PMBok Cafe had a nice post about the jargon of PM 2.0
As well the PM 2.0 advocates have either failed to make or lost their connection with the core principles of project management. They've confused the tools of project management - be they 1.0, 2.0 or any X.0 - with the practices of project management. Managing projects means knowing:
- What will it cost?
- When will it be done?
- Do we know what "done" looks like?
- What are the impediments to getting to "done"?
- Who do we need to get all this work "done"?
Without clear and concise answers to these questions, the tools have no purpose. With the answers to these questions, the tools might be useful, but usually only for the tools vendors.
Tools are a convenience for storing information, communicating that information, and analyzing the information around the MANAGEMENT of projects. The tools are not a replacement for project management.
I finally figured out why I have such a visceral response to many of the PM 2.0 proponents.
The light came on when a poster said PM 2.0 is just common sense. One of my favorite quotes around this approach to most things is
"Common Sense is neither common nor sensical. Much of what passes for common sense is not based on any underlying principle it’s just anecdotes that have worked for the current situation."
Benjamin Franklin
Ben had it right. What passes for common sense is not based on any underlying principle. The principles of Project Management are independent of any tools - nor matter what version. In the absence of these principles, the project management tools have not purpose. Failing to understand this puts the proponents of these tools in the untennable position of not connectinig their value prosition with the market need to increase the Probability of Project Success (PoPS).
