Page 67 - Global Project Management Handbook

THE FUTURE OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT 3-3

The relationships between established professional bodies [PMI, IPMA, Project
Management Professionals Certification Center (PMCC), and the APM Group] and their
methods of development through individualism and collaboration [PMI through the PMBOK
Guide; IPMA through a shared-competence baseline (ICB-IPMA Competence Baseline); the
TM
APM Group through “PRojects IN a Controlled Environment” (PRINCE2 ), Managing
®
Successful Programmes (MSP), and Management of Risk (M_o_R) ; PMCC through A
Guidebook of Project and Program Management for Enterprise Innovation (P2M)] are con-
textualized according the needs of the national and international associations.
For example, the PMI, the IPMA, the Association for Project Management (APM),
and the Australian Institute of Project Management (AIPM) headquarters draw from the
Global Project Management Forum (GPMF)—a kind of suprainstitutional body and think
tank—the desire to create global standards, and in addition, the PMI is very active in sup-
porting research in areas such as establishing a theory of project management, demon-
strating project management value for executives, and achievement of corporate strategy
through successful projects.
The evolution of bodies of knowledge (e.g., the PMBOK Guide, ICB, APM BOK, and
P2M) and methodologies [e.g., the Organizational Project Management Maturity Model
TM
(OPM3), PRINCE2 , and MSP] is evidenced further by themes in papers and books cit-
ing techniques of psychosociology of temporary groups through to knowledge creation
and organizational learning.
In addition, the field is currently characterized by this abundance of initiatives:
● Research—for example, the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
(EPRSC) Network in the United Kingdom “Rethinking Project Management” Web
site (www.rethinkingpm.org.uk)
● Development of standards—for example, the current development of “Global
Performance-Based Standards for Project Management Personnel” (GPBSPMP) under
the direction of Prof. Lynn Crawford and involving industries, professional bodies, insti-
tutions and organizations, and universities from all over the world
● Increasing use of project management methods and techniques—in a preparadigmatic
phase according to Kuhn’s (1983) sense
This phase is the place of revolution, inaugurated by a growing but still narrow subdi-
vision within the project management community that believes that the existing positivist
paradigm has ceased to function adequately in the exploration of the nature of project

management. A second and more profound aspect on which the significance of the
former belief depends is that the success of the revolution necessitates full or partial
relinquishment of one set of institutions in favor of another. Is this the intention of the
creation, in the United States, of an alternative professional body [American Society for
the Advancement of Project Management (ASAPM)] to the PMI? Is this PMI’s purpose
in creating regional service centers in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa (EMEA) and
the Asia-Pacific, with others to come?
In order to develop bodies of knowledge, standards, certification programs, education,
and competencies, a knowledge field is needed. Yet, in both the academic and business
worlds, the field of project management is not clearly established and defined. In addition,
the field is still evolving in breadth and depth.
● In breadth, it is embracing information systems, human resources management,
change management, strategic management, economic value management, psychol-
ogy, management of technology, quality, sociology, multicultural management, sys-
tems thinking, knowledge management, organizational learning, team management,
temporary group, and systems engineering.