LeRoy –

A noble endeavor … but also a quixotic one. When we were finished the initial version of the PMBOK Guide in 1996, the one thing we were hoping for was that practitioners would adopt the definitions in the glossary. No go. Even PMI doesn’t consistently use those definitions in most of its other publications!

And for those of you interested in definitions, Max Wideman’s glossary is a must read (http://www.maxwideman.com/). Although I must admit that my preferred definition is not always the same as Max’s!

Duncan

LeRoy –

A noble endeavor … but also a quixotic one. When we were finished the initial version of the PMBOK Guide in 1996, the one thing we were hoping for was that practitioners would adopt the definitions in the glossary. No go. Even PMI doesn’t consistently use those definitions in most of its other publications!

And for those of you interested in definitions, Max Wideman’s glossary is a must read (http://www.maxwideman.com/). Although I must admit that my preferred definition is not always the same as Max’s!

Duncan

LeRoy,
Noble venture but far from quixotic. Our firm maintains a DoD/DOE/NASA terms handbook for our staff working in those domains. I find new terms and definitions nearly every month.
While no a big fan of “paying” for public domain information, the ESI work is recognized in the non-defense world as useful, along with Max’s list.
The challenge we experience in our A&D, Federal and State government, and ERP world is some starting point is needed, but the terms and definitions become “localized” to the business domain.
I can’t imagine the global impacts.
You’re not Don Quixote, but a zoologist gathering in the species of the world. Keep up the good work.

LeRoy,
Noble venture but far from quixotic. Our firm maintains a DoD/DOE/NASA terms handbook for our staff working in those domains. I find new terms and definitions nearly every month.
While no a big fan of “paying” for public domain information, the ESI work is recognized in the non-defense world as useful, along with Max’s list.
The challenge we experience in our A&D, Federal and State government, and ERP world is some starting point is needed, but the terms and definitions become “localized” to the business domain.
I can’t imagine the global impacts.
You’re not Don Quixote, but a zoologist gathering in the species of the world. Keep up the good work.

“pound of flesh” is my favorite! Thanks for the book, and thanks for sharing with us here on pmStudent!

“pound of flesh” is my favorite! Thanks for the book, and thanks for sharing with us here on pmStudent!

Glen — my bad for not being clear. I didn’t mean to suggest that the development of a glossary/dictionary was quixotic. In LeRoy’s last paragraph, I sensed a suggestion that he saw this work as definitive and that buyers and readers could be assured of being understood if they used this particular set of definitions. It was that aspect that I saw as quixotic.

Duncan

Glen — my bad for not being clear. I didn’t mean to suggest that the development of a glossary/dictionary was quixotic. In LeRoy’s last paragraph, I sensed a suggestion that he saw this work as definitive and that buyers and readers could be assured of being understood if they used this particular set of definitions. It was that aspect that I saw as quixotic.

Duncan

Josh — what is the “pound of flesh” reference that you found so interesting?

Josh — what is the “pound of flesh” reference that you found so interesting?

Bill, it was cited in the post, and I enjoy it. Cheers!

Bill, it was cited in the post, and I enjoy it. Cheers!

Josh — I thought that you meant you liked the definition of “pound of flesh” which wasn’t given in the post. By the way, this shouldn’t be a new term to most … “The Merchant of Venice” remains required reading in an awful lot of high school English classes!

Duncan

Josh — I thought that you meant you liked the definition of “pound of flesh” which wasn’t given in the post. By the way, this shouldn’t be a new term to most … “The Merchant of Venice” remains required reading in an awful lot of high school English classes!

Duncan

Glen, I would really enjoy it if you wanted to write some posts here. I think everyone would get a lot out of your posts, I know we already get a lot from your comments.

If you’re interested, just click “Register” on the top-right corner of this page.

Thanks!

Glen, I would really enjoy it if you wanted to write some posts here. I think everyone would get a lot out of your posts, I know we already get a lot from your comments.

If you’re interested, just click “Register” on the top-right corner of this page.

Thanks!

Hi LeRoy, Glen and other interested readers,
I think I can offer an explanation as to why the lexicon is proliferating so much.

Based on my PhD research, I believe I was able to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that project management is, as Kerzner, Lewis, Meredith and Mantel and a host of other reputable researchers/authors claim, a System- A methodology or process.

Furthermore, the “processes” of project management are embedded in virtually every existing “profession”, trade, occupation and even into each and every one of our daily lives.

Because of the growing awareness that what we have been doing intuitively for thousand of years now has a name,(“Project Management”) we are also finding out that the terms we use which are associated with those processes also have specific words, and while the actual word may be different for each application, the underlying meaning or application is much the same.

The best example of this is Wideman’s Comparative Glossary http://www.maxwideman.com/pmglossary/index.htm, where we can see multiple definitions for the same term.

This is the same thing Duncan, Ishikawa and I found out doing our research on Program for GAPPS. http://www.globalpmstandards.org/program-manager-standards/general/defining-program-types/

Where am I going with this? Because project management is a process embedded in just about every aspect of our lives, both working and private, I question whether a single “dictionary” is either necessary or appropriate. While I can see some value in what Glen is doing (by trying to compile a dictionary of terms used by the US Government) to try to develop a dictionary and claim it to be or attempt to establish it as a “standard” is somewhat naive as well as being futile.

For instance, I come from a background in construction project management and while some terms are generally the same, there are many terms which are unique to the process of construction management which have little or no meaning to an IT project manager. Maybe what the term describes would be similar, but the term itself does not have to. Likewise, I am a private pilot, (Alaska Bush for 6 years) and every single flight meets the definition of a project, even requiring that flight plan be filed and closed out at the completion of the flight. But without question, the terms used for the “project management” portion of flying a plane have little or no meaning outside of that application or incarnation of project management.

Another example. PMI published a “recommended practice” for WBS development. Yet for over 30 years now, most of us coming from construction have been looking at WBS as a relational database model, containing more than one way to sort the work. CSI’s Master and Uniformat were the first models, followed by Norsok Z-014 for offshore oil and gas. This “multi-dimensional” approach to developing the WBS has now been validated by the creation of “OmniClass”. What is the lesson learned? That there is or should be no “best” or “right” way to define all the work and only the work contained in a project. That defining the work in a project can take many forms, depending on the needs and perspectives of the user.

Bottom line on all this- While I think something like what Max is doing has immense value, my guess is the latest edition of ESI’s book contains just one definition. (I do have previous editions of ESI’s dictionary) If this is the case, then it is no different than the 7 blind men trying to describe the elephant…. But one perspective out of many possible definitions.

BR,
Dr. PDG, Jakarta

Hi LeRoy, Glen and other interested readers,
I think I can offer an explanation as to why the lexicon is proliferating so much.

Based on my PhD research, I believe I was able to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that project management is, as Kerzner, Lewis, Meredith and Mantel and a host of other reputable researchers/authors claim, a System- A methodology or process.

Furthermore, the “processes” of project management are embedded in virtually every existing “profession”, trade, occupation and even into each and every one of our daily lives.

Because of the growing awareness that what we have been doing intuitively for thousand of years now has a name,(“Project Management”) we are also finding out that the terms we use which are associated with those processes also have specific words, and while the actual word may be different for each application, the underlying meaning or application is much the same.

The best example of this is Wideman’s Comparative Glossary http://www.maxwideman.com/pmglossary/index.htm, where we can see multiple definitions for the same term.

This is the same thing Duncan, Ishikawa and I found out doing our research on Program for GAPPS. http://www.globalpmstandards.org/program-manager-standards/general/defining-program-types/

Where am I going with this? Because project management is a process embedded in just about every aspect of our lives, both working and private, I question whether a single “dictionary” is either necessary or appropriate. While I can see some value in what Glen is doing (by trying to compile a dictionary of terms used by the US Government) to try to develop a dictionary and claim it to be or attempt to establish it as a “standard” is somewhat naive as well as being futile.

For instance, I come from a background in construction project management and while some terms are generally the same, there are many terms which are unique to the process of construction management which have little or no meaning to an IT project manager. Maybe what the term describes would be similar, but the term itself does not have to. Likewise, I am a private pilot, (Alaska Bush for 6 years) and every single flight meets the definition of a project, even requiring that flight plan be filed and closed out at the completion of the flight. But without question, the terms used for the “project management” portion of flying a plane have little or no meaning outside of that application or incarnation of project management.

Another example. PMI published a “recommended practice” for WBS development. Yet for over 30 years now, most of us coming from construction have been looking at WBS as a relational database model, containing more than one way to sort the work. CSI’s Master and Uniformat were the first models, followed by Norsok Z-014 for offshore oil and gas. This “multi-dimensional” approach to developing the WBS has now been validated by the creation of “OmniClass”. What is the lesson learned? That there is or should be no “best” or “right” way to define all the work and only the work contained in a project. That defining the work in a project can take many forms, depending on the needs and perspectives of the user.

Bottom line on all this- While I think something like what Max is doing has immense value, my guess is the latest edition of ESI’s book contains just one definition. (I do have previous editions of ESI’s dictionary) If this is the case, then it is no different than the 7 blind men trying to describe the elephant…. But one perspective out of many possible definitions.

BR,
Dr. PDG, Jakarta

Gentlemen:
Many thanks for your comments and thoughts, and a special thanks to Glenn for his encouragement to keep up the good work. I’ve been doing this for 10 years so no need to stop now .

Please understand that my goal in compiling and writing this dictionary is not to offer the industry the “definitive” work; far from it. That will never exist, especially as Paul points out, because things just keep on changing. It was simply to get things going to try to get some level of consensus on various common terms; and, to help project managers understand the lexicon in other disciplines as well. So, for example, rather than carrying around several dictionaries (one each for business terms, financial terms, U.S. Government Contracting Terms, etc.) I did some of the grunt work to pull together those terms in each of those industries used the most based on my 33 years in the field.

Quick, easy to read, and extremely portable were also objectives in my approach to this. Having heard from literally thousands of people who have used the dictionary over the past ten years, my objectives were sound. Of course, others have their approach to dictionaries and each approach has its advantages and disadvantages, pluses and minuses, etc, and mine is no different. I’m just glad there is more than one from which to chose these days. When I started mine I couldn’t find anything at all which is why I actually spent the time to put one together.

All the best,

LeRoy

Gentlemen:
Many thanks for your comments and thoughts, and a special thanks to Glenn for his encouragement to keep up the good work. I’ve been doing this for 10 years so no need to stop now .

Please understand that my goal in compiling and writing this dictionary is not to offer the industry the “definitive” work; far from it. That will never exist, especially as Paul points out, because things just keep on changing. It was simply to get things going to try to get some level of consensus on various common terms; and, to help project managers understand the lexicon in other disciplines as well. So, for example, rather than carrying around several dictionaries (one each for business terms, financial terms, U.S. Government Contracting Terms, etc.) I did some of the grunt work to pull together those terms in each of those industries used the most based on my 33 years in the field.

Quick, easy to read, and extremely portable were also objectives in my approach to this. Having heard from literally thousands of people who have used the dictionary over the past ten years, my objectives were sound. Of course, others have their approach to dictionaries and each approach has its advantages and disadvantages, pluses and minuses, etc, and mine is no different. I’m just glad there is more than one from which to chose these days. When I started mine I couldn’t find anything at all which is why I actually spent the time to put one together.

All the best,

LeRoy