photo by alq666
No related posts.
Software project methodologies
Previous post: Lessons Learned in 2008: Web 2.0 Style
Next post: Ethics for project managers
Previous post: Lessons Learned in 2008: Web 2.0 Style
Next post: Ethics for project managers
{ 46 comments… read them below or add one }
Interesting to see the PMBOK Guide included as a “software project methodology” when:
– The document itself says explicitly that it is not a methodology.
– The document itself says explicitly that it does not address software-oriented processes.
Also ironic to see XP illustrated with a single person sitting at the keyboard when one of the key practices of XP is pair programming.
Duncan
William R. Duncan, Project Management Partners
Primary author of the original version of “A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge”
Board Chair, PMCert, the independent certification body of asapm
Exactly Bill. I believe there is more to be gained by combining the best thoughts and approaches represented here then to set one against the other.
In fact, even a consolidated view of these “approaches” don’t address the capabilities required to delivery software into production where your stakeholders are receiving value. End-user training, financial benefit, organizational design, process changes, etc. are not adequately addressed by any of these.
Remember, it isn’t about getting working software installed on a system, it is about improving your organizations ability to profitably deliver value to the customer.
Interesting to see the PMBOK Guide included as a “software project methodology” when:
– The document itself says explicitly that it is not a methodology.
– The document itself says explicitly that it does not address software-oriented processes.
Also ironic to see XP illustrated with a single person sitting at the keyboard when one of the key practices of XP is pair programming.
Duncan
William R. Duncan, Project Management Partners
Primary author of the original version of “A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge”
Board Chair, PMCert, the independent certification body of asapm
Exactly Bill. I believe there is more to be gained by combining the best thoughts and approaches represented here then to set one against the other.
In fact, even a consolidated view of these “approaches” don’t address the capabilities required to delivery software into production where your stakeholders are receiving value. End-user training, financial benefit, organizational design, process changes, etc. are not adequately addressed by any of these.
Remember, it isn’t about getting working software installed on a system, it is about improving your organizations ability to profitably deliver value to the customer.
Good point Bill, and people who try to use the PMBOK Guide as a methodology are going to be disappointed. It’s a standard, not a methodology.
I think the depiction of XP was OK though. I think the archer represents the other programmer! Maybe this is how some developers feel about it, getting shot in the back by their XP partner!
Good point Bill, and people who try to use the PMBOK Guide as a methodology are going to be disappointed. It’s a standard, not a methodology.
I think the depiction of XP was OK though. I think the archer represents the other programmer! Maybe this is how some developers feel about it, getting shot in the back by their XP partner!
As Bill mentions PMBOK is not a method, nor is CMMI. This is a very common mistake and indicitative of the low level of understanding of the complex and important issue – how can methods be improved within specific frameworks.
Yet another blow for moving the profession of project management from ancedotal opinions to useful dialog.
As Bill mentions PMBOK is not a method, nor is CMMI. This is a very common mistake and indicitative of the low level of understanding of the complex and important issue – how can methods be improved within specific frameworks.
Yet another blow for moving the profession of project management from ancedotal opinions to useful dialog.
Bill,
I agree that the PMBOK was not intended to be a method, but with it’s elaboration over the years into a process oriented doc, and the mindset that many have of fpaint by numbers – it does become one.
FWIW I liked the earlier versions of the PMBOK more than the current. Their simplicty gave them a lot of value. I think the product is overcomplicating some simple issues these days.
Glenn
I think Jurgen’s reference to CMMI is shorthand for PSP/TSP – out of the same box.
I agree that the conversation gets difficult when we are all using different terms. That’s one for me to take on board.
Bill,
I agree that the PMBOK was not intended to be a method, but with it’s elaboration over the years into a process oriented doc, and the mindset that many have of fpaint by numbers – it does become one.
FWIW I liked the earlier versions of the PMBOK more than the current. Their simplicty gave them a lot of value. I think the product is overcomplicating some simple issues these days.
Glenn
I think Jurgen’s reference to CMMI is shorthand for PSP/TSP – out of the same box.
I agree that the conversation gets difficult when we are all using different terms. That’s one for me to take on board.
Yes, but consider this. Although PMI has maintained that the PMBOK is NOT a methodology, then why do they flow chart it? As soon at they start to flow chart it, implying a system, then why is everyone surprised when people refer to it as a methodology? If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck……..
And Glenn, you still seem to be buying into the PMI hype that project management is a profession. On what grounds are you basing this? As discussed before, I have absolutely no qualms that there are professional project managers, but just because there are professionals doing what it is we do, does not make what we do a profession.
At very least, making unsubstantiate (and unsubstantiatable) claims is or at least should be, an ethical violation, shouldn’t it? (Ya, I know PMI in their latest CoE, PMI makes the claim that project management is a profession something like 22 times- but adapting the old Wendy’s commercial, where is the proof?)
Bottom line here- regardless of what the claims may be and regardless of the disclaimers PMI may publish, the fact is the layout of the PMBOK Guide can only lead one to BELIEVE that what PMI advocates is a methodology or process.
BR,
Dr. PDG, Jakarta
PMBoK is not a Methodology. It describes “what” is typically done on most project by most people. It does not prescribe “how” to do these things. It is acknowledged in the PMBoK that you would do them differently on a construction project than you would on a Software Development project or an organizational restructuring.
The fact is, that whether you standardize your management of scope, time, cost, quality, staffing, procurement, communication and risk – you are managing them somehow. It would be irresponsible not to manage them. Since you are doing them, why not intentionally leverage proven practices. PMBoK suggests you decide which ones are most important to your business and how to best implement them.
As for whether PM is a profession or not please read http://www.dennisstevens.com/2008/12/14/is-project-management-a-profession/. I don’t believe it is unethical to call something “a profession” that meets the dictionary definition. Although I would agree that many of the practices are immature and the value of a PMP is debatable.
At the end of the day, there are a number of approaches and bodies of knowledge that intend to help organizations delivery projects (Software or not). There is value in almost all of them. As Jeff Sutherland suggests in SCRUM, draw from the best practices you can find to improve your organization’s ability to profitably delivery value to your customers.
Hi Dennis,
Yes, I do agree that the PMBOK is not a methodology, but because PMI over the years is depicting it via flow charts, it in fact, appears to be one, even though most of us know it is not.
Another issue I have with the PMBOK is it describes “most practices used on most projects, most of the time”. Contrast this with other professions that are willing to advocate “best practices”. To put the importance of this issue in perspective, you are about to go in for open heart surgery. Your cardiologist is going to hold your heart in his/her hands. Do you want this person to be using procedures used on “most heart surgery most of the time” or do you want your cardiologist to be using “best practices”?
IMPO, PMI, in trying to be all things to all people, have created such a high level, generic approach, as to be relatively useless for practical application. PMI readily admits to this, which is why they encourage application specific BoK’s. But even those have not, IMPO, been all that impressive.
Let me take a look at your treatise on profession and will get back to you.
BR,
Dr. PDG, Jakarta
Dennis,
Great ending comment.
“Take the good stuff, pay little attention to the poor stuff, and everyone get back to work.”
The academic discussion of PM is interesting to academics, but when borish papers are written about how many angles can dance on the head of a pin, I usually go out the plant floor and hang around the engineers to get reconnected with the reality of building flying machines on-time, on-budget, and on-spec.
Paul,
Please read http://herdingcats.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/11/theory-is-obsolete-and-other-touchy-topics.html before putting words in my mouth then arguning with them.
Thanks.
Glenn,
Regarding the use of the term “profession”, I was using your words taken from one of your posting of Feb 9th
“Yet another blow for moving the profession of project management from ancedotal opinions to useful dialog.”
And I hate to make an issue over this topic, but PMI in particular is pushing the idea that project management is a profession, that I feel obligated to at least counter their position, lest people start to actually believe it. (And there are a lot of people out there that do believe it.
Bottom line- All I could ask is that you be consistent in stating your beliefs.
BR,
Dr. PDG, Jakarta
Paul,
What is the bebefical outcome in your personal push to counter PMI? It is simply responding in an “unprofessional” manner.
In the XP discussion world many years ago, Ron Jefferies suggested that when the forums decend into words are “professional” the conversation is over.
Whether PM’s are considered professional or not in your eye is unlikley to improve the performanec of projects.
I persoannly wish PMI would improve their certification processes – and they have made good progress on the Program Management Cert. Two in our office have received this.
Attempts to professionalize PM adds value on all fronts.
Like all political arguments, you’ll need to present an alternative to the poor standing of some PMs holding PMP’s before value can be contributed to the dialog. Otherwise it’s just complaining about the other sides position.
“Actionable unasailable benefical outcomes” is what proposals are all about – what woudl you proposed we as a commnity shoudl do about increasing the “professionalism” of project managers in similar ways Professional Engineers have done at the state level?
Fair questions, Glen.
First, PMI no longer represents the values that I subscribe to as a professional, life-long project manager.
PMI since Virgil Carter took over around 1995 or 96, went from being a legitimate professional organization to being a big business, conveniently masquerading behind their 501(c)(3) not for profit status. So yes, I do feel a professional obligation to counter at least some of what PMI stands for.
And perhaps more importantly, there are a LOT of people who send me emails who support my position, but don’t have the cojones to say what I do.
Lastly, you ask what I would do to improve the “professional” status and standing of project management? By losing the focus on knowledge based credentials, pushing for COMPETENCY based assessment. (Which is where Duncan and I are heading right now to Pretoria)
Take a look at this posting to get an idea of a few of my suggestions…… http://www.pmhub.net/index.php?id=news.display&newsid=NW499b586f2502a
Catch up with everyone later……
BR,
Dr. PDG, Singapore’s Changi Airport, headed to the GAPPS workshop, Pretoria, South Africa
Paul,
Similar processes are taking place in the SIGs. The A&D SIG (which I’m the Region 6 Co-Chair) is being insourced to corporate. I’ll likely move to INCOSE and ACSE for the EV and program controls community.
Paul,
Could have the PMHUB site add RSS feeds so Google Reader can be used?
Paul,
Regarding the PMBOK Method question, I might suggest that PMI struggles in the same way SEI did when CMM first arrived. Confusion between method and process and the improvement of process took some time to settle down.
I have also found many critics of PMBOK have in fact not read PMBOK. As Bill so clearly states PMBOK states what it is. Not reading it is no excuse for mis-stating.
That said it is actually irrelative, academic and some what padandic to press one. The management of projects needs all possible suggestions for any and all sources – even mislabeled and misnamed sources to improve project performance.
Paul,
Regarding PMI’s “flow charts.” There are decision boxes in those charts. Hence flow is linear.
Please examine the training materials for CMMI 1.2 DEV to see similar diagrams. Little confusion occurs with CMMI these days about process improvement frameworks and method. Poissibly the “reader” is at fault here, not the “writer.”
My beef with PMI in V4 is they failied to use any industry standard notion for describing the interaction and dependencies between the process areas – IDEF0 is standard notion for this effort.
Hi Glenn,
I am not disputing the fact that the reader is at fault, as PMI is quite clear that what they produce is not a methodology, but a BoK.
But just as McDonalds has to make their hot cups of coffee idiot proof, I would argue that PMI has the obligation of making the PMBOK Guide idiot proof. And when they draw in the process diagrams, it is hard to make the argument that what they have produced is NOT a methodology.
Having said that, if you take the processes as building blocks, (as in Leggo Blocks) then turning the processess INTO a methodology is not a gigantic leap of faith.
I think this is consistent with where INCOSE and Systems Dynamics are taking us, which I think is a good thing. Messy, but good…..
Paul,
That said, it would not bode well for the success of a project manager who read thePMBOK as a method. It’s a rcae to the bottom with that paradigm. Same goes for EV from the crtics that have never beed trained nor worked in a EV centric shop.
The lowest common denominator approach is unlikley to improve the performance of projects
By The Way, My name is spelled – GLEN.
Sorry Glen,
I find myself in the funny position of defending the PMBOK, but I do think the processes are fundamental and if used as building blocks, CAN (in the hands of an experienced practitioner) be turned into a methodology.
Understand, this academic stuff is only a couple of years old. For most of my working life, I was a general contractor, building schools and other federally funded projects, using Earned Value on a daily basis. Even now, although the company I work for (PTMC/APMX) is mostly a training and consulting company, we also have crews in the field providing Construction Management Professional Services on both a “fee” and “@risk” basis. So when I make suggestions, comments, critiques or recommendations, they are coming not from someone who works as an employee, earning a weekly salary, but from an entrepreneur, a contractor whose own money is on the line if the project screws up.
Which is one reason I have little patience with some of the theory I see here.
BR,
Dr. PDG, Changi Airport, on my way to the GAPPS Workshop in Pretoria, SA.
Paul,
I agree the processes can be turned into methods. Our Deliverables Based Planning(sm) method makes use of most of the PMBOK Knowledge Areas (the Process Groups are too general). Along with PMBOK, the DBP(sm) uses Capabilties Based Planning, the SEI Requirements Elicitation method, Performance Based Earned Value ™ (Paul Solomons trademarked method http://www.pb-ev.com) and the itertaive and incremental execution of the Performance Measurement Baseline taken nearly directly from Scrum.
There are other similar methods in our business area. I’d conjecture any credible project management method must cover the Knowledge Areas in some way. DOE 413.3, Brookhaven’s PMO Guide Book, Sandia PMO guidance, NASA Centers each have their own, and NAVAIR’s PMO guidance, and best of all the DoD version of PMBOK which fixes most of the erroneous guideance in PMBOK 3rd edition.
It can be done and has been, but as you suggest it takes work – professional grade work.
Glenn,
I am advocating for IDEF0 on the next version.
Dennis
Dennis,
That would be best in my opinion. CaseWise is another tool we use, but it costs money.
I’ve started an IDEF0 model of 3rd edition and will switch to 4th edition when I’m on the road and bored in the hotel.
There is a pretty good version in IDEF0 for 3rd edition on the web
http://www.tech.purdue.edu/Cgt/Courses/cgt426/Reading/SeeskinProjectManagement.ppt
This needs a bit of work, but is a great starting point.
Yes, but consider this. Although PMI has maintained that the PMBOK is NOT a methodology, then why do they flow chart it? As soon at they start to flow chart it, implying a system, then why is everyone surprised when people refer to it as a methodology? If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck……..
And Glenn, you still seem to be buying into the PMI hype that project management is a profession. On what grounds are you basing this? As discussed before, I have absolutely no qualms that there are professional project managers, but just because there are professionals doing what it is we do, does not make what we do a profession.
At very least, making unsubstantiate (and unsubstantiatable) claims is or at least should be, an ethical violation, shouldn’t it? (Ya, I know PMI in their latest CoE, PMI makes the claim that project management is a profession something like 22 times- but adapting the old Wendy’s commercial, where is the proof?)
Bottom line here- regardless of what the claims may be and regardless of the disclaimers PMI may publish, the fact is the layout of the PMBOK Guide can only lead one to BELIEVE that what PMI advocates is a methodology or process.
BR,
Dr. PDG, Jakarta
PMBoK is not a Methodology. It describes “what” is typically done on most project by most people. It does not prescribe “how” to do these things. It is acknowledged in the PMBoK that you would do them differently on a construction project than you would on a Software Development project or an organizational restructuring.
The fact is, that whether you standardize your management of scope, time, cost, quality, staffing, procurement, communication and risk – you are managing them somehow. It would be irresponsible not to manage them. Since you are doing them, why not intentionally leverage proven practices. PMBoK suggests you decide which ones are most important to your business and how to best implement them.
As for whether PM is a profession or not please read http://www.dennisstevens.com/2008/12/14/is-project-management-a-profession/. I don’t believe it is unethical to call something “a profession” that meets the dictionary definition. Although I would agree that many of the practices are immature and the value of a PMP is debatable.
At the end of the day, there are a number of approaches and bodies of knowledge that intend to help organizations delivery projects (Software or not). There is value in almost all of them. As Jeff Sutherland suggests in SCRUM, draw from the best practices you can find to improve your organization’s ability to profitably delivery value to your customers.
Hi Dennis,
Yes, I do agree that the PMBOK is not a methodology, but because PMI over the years is depicting it via flow charts, it in fact, appears to be one, even though most of us know it is not.
Another issue I have with the PMBOK is it describes “most practices used on most projects, most of the time”. Contrast this with other professions that are willing to advocate “best practices”. To put the importance of this issue in perspective, you are about to go in for open heart surgery. Your cardiologist is going to hold your heart in his/her hands. Do you want this person to be using procedures used on “most heart surgery most of the time” or do you want your cardiologist to be using “best practices”?
IMPO, PMI, in trying to be all things to all people, have created such a high level, generic approach, as to be relatively useless for practical application. PMI readily admits to this, which is why they encourage application specific BoK’s. But even those have not, IMPO, been all that impressive.
Let me take a look at your treatise on profession and will get back to you.
BR,
Dr. PDG, Jakarta
Dennis,
Great ending comment.
“Take the good stuff, pay little attention to the poor stuff, and everyone get back to work.”
The academic discussion of PM is interesting to academics, but when borish papers are written about how many angles can dance on the head of a pin, I usually go out the plant floor and hang around the engineers to get reconnected with the reality of building flying machines on-time, on-budget, and on-spec.
Paul,
Please read http://herdingcats.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/11/theory-is-obsolete-and-other-touchy-topics.html before putting words in my mouth then arguning with them.
Thanks.
Glenn,
Regarding the use of the term “profession”, I was using your words taken from one of your posting of Feb 9th
“Yet another blow for moving the profession of project management from ancedotal opinions to useful dialog.”
And I hate to make an issue over this topic, but PMI in particular is pushing the idea that project management is a profession, that I feel obligated to at least counter their position, lest people start to actually believe it. (And there are a lot of people out there that do believe it.
Bottom line- All I could ask is that you be consistent in stating your beliefs.
BR,
Dr. PDG, Jakarta
Paul,
What is the bebefical outcome in your personal push to counter PMI? It is simply responding in an “unprofessional” manner.
In the XP discussion world many years ago, Ron Jefferies suggested that when the forums decend into words are “professional” the conversation is over.
Whether PM’s are considered professional or not in your eye is unlikley to improve the performanec of projects.
I persoannly wish PMI would improve their certification processes – and they have made good progress on the Program Management Cert. Two in our office have received this.
Attempts to professionalize PM adds value on all fronts.
Like all political arguments, you’ll need to present an alternative to the poor standing of some PMs holding PMP’s before value can be contributed to the dialog. Otherwise it’s just complaining about the other sides position.
“Actionable unasailable benefical outcomes” is what proposals are all about – what woudl you proposed we as a commnity shoudl do about increasing the “professionalism” of project managers in similar ways Professional Engineers have done at the state level?
Fair questions, Glen.
First, PMI no longer represents the values that I subscribe to as a professional, life-long project manager.
PMI since Virgil Carter took over around 1995 or 96, went from being a legitimate professional organization to being a big business, conveniently masquerading behind their 501(c)(3) not for profit status. So yes, I do feel a professional obligation to counter at least some of what PMI stands for.
And perhaps more importantly, there are a LOT of people who send me emails who support my position, but don’t have the cojones to say what I do.
Lastly, you ask what I would do to improve the “professional” status and standing of project management? By losing the focus on knowledge based credentials, pushing for COMPETENCY based assessment. (Which is where Duncan and I are heading right now to Pretoria)
Take a look at this posting to get an idea of a few of my suggestions…… http://www.pmhub.net/index.php?id=news.display&newsid=NW499b586f2502a
Catch up with everyone later……
BR,
Dr. PDG, Singapore’s Changi Airport, headed to the GAPPS workshop, Pretoria, South Africa
Paul,
Similar processes are taking place in the SIGs. The A&D SIG (which I’m the Region 6 Co-Chair) is being insourced to corporate. I’ll likely move to INCOSE and ACSE for the EV and program controls community.
Paul,
Could have the PMHUB site add RSS feeds so Google Reader can be used?
Paul,
Regarding the PMBOK Method question, I might suggest that PMI struggles in the same way SEI did when CMM first arrived. Confusion between method and process and the improvement of process took some time to settle down.
I have also found many critics of PMBOK have in fact not read PMBOK. As Bill so clearly states PMBOK states what it is. Not reading it is no excuse for mis-stating.
That said it is actually irrelative, academic and some what padandic to press one. The management of projects needs all possible suggestions for any and all sources – even mislabeled and misnamed sources to improve project performance.
Paul,
Regarding PMI’s “flow charts.” There are decision boxes in those charts. Hence flow is linear.
Please examine the training materials for CMMI 1.2 DEV to see similar diagrams. Little confusion occurs with CMMI these days about process improvement frameworks and method. Poissibly the “reader” is at fault here, not the “writer.”
My beef with PMI in V4 is they failied to use any industry standard notion for describing the interaction and dependencies between the process areas – IDEF0 is standard notion for this effort.
Hi Glenn,
I am not disputing the fact that the reader is at fault, as PMI is quite clear that what they produce is not a methodology, but a BoK.
But just as McDonalds has to make their hot cups of coffee idiot proof, I would argue that PMI has the obligation of making the PMBOK Guide idiot proof. And when they draw in the process diagrams, it is hard to make the argument that what they have produced is NOT a methodology.
Having said that, if you take the processes as building blocks, (as in Leggo Blocks) then turning the processess INTO a methodology is not a gigantic leap of faith.
I think this is consistent with where INCOSE and Systems Dynamics are taking us, which I think is a good thing. Messy, but good…..
Paul,
That said, it would not bode well for the success of a project manager who read thePMBOK as a method. It’s a rcae to the bottom with that paradigm. Same goes for EV from the crtics that have never beed trained nor worked in a EV centric shop.
The lowest common denominator approach is unlikley to improve the performance of projects
By The Way, My name is spelled – GLEN.
Sorry Glen,
I find myself in the funny position of defending the PMBOK, but I do think the processes are fundamental and if used as building blocks, CAN (in the hands of an experienced practitioner) be turned into a methodology.
Understand, this academic stuff is only a couple of years old. For most of my working life, I was a general contractor, building schools and other federally funded projects, using Earned Value on a daily basis. Even now, although the company I work for (PTMC/APMX) is mostly a training and consulting company, we also have crews in the field providing Construction Management Professional Services on both a “fee” and “@risk” basis. So when I make suggestions, comments, critiques or recommendations, they are coming not from someone who works as an employee, earning a weekly salary, but from an entrepreneur, a contractor whose own money is on the line if the project screws up.
Which is one reason I have little patience with some of the theory I see here.
BR,
Dr. PDG, Changi Airport, on my way to the GAPPS Workshop in Pretoria, SA.
Paul,
I agree the processes can be turned into methods. Our Deliverables Based Planning(sm) method makes use of most of the PMBOK Knowledge Areas (the Process Groups are too general). Along with PMBOK, the DBP(sm) uses Capabilties Based Planning, the SEI Requirements Elicitation method, Performance Based Earned Value ™ (Paul Solomons trademarked method http://www.pb-ev.com) and the itertaive and incremental execution of the Performance Measurement Baseline taken nearly directly from Scrum.
There are other similar methods in our business area. I’d conjecture any credible project management method must cover the Knowledge Areas in some way. DOE 413.3, Brookhaven’s PMO Guide Book, Sandia PMO guidance, NASA Centers each have their own, and NAVAIR’s PMO guidance, and best of all the DoD version of PMBOK which fixes most of the erroneous guideance in PMBOK 3rd edition.
It can be done and has been, but as you suggest it takes work – professional grade work.
Glenn,
I am advocating for IDEF0 on the next version.
Dennis
Dennis,
That would be best in my opinion. CaseWise is another tool we use, but it costs money.
I’ve started an IDEF0 model of 3rd edition and will switch to 4th edition when I’m on the road and bored in the hotel.
There is a pretty good version in IDEF0 for 3rd edition on the web
http://www.tech.purdue.edu/Cgt/Courses/cgt426/Reading/SeeskinProjectManagement.ppt
This needs a bit of work, but is a great starting point.