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

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

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

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

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

Thanks!

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

Thanks!