to focus Continual Service Improvement (CSI) processes and activities on areas that support vital business functions. Completing a business, or enterprise, analysis also gives the IT Service provider a means of assessing their IT Service Management maturity. Self assessment begins with a good, hard look at where the IT Service provider is right now in terms of providing service value in the areas most important to the customer. A thorough assessment of strengths and weaknesses in the current service model will help the organization identify pain points and plan to address them first. This baseline is the “as is” portion of a common gap analysis.
Simply put, gap analysis consists of four parts: documenting the current state, describing the desired state, measuring the difference (gap), and coming up with a plan to close the gap. Gap analysis is a tool that can be used repeatedly to refine our understanding of a business challenge and clarify our response to each challenge. It is likely that an IT service provider will complete many gap analyses in the course of aligning IT services with changing business needs.
Requirements again take the spotlight when the Service Level Manager works with business customers to negotiate Service Level Agreements. Desired state is the “to be” portion of gap analysis. In this process, business rules are deconstructed into business requirements which are refined into functional and non-functional requirements. Functional and non-functional business requirements are expressed by the customer as service level requirements (SLR). Service Level Targets (SLT), supplied by the IT service organization, defines the current capabilities of the IT infrastructure. The Service Level Management process compares the requirements to the targets and negotiates the differences to create the several types of Service Level Agreements.
The Service Level Manager develops and maintains a relationship with business process owners that keeps the IT Service provider informed about changes to business requirements. Strong analysis and communication skills remain important when developing the service offering and establishing measures of success.
To summarize, Service Design and Continual Service Improvement come together to identify and understand the business requirements that IT Services strive to support. Clear, accurate, validated requirements can save time and money in the design of IT Services. The alignment of business and IT Service visions is both the goal and a key benefit of IT Service Management.
Rhane Thomas
An IT Service provider may well choose to begin an ITSM implementation with a business analysis to create a baseline “picture” of the business rules and requirements. This point in time understanding can help the IT Service provider to focus Continual Service Improvement (CSI) processes and activities on areas that support vital business functions. Completing a business, or enterprise, analysis also gives the IT Service provider a means of assessing their IT Service Management maturity. Self assessment begins with a good, hard look at where the IT Service provider is right now in terms of providing service value in the areas most important to the customer. A thorough assessment of strengths and weaknesses in the current service model will help the organization identify pain points and plan to address them first. This baseline is the “as is” portion of a common gap analysis.
Simply put, gap analysis consists of four parts: documenting the current state, describing the desired state, measuring the difference (gap), and coming up with a plan to close the gap. Gap analysis is a tool that can be used repeatedly to refine our understanding of a business challenge and clarify our response to each challenge. It is likely that an IT service provider will complete many gap analyses in the course of aligning IT services with changing business needs.
Requirements again take the spotlight when the Service Level Manager works with business customers to negotiate Service Level Agreements. Desired state is the “to be” portion of gap analysis. In this process, business rules are deconstructed into business requirements which are refined into functional and non-functional requirements. Functional and non-functional business requirements are expressed by the customer as service level requirements (SLR). Service Level Targets (SLT), supplied by the IT service organization, defines the current capabilities of the IT infrastructure. The Service Level Management process compares the requirements to the targets and negotiates the differences to create the several types of Service Level Agreements.
The Service Level Manager develops and maintains a relationship with business process owners that keeps the IT Service provider informed about changes to business requirements. Strong analysis and communication skills remain important when developing the service offering and establishing measures of success.
To summarize, Service Design and Continual Service Improvement come together to identify and understand the business requirements that IT Services strive to support. Clear, accurate, validated requirements can save time and money in the design of IT Services. The alignment of business and IT Service visions is both the goal and a key benefit of IT Service Management.
Rhane Thomas
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)