PMBOK4 Review
From TurboEPM
Issues of adaptation solutions for project management under the PMBOK 4
Before the release of 4th edition of PMBOK remain a matter of months. However, virtually no reviews PMBOK 4, either in Russia or abroad. If the work Google, you will quickly see that you are now viewing the most comprehensive comparative review of PMBOK PMBOK 3 and 4 came out in the world. It is no coincidence the review says a representative of Microsoft EPM PAC , as we shall see PMBOK 4 is important achievement of greater relevance PMI methodologies and Microsoft. Thanks to the cooperation PMI and Microsoft EPM PAC are possible, such reviews as this one.
Analysis of the PMBOK 4 complicates the fact that the world is not yet any certified person on PMBOK 4 and there is no coach who would be prepared at least one PMP on PMBOK 4. In such circumstances, is difficult to find an expert who can convincingly demonstrate their professionalism in PMBOK 4. Nevertheless, they are. It is the authors PMBOK PMBOK 4 and 3. We will give their opinion. We also give estimates of the central PMI experts specializing in iterative methods in connection with a new philosophy PMBOK 4. Microsoft Corporation very much appreciates the expert's opinion PMI Bonnie Beafore publishing its article on Microsoft.com, and publishing her books in the Microsoft Press, and we give her opinion. Unfortunately the non-disclosure procedure adopted in EPM PAC limits the use of the information Microsoft, however, we give the necessary instructions for compatibility methodologies Microsoft Solution Framework and PMBOK 4.
Your opinion as I made my questions, you can give them an answer on your own. In compiling this article helped me very much the head of the central branch of PMI on Ukraine Vlad Berezin (PMP), his comments on several issues presented in the review.
Comparing PMBOK PMBOK 3 and 4 will inevitably raise questions that are already hot subject to debates:
1) Can we assume that the PMBOK 4 is a fundamentally different level, if the PMBOK 4 went to delete the entire section, and made such a big correction?
Authors PMBOK 4 believe that it is not a "realignment" of information and a more detailed disclosure of PMBOK 3, and the fundamental new changes. In an interview with the lead on developing PMBOK 4, you can look below. Also co-author and editor of the PMBOK 3 believes that the changes are significant at the conceptual level. On the other hand, Vlad Berezin notes that the transition from 2 to PMBOK PMBOK 3 has also been made many changes, but on the whole concept of this standard has not changed.
2) Do not have resulted if such a large alteration in the PMBOK 4 to the fact that the old courses and methodological developments require a complete rework?
In principle, all parties discussed the PMBOK 4 agree that the courses aim to eventually PMP certification require complete rework. Also, most agree that the basic fundamentals of project management can be saved and the old materials. Regarding methodological developments at the level of regulation there are different points of view depending on the recognition of the significance of changes in the PMBOK 4.
3) Did the PMBOK 4 followed the worldwide trend in software and methodological solutions-oriented IT-technologies?
In the PMBOK 4 introduces the practice of artificial intelligence systems. Many professionals in the implementation of IT-systems will find that they are well familiar principles of iterative and analysts to make prototypes PMBOK 4 "compatible" with the most modern techniques of project management in high technology.
On the other hand, Vlad Berezin notes that the PMBOK 3 although not disclose methodological aspects of the application of these technologies, but does not prohibit them.
4) It is logical that when the project implementation of the project management to follow PMBOK. Does the fact that the four were seized in the PMBOK abstract document similar to the "concept" and implemented a prototype of the fact that now the introduction of project management on PMBOK 3 frequently being mistaken or ineffective?
These are the questions everyone must answer yourself carefully studied what was so much changed in the PMBOK 4.
Of course the new requirements is a new job, but you have to pass through it. We had to spend a fair resources for adaptation under the PMBOK 4, but as we will see the company working on PMBOK 4 receives substantial benefits and could take on a variety of risks in project management. Including in project implementation of the project management.
You should decide how you can use the old educational materials and practices in light output PMBOK 4 independently.
Interview with head of development PMBOK 4 th edition
I think better to start review of PMBOK 4 with views of the authors of the original.
Cynthia Stackpole, a project manager to develop PMBOK 4 th edition.
You can watch a video interview with her posted on YouTube. Interview in English, but is equipped with a very clear slides, allowing even minimal language skills to understand what is at stake.
Greater emphasis on program management and portfolio methods (Introduction)
We proceed to analyze the new version of PMBOK.
Chapeau, inter alia, provides a fairly clear focus on program management of projects and project portfolios. Moreover, program management as seen in the diagram below is an important methodological part.
We also noted the tendency of their practice to the widespread use of programs and projects for corporations, so did a Turbo Project support for the work with the programs.
New PMBOK in the introductory part describes only the most general principles of program management of projects and project portfolios. The fact that PMI is preparing separate guidelines on portfolio and program management. Already operates a separate certification program and portfolio management (PgMP, Program Management Professional).
PgMP certificate already has about 100 professionals in the world. When selecting models PMI certification you need to define who you are the project manager or portfolio manager?
New organizational requirements (Organization)
New PMBOK heavily reworked to work with stakeholders in the project to become a lot more added as special processes to identify stakeholders. In addition, very important in the introductory part PMBOK delineation of responsibilities of stakeholders, such as transfer functions initialized portfolio managers. It is not hard to guess it will immediately reflect on the draft Charter and other parts.
PMBOK 4 - A new philosophy of iterative project management (Project Life Cycle)
The fact that the PMBOK 4 was not just a great improvement shown by changes in the introduction to the conceptual part. Prior to this PMBOK probably remained almost the only major procedures, which had a description of the open only for the serial management phase of the project is known as a method of Waterfall (waterfall).
Falls to the principle that you can not start a new phase of the previous unfinished. This is also in the new PMBOK
But there is new - the overlap of the phases of the project. In the figure a realistic example of overlapping phases of design and construction to accelerate the construction of a new plant.
All this means that in the PMBOK 4 is now introduced modern iterative techniques of project management.
Waterfall methodology is formally declared in 1970 after the publication of the Winston Royce (Winston Royce).
Modern techniques of project management for such ak Microsoft Solution Framework, Rational Unified Processes and Agile iteration, ie involve multiple return back to improve project results. Annotations to the books describing the techniques, as well as annotation to the book Bonnie Biafore describing the practical methods of PMI, many of which do not correspond to the PMBOK 3, namely PMBOK 4, you can read this review .
Vlad Berezin argues that since in the introduction of PMBOK 3, it was the mention of iterative, and therefore should be seen as PMBOK four major refinement of previously expressed ideas, but not as a fundamental innovation. Experienced experts to develop ideas PMBOK 3 independently of the general provisions, as in the PMBOK 4 only formally recorded this practice.
Criticism of renowned experts PMI concept of "waterfall" in the PMBOK 3
More categorical co-author and editor of the PMBOK 3 rd version of Mike Griffiths (PMP). Co-author and editor of the PMBOK 3 believes that iterative is a fundamental change in the PMBOK 4. You can read his opinions in this article: PMBOK 4: This Time It's Iterative!
Mike not only co-PMBOK 3, but also one of the founders of the popular methods of Agile, where iterative conceptual point. No wonder then that Mike believes that the PMBOK 4 must have been in an iterative go further even more closer to Agile.
Question of the iterative coincidence is such a concept, because changing the philosophy of project management. Michele Sliger (PMP) in his article compared PMBOK 3 with Agile indicates that the philosophy of PMBOK 3 "sacred cow" is itself a plan (plan driven), and iterative methods "sacred cow" is the maximum customer satisfaction within a fixed budget and time (value driven). Michelle this methodological difference demonstrated by the following scheme known Triangle time is money, the amount of work. " The diagram shows the Waterfall approach, "waterfall" of the PMBOK 3, and demonstrates the iterative Agile project management paradigm.
Griffiths and Sliger known experts PMI, as well as leading experts in the iterative methods of project management, therefore, to evaluate the iterative PMBOK better than them nobody will. According to them PMBOK 3 oriented to achieve performance specifications (requirements specification) by the hard planning for this budget and timeline swim because of the inevitable risks. Iterative methods are constantly adjusting the content of the project (scope) and due to this can be kept in a fixed time and budget, while in a few iterations can be achieved by increasing quality. In iterative methods the most important tool is a prototype that allows you to quickly adjust and verify the coverage. In particular, the development of a prototype - a powerful tool to combat the severe risks associated with the inevitable design flaw in the "paper" sheets.
Iterative methods of project management dominate in all kinds of projects where the customer is ready to change the requirements for the mobile system to enhance their level of satisfaction, as well as to keep projects on time and budget. For example, the introduction of most information systems iteratively. Microsoft partners requires an iterative way to implement a project management system based on Microsoft Project using a special modification techniques Microsoft Solution Framework.
Microsoft Solution Framework is compatible with Agile, even on Microsoft's Web site is ready-made templates and recommendations. Not surprisingly, the problems of integration with the methods of PMBOK 3 were similar. The difference from the MSF Agile is primarily concerned with higher level of documentation processes in MSF.
PMBOK 4 allowed the problem of "compatibility" of teaching materials PMI and Microsoft
Since the PMBOK 3 was not explicitly described in detail and support for iterative and prototype development, the many practices of using iterative methods rather cautiously applied PMBOK 3 giving a leading role iterative methods such as Agile orMicrosoft Solution Framework . These restrictions on the use of PMBOK used and we as Being a Microsoft partner, we could not go the way of ignoring Adapted Microsoft Solution Framework with ready-made methodological developments.
Although there are many experts' suggestions on how to convert the concept of PMBOK 3 interativnye method (see even offers Sliger - "p a radigm s hift" ), in practice, "cross-linking paradigm" smoothly and simply did not happen.
Very many of our colleagues to implement Microsoft Project went on the road non-methodical development of Microsoft and create your own teaching materials to exactly match the PMBOK 3. At the level of work stages, in the offer to introduce MS Project Customer is not seen 4 stages MSF Implementation MS Project , although it seems to be required for certification on Microsoft in project management. Many who now look into your plan management system implementation project, verify that the integration of methodologies, PMBOK 3, and all the MSF is not as smooth as we would like.
Observed on the fact of avoiding the use of MSF in the implementation of MS Project proves that talk about full compatibility PMBOK 3, and MSF was more than talk. Moreover, we note "victims" inconsistencies standards are most often specific methodological developments by Microsoft as a summary of the practices of hundreds of large-scale implementations of MS Project, a repository of regulations Microsoft, a repository of templates, work plans copied from the successful implementations, etc. etc. Sometimes the technique of an abstract dispute "about the terms" transformed into concrete and substantial losses.
C output PMBOK 4 Limits on an iterative disappear, and now choose "MSF or PMBOK?" is not required. PMI "de jure" 4 in the PMBOK legalize an iterative approach, and many processes, as we shall see later, it was adapted by an iterative project management. Therefore, Microsoft partners can safely use developments MSF and without guile to claim that this is a standard approach PMI, and is not an option, but as much important as the Wave.
PMBOK 4 stating in unequivocal form of support for iterative methods, and the prototype is already beginning to attract a new philosophy of many new supporters in the ranks of PMI. The commentary Griffiths iterative Agile proponents say PMBOK 4 as a "breath of fresh air" in project management.
As a supporter of Microsoft Solution Framework (in an adapted version of nedreniya Microsoft EPM) is ready to support assess PMBOK 4 as a new philosophy of project management. At least now PMBOK 4 contains a description of both approaches. It should be noted that Microsoft as one of the key partners and sponsors PMI put some serious effort and for its part to "increase compatibility and terativnogo MSF and the PMBOK by a marketing 4.
Continuity of "old" and iterative methods for project management PMBOK 4
From myself and I may add that the opposition and the progressive refinement method Waves with iterative methods is incorrect. This method for different cases in project management. Possible options and combinations of project management. For example, the sub-design may be a fixed time and budget be an iterative process, and subproject construction can be performed by the method of "waterfall." Such a combined option is supported in Turbo Project .
In addition, iterative methods may themselves use the "Wave". Because the fixation time and budget is well compatible with the principle of iterative, the details of large projects, "Wave" top-down usually works well, but at the level of sub-projects already dominates iterative and mobility. Shelf standards for time and budget phases in the Rational Unified Processes allows this iterative procedure to make effective plans for the Wave (we used this principle in the valuation Turbo Project ).
Therefore, consider the PMBOK 4 as the negation of the old experience is not true. On the contrary, the "old" technique enhanced with new iterative.
Changes in the basic principles of project management (Project Integration Management)
Exclusion of the total (pre-) descriptions of the works
The Russian tradition of introducing project management is the first compilation of the paper, "Concepts of Project Management."
In the PMBOK 3 no such thing, but there is a document "prior description of the" (Preliminary Project Scope Statement), which has the following main characteristics:
- A description of the project results without detailed specifics and only on the upper level - A description of only the general requirements of the process
If we assume that project management is being implemented also by PMBOK, the majority of "concepts" with the general declarations fell under the indications Preliminary Project Scope Statement.
In principle, another option in the PMBOK 3, and is not provided, a preliminary description of the content was the only common document. Also quite common documents were "planning the content" (Scope Planning).
In the PMBOK 4 Remove and Preliminary Project Scope Statement and Scope Planning. In principle, shared document than the Constitution nothing left, everything else is very specific regulations for which the PMBOK 4 gives a clear description of the content.
In connection with this question. Is the practice of making abstract "concepts" methodological error in the light of the requirements PMBOK 4?
Does that mean that the consultants have with the abstract "concepts" go to the procedures and documents described in a radically new PMBOK section 4 on gathering requirements (Collect Requirements)?
At least 4 in the PMBOK is difficult to justify the existence of abstract "concepts" in the project implementation and project management found in the results of processes PMBOK 4 something like that.
Vlad Berezin in his commentary notes that the PMBOK 4 is introduced in the new practice of experienced experts. Experienced experts, and before the PMBOK four preferred detail of the concept to actual design documents (progressive elaboration).Therefore, the appearance of exact requirements to detail only perpetuates the de jure what is already "de facto" become the practice among professionals.
Consultants PM Consulting Services did not change the traditional title of "Concept", but were excluded all abstract terms and the content of the document was equivalent to that described in Collect Requirements.
Shift in emphasis in the Charter of the Project on initialization in the direction of creating the authority the project manager
Large changes in the Project Charter. Project Charter is a document formally authorizes the launch of the project.
In the PMBOK 3 for Charter hidden initialization procedure, in the PMBOK 4 is changed. In the introductory part of the PMBOK 4 can read what is already known to those who passed the exams on the analyst to implement Microsoft EPM: initializing this case the portfolio manager. PMBOK would not constitute advice on portfolio and program management. Accordingly, in the PMBOK 4 is very consistently cleared the project charter of initialization functions.
Eliminated all functional and organizational requirements of the Constitution Project. Excluded from the Charter requirement to describe the return on investment (ROI), because everything that happens to the Charter, including ROI-analysis of the case portfolio manager (see Section 2.3.3 in the PMBOK 4). PMBOK four fairly clearly defined boundaries of projects and actions that are beyond its borders in the PMBOK 4 is not included.
Charter in the PMBOK 4 is a formal for confirmation of the already adopted the solution, not the process of making such a decision.
Since the pre-trial detention revoked, the charter provides general requirements for the project and product, but in a very short form (high-level).
The composition of the Charter on PMBOK 4 looks like this (italics are marked changes in relative PMBOK3, the deletion of paragraphs described above):
- The aim of the project
- Measurable success criteria for project
- Summary of general requirements
- A summary description of the nature of the project
- Summary of product characteristics of the project
- Key milestones for the duration of the project
- Indicative budget
- System requirements for approval of the project and who decides that the project was successfully completed
- Project Manager, its powers and responsibilities
- List of names of individuals with their responsibility for the project
It should be noted that the well-known expert Bonnie Biafore PMI in their books (see the review by Microsoft Press ) formulates the Charter as well as in the PMBOK April saw the main function is to give the project manager authority and interested parties to demonstrate that the project manager is strong support for the sponsor ( curator). Bonii Biafore said that the project is very important that managers are acting as the sponsor (supervisor), written independently of the Constitution Project. This is a demonstration of the level of support to project manager. PMBOK 4 eased this problem allowing the sponsor is easy to state the essence of the project.
In paragraph 2.3.2 PMBOK 4 The role of the sponsor (supervisor) in the drafting of the Charter is now marked. In the introduction, PMBOK 3, it was stated that the lead in developing the Charter is a project management team (project management team), 4 in the PMBOK, this link has been removed. Also on PMBOK 4 Inventory of the main results for the Constitution (Statement of Work, SOW) is now the exclusive privilege of the sponsor. In the SOW as in the PMBOK 3 comprises: the declaration requirements of the organization, general requirements for product design and compliance with the strategic objectives of the organization.
Maybe that's the idea of greater involvement of the sponsor in writing of the Constitution as reflected in the fact that the development of the Constitution removed the tools for the selection of projects and even the methodology of project management.Indeed Sponsor makes the final choice by their own expert evaluation. Therefore, only this method and on PMBOK at 4 in the development of the Charter.
Commenting on the process of drafting the Charter of the project in the PMBOK 4 Vlad Berezin regrets that the authors of the PMBOK four opted for the division of the portfolio manager (certification PgPM) and Project Manager (certified PMP). According to Vlad the practice of many organizations is the initialization of the project within the framework of the project, now PMBOK 4 does not support this method of initialization.
Procedures for the Project Charter, completely redesigned and almost has nothing to do with the PMBOK 3
Procedure on the one hand a few times simplified the number of operations, but on the other hand, new conceptual moments.
Business Case now passed beyond the compilation of drafting the Charter. It includes: the market demands, business needs, customer needs, technological advantages of the project, appropriate legislation and social needs.
The importance of the contract shifted from 1st to 3rd priority.
Effect of the Charter of the factors of the enterprise (Enterprise Environment Factors) drastically reduced to the standards, organizational structure and market conditions.
Drastically reduced the influence of organizational assets (Organization Process Assets) to the Charter to the standards of the Charter of the template and information on previous similar projects.
Among the experts participating in the Charter in the PMBOK 4 is declared the first Project Management Office and narrow the experts on the subject of the project. Recall that n is on PMBOK 4 whole procedure of the statute consists of peer review, other procedures are removed.
Effect of the Charter to other processes PMBOK also completely revised in the light of new processes for gathering requirements and identifying stakeholders.
Can I now use a methodical studies for drawing up the Constitution made for the PMBOK 3? In my opinion there is no and our consultants have developed a new template of the Constitution and laws of work processed at this time.
Perhaps you will agree with another point of view that these changes in the PMBOK 4 are insignificant and can use the old developments.
Improved procedures for closing. Closure in phases, and closure of contracts for procurement
In the PMBOK 4 was amended ideology closing procedures. Of the project closure process is now entirely run continuously closing and separate phases. It should be noted that this adherence to the real trends in the market. In other reviewsMicrosoftProject.ru noted market shift toward larger programs and multiproektov, which consists of many sub-projects, in such circumstances, the closing phase of the procedure is often the closing of the subproject.
Vlad Berezin notes that experienced experts could by interpreting the general provisions of the PMBOK 3 to use the same procedures as in the closing PMBOK 4, only difference is that the "de jure" standard does not prescribe the details of such processes.
In the PMBOK 4 closing procedure is made more natural. From the procedure itself removed the concept of administrative closure and contract closure. Also from the closing of the contract removed a necessary use of the methodology and information systems. Of course the decision to close the methodology does not accept and not IT-systems, it is only an expert appraisal.
Process appeared to close the purchase contract.
The very process of closing the purchase contracts fairly well registered. We dwell on this further.
New in the content management Project (Scope Management)
PMBOK 4 first described the process of conducting analytical work
In the content management a new trend in continuity with the introduction of modern techniques and software solutions methodically x th show its strength.
What we had in the PMBOK 3 as the top content management? Scope Planning - planning content. The implication was that to describe processes for the preparation of the project content.
If an open mind to get a grasp in the PMBOK 3, there are many unanswered questions.
Who should come up with design solutions for the project?
How to come up with design solutions?
How to check the quality of design decisions before implementing them?
All these were questions without answers. Instead, the recommendations were to describe the planning of content.
In the PMBOK 4 Delete entirely Scope Planning. In this regard, and the issues above should be considered that methodological developments made in strict accordance with the PMBOK 3 contain serious flaws in conducting analytical work?
This is a pretty serious matter. According to Vlad Berezin all depended on himself a consultant. Experienced consultants to disclose fully the composition of project documents and their practice, and recorded in the PMBOK 4. At the same time, the consultants could be limited and only the general provisions, PMBOK 3, this is not prohibited.
Like it or not you want to reply to each their own to learn a new process of gathering project requirements (Collect Requirements) replaced the Scope Planning.
Now as a consultant in project management in detail to identify the requirements of a large number of special events. This can not but rejoice, because Recalling the requirements of PMBOK four customers are now able to consultants to provide better procedural documents. In fact PMBOK 4 now can fulfill the role as the SNIP builders when you need to pull out of the designer and architect not only beautiful strokes common solutions, but important details. Similarly, requiring the execution of instructions PMBOK 4 is from a consultant now get much more specific.
PMBOK 4 introduces a serious set of activities to identify project requirements.
- Interviews
- Team of expert stakeholders on the competencies (Focus Group)
- Thematic session (Facilitated Workshop). The format of the session: "experts and users."
- Creative Technology decision-making and resolve conflicts of interest of stakeholders, including technology decision for most of the minority.
- Questionnaires
- Monitoring of the implementation process, in reality, not just on papers
- Prototypes
