Talk:Project Management Institute

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Systems (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is within the field of Systems engineering.
 
WikiProject Organizations  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Organizations. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Business  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Pennsylvania  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Discussion[edit]

An anonymous contributor wrote "Need to compare with real degrees such as MBA, also reads like a PMI Brocure [sic] and is not NPOV" I think the current information is factual, and doesn't express an positive or negative opinion. Stating that a professional certification is not equivalent to a college degree isn't worthy of an encyclopedia entry. Many employers require a PMP certification as a condition for employment or advancement, but do not require an MBA. --Garrybooker 04:31, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Good discussion. The fact that PMI has "sold" the PMP to some employers means, what? Also consider comparing PMI/PMP to the backlash from the Agile/Scrum approach, that's not opinion, that's fact. While PMP'ers still have enthusiasm for PMI, in a sense, this is a "bill of goods" being "sold" to the public.

Dear Anonymous Person: The expression "a bill of goods" means something intentionally misrepresented, or something passed off in a deception or fraud (I looked it up). What do you think is intentionally misrepresented, deceptive or fraudulent? While I don't always agree with the PMI processes (I think many small projects require a different approach) I have never seen anything in PMI that is deceptive or fraudulent. It is a very ethics-oriented organization. --Garrybooker 16:23, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

It's several things. PMI is attempting to establish itself as the gatekeeper to jobs, where a job req is the PMP only issued by PMI. This is a concerted effort. Then they sell the PMP training, books, and charge for the exams. Then the cycle begins all over again. There are many, many alternatives to PMI's PMP, a BBA, an MBA, many colleges have 4 year programs as well as graduate programs that include substantive management course work. There are also other certificate programs, CDP/CCP/CDMP/ISA (granted it's different but the concept is the same). In contrast, the PMP exam is a fairly superficial quiz. While it's better than nothing, it's not substantive. As a hiring manager, I'd be tempted to take off points for a PMP.


"I'd be tempted to take off points for a PMP" Sounds like you had a bad experience w/ PMI...did you fail the test or get passed over for someone w/ the PMP. As for PMI/PMP cycle, it is no different than GMAT and B School and LSAT and Law School (The guys who handle the accreditation of law schools, ABA, also run the LSAT). A degree is dated shortly after you walk across the stage, a cert shows you have the desire and drive to keep learning...


A PMP is an affectation. Sorry, it's not substantive. You also have it backward. A cert like the PMP is about acquiring a few buzzwords; a degree is a reflection of effort to acquire wide ranging and enduring fundamentals. Neither is a substitute for experience. The fact that the PMP asks for experience does not make it a certification of experience or accomplishment. Unfortunately, everyone wants to set themselves up as the gatekeeper, ie, "buy my cert, pay for my classes, give me a portion of your income." Please do not compare the PMP to law school.


The other problem with the PMP is that the "body of knowledge", while OK, good maybe, isn't exactly how projects really work. There is too much emphasis on form, stakeholders, paper deliverables, meetings, and not enough on the hard issues. It's not substantive. What's really telling is that when you drag the internet for examples of PMP success stories, you find the converse.


Comment from Mel... As someone who has managed projects (IT) for many years, I wish I had discovered PMI years ago. The PMBOK has a great deal of practical advise that took me years to discover by trial and error. Obviously it's not equivalent to an MBA, for example... but it's more relevant to my work experience than my BSc in math. I'm not sure it belongs in Wiki... but don't slam the PMP certification... Mel —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ve2dc (talkcontribs) 17:13, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

After reading the article, I was shocked to see the claim of 370,000 holders of the PMP certification and only a listed membership of 318K+! I help DPMA's CPM for years and found that it did had little or no impact on my career. I also think that it is extremely odd that PMI either sponsors, charges for, or benefits from a member maintaining their certification. At least DPMA would accept ALL training sources on a one to one credit basis. That is, they did not give more weight to DPMA training versus non-DPMA training as PMI seems to do. Overall, in my opinion, this is a certification for certifications sake only and in my world holds little or no relevence. I have worked side by side with PMP Certified Project Managers, and I use the term very loosely, who couldn't succesfully manage a project to save their own lives. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.43.88.121 (talk) 13:10, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Program Management[edit]

Is there any more information about PMI's Program Management certification and its differences to the Project Management certification?

I've read all the information PMI has to offer and it seems like Program Management is focused on mid to senior level project managers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ykimva (talkcontribs) 15:11, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Comments on the PMI Article[edit]

I believe the article on PMI is of a nature that does not belong in Wikipedia. It expresses more the opinion of an individual instead that it is factual. Such an opinion article may do well in the yellow press, but does not belong in Wikipedia.

I think the article is more balanced right now with the last section. Pm master 15:30, 24 February 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pm master (talkcontribs)

I was first surprised to see the article but I agree, the artcle shows the potential issues and is not advertisement. The PMP certification is not comparable with a university diploma but clearly with a test like TOEFL. I am a PMP so I can compare. --Dr.Bernhardt (talk) 12:49, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

PMI Incorporation[edit]

Some chapters and SIGs are listed as registered Pennslvania non-profit corporations, but PMI itself doesn't seem to be listed. Clarification appreciated! To search the Pennsylvania Department of State business entity registration database, use this link [1]. --65.78.213.196 (talk) 00:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

It looks like PMI itself is in that list; here is their listing: [2]. The whole section on Not-for-Profit Controversy doesn't belong in this article because nonprofit status is a purely legal designation, not a moral one. Nonprofit organizations are entitled to charge fees for service -- they're just not allowed to make a profit. Megan Farrington, DPA (talk) 15:27, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Being a purely legal designation and the factual demonstration that PMI is legally listed as a non-profit - this whole section should be removed. This post has been hijacked by someone unhappy with the organization and is just venting. Who will take the intitiative to do the re-write?Reb4179 (talk) 05:25, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

"Operational Goals" Section[edit]

This is the most subjective portion of the article and is not supported by citations. It should either be removed or edited accordingly. --Gordon Jones (talk) 20:56, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


I agree that this section should be removed. Makingprogress19 (talk) 21:01, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Suggested page changes[edit]

Since there was a call for more sourcing and information, I wanted to go through this page and make suggested changes, including references. I started at the beginning, however, i believe the Not For Profit Status and Operational Goals sections have some factual mistakes as well. Here are my suggested changes for the current opening, Overview, Membership and Certification sections: The '''Project Management Institute (PMI)''' is a member association and advocacy organization for the project management profession. Overview & Membership <nowiki>PMI was founded by a group of five volunteers in 1969. Currently, the organization has 260,000 members in more than 171 countries. As of January 2008, 70 percent of the membership lived in North America.<ref>http://www.pmi.org/AboutUs/Pages/About-PMI.aspx</ref>

To serve its members and the profession, PMI has created industry standards, such as [[''A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge'']] (''PMBOK® Guide''), which has been recognized by the [[American National Standards Institute]] (ANSI)<ref>http://webstore.ansi.org/RecordDetail.aspx?sku=ANSI%2FPMI+99%2F001%2F2004</ref>. PMI also issues several professional certifications, produces industry and research publications, offers involvement in local chapters and holds four conferences, called “global congresses” around the world each year.

PMI also has representative offices in Washington, D.C., and Beijing, China<ref>http://www.pmi.org/AboutUs/Pages/Representative-Offices.aspx</ref>, as well as Regional Service Centres in Singapore, Brussels, Belgium and New Delhi, India.<ref>http://www.pmi.org/AboutUs/Pages/Regional-Service-Centre-Contacts.aspx</ref> Certification

PMI’s offers five professional certifications<ref>http://www.pmi.org/CareerDevelopment/Pages/Our-Credentials.aspx</ref>:

PMI Risk Management Professional (PMI-RMP)SM
PMI Scheduling Professional (PMI-SP)SM
Program Management Professional (PgMP)SM
Project Management Professional (PMP)®
Certified Associate in Project Management (CAPM)®

Nearly 260,000 people hold the PMP certification<ref>http://www.pmi.org/AboutUs/Pages/About-PMI.aspx</ref>. In 2007, it earned the ISO/IEC 17024 accreditation from the [[International Organization for Standardization]] (ISO)<ref>http://www.pmi.org/AboutUs/Pages/Release_PMI-055-08-07.aspx</ref>. Credential holders do not have to be members of PMI.

To maintain most PMI credentials, holders must earn Professional Development Units (PDUs) which can be earned a variety of ways such as taking classes, attending PMI global congresses, contributing to professional research or writing and publishing papers on the subject.<ref>http://www.pmi.org/CareerDevelopment/Pages/Continuing-Certification-Requirements-(CCR).aspx</ref>

Makingprogress19 (talk) 04:23, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

This is a very good suggestion for a re-write. It is NPOV and removes all of the inflammatory rhetoric that was existing. I would only suggest moving the discussion of its founding and membership to follow the listing of the certifications. It makes more sense to me to start out with a discussion of what PMI is and does before discussing its history and size. Reb4179 (talk) 05:29, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Section Removal[edit]

i would like to suggest removing the section Not For Profit Status section. It's neutrality has been questioned and it has been marked as vague and is need of valid citations. If there is objection can we discuss ways to make improvements to it so that it is more neutral? Makingprogress19 (talk) 22:45, 24 July 2008 (UTC)


Congress section[edit]

I think a section on PMI's global congresses would be helpful. Thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Makingprogress19 (talkcontribs) 00:18, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality Question[edit]

I am wondering if someone can provide specifics about the questions of neutrality raised on this page. There is no discussion about it. Makingprogress19 (talk) 15:26, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Page Sourcing[edit]

The majority of the sources on this page have been changed. They should now comply with third-party reliable sourcing. Can we remove the warnings on the page? How do you do that? Makingprogress19 (talk) 12:36, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality Question (Part II)[edit]

Hello. My name is Len O'Neal and I work for PMI as the manager of online strategy and content. I'm a bit puzzled by the neutrality dispute on this page - does anyone know how it came about? Regarding neutrality - of the 21 cited references on this page, only three point to the PMI's Web site, the rest point to third-party sources. We'd be happy to supply alternative sources for the comments on the page regarding standards. And with regard to notability, PMI is a four-decade-old organization that has 265,000 members in 170 countries - well within the range of other organizations whose notability is not disputed on their Wikipedia entries (e.g., the Association for Computing Machinery with 83,000 members and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers with 365,000 members). Would appreciate any insight on why the neutrality dispute still exists on this page and if it could possibly be resolved. Thanks. ONeallen (talk) 19:50, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Comment from asoundmove:
Quote from the top of the article: "PMI is the leading membership association for the project management profession.[1]". This is unsubstantiated (other than an incorrect self reference). Even the IEEE does not claim to be _the_ leader in their field, whereas they arguably are, instead they say "IEEE is one of the leading [...]". asoundmove 14 November 2008 —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:19, 14 November 2008 (UTC).
I readded that claim. Made it even "world-leading", and based it on a reliable source. This simply explains people, who they are dealing with. As far as I know this is how Wikipedia works, and should work. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 15:49, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Excellent point. Since I work for PMI, I’d rather not alter the content of this page. Would someone mind adjusting the wording of that first paragraph to read differently? Perhaps it could say something like 'With over 420,000 members and credential holders worldwide, PMI is the largest membership association for the project management profession.' I appreciate you pointing this out. Once this change has been made, does anyone see any reason why the neutrality flag cannot be removed? Are there any other issues with the content of this page? Thanks. ONeallen (talk) 24 November 2008 (UTC)

I wikified this article and removed the tags, which I think shouldn't be here any more. I do think this article could use some more general introduction. I'll see what I can do sone. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 13:07, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
I wikified this article some more and readded an Advert-section tag in the article. I think this article needs work. My problem with that section is, that:
  • It lists the MPI activities. Instead of describing it to a general audience from reliable sources.
  • There is a rain of references. Instead there should only be wikilinks and links to reliable sources.
  • It seem to shows a lot of news. Now Wikipedia is no news medium. Word like "currently" and "recently" should be avoided. Instead wite "in 2008" and add the reliable source.
  • ... and wikilinks shouldn't be referenced.
  • ... and all abreviations should be avoided.
  • ... not reliable sources should be removed.
I will make some more changes to the article sone based on these points. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 15:44, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Overview Section[edit]

The first paragraph has many misspellings or non-sequiturs. Surprisingly poor quality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.225.207.33 (talk) 22:56, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I made some corrections. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 23:22, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Intro/article rewritten[edit]

I have rewritten the intro of this article, late last year. I am pretty sure this intro doesn't read like an advertisment any more. So I removed the tag (again).

Now if somebody thinks I am wrong, would he please explain, which particular sentences are not ok, so I can do something about it. Just a general tag with no justification makes little sense to me. Thank you. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 01:28, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit]

I removed the advert- tag for now. I do think think claims of presument advertisment should be explained of on the talkpage, so people can do something about this. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 23:36, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

The intro is identical but for formatting. The entire article appears written by the organization itself. There are many blatantly biased advertising sentences, while I have difficulty finding a single sentence that would not be expected from an organization's advertising department. —Centrxtalk • 23:59, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Maybe I haven't made myself quite clear. I have rewritten the intro between 2 and 7 dec 2008, see here, and recreated what I think is an introduction from a neutral point of view. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 00:01, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Okay. The intro is innocuous. The rest of the article reads exactly like advertising, and some of it is copied directly from PMI literature. The simplest edit to fix this would delete half the article. I was doing this edit, when I found that part was copied. It looks like all revision prior to 03:25, 12 January 2008 need to be deleted, and many parts since. It may be easier to delete the entire article and start from scratch, retaining parts not copied. —Centrxtalk • 00:10, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks very much, I don't know about that last remark. First I will comment on the intro. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 00:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Introduction[edit]

Thanks, I have no problem rewriting the article some more. Just for the record, I am definitly not on the payrole of the PMI instutute. I do have made a sever effort to improve the coverage of project management in Wikipedia lately (late last year, what cost me almost half a week). Now it seems to me the PMI has a similar position in the field of PM as the IEEE in the field of electrical enginmeers. So I will use the IEEE article as the standard:

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers or IEEE (read eye-triple-e) is an international non-profit, professional organization for the advancement of technology related to electricity. It has the most members of any technical professional organization in the world, with more than 365,000 members in around 150 countries.

If we translate this here, we could get something like:

The Project Management Institute or PMI is is an international non-profit, professional organization for the advancement of project management. It has the most members of professional project management organization in the world, with more than 285,000 members in around 120 countries.

This should give, short of, a Wikipedia standard opening, which should do. Any objections? -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 00:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

On the other hand the current introduction is based on two reliable sources:
The Project Management Institute (PMI) is a non-profit professional organization dedicated to advancing the state-of-the-art of project management.<ref>Jon M. Wickwire et al. (2002). ''Construction Scheduling: Preparation, Liability, and Claims''. p. 289.</ref> It is the world's leading association for the project management profession.<ref name="NoKe07"> Sebastian Nokes, Sean Kelly (2007). ''The Definitive Guide to Project Management: The Fast Track to Getting''. p.331.</ref>
It seems to me this is according to Wikipedia rules and can't classify as advertisement. So I propose to leave it with that. But if some one insist, we could make a combination of the IEEE intro and this intro. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 21:31, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Accreditation by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI)[edit]

I just search though the (ANSI) website trying to get prove the PMI is accredited by the ANSI. So far I couldn't find a direct reference here. I did find in: Jan Van Bon (2006). Frameworks for IT Management. Van Haren Publishing. ISBN 9077212906. p.206:

  • 1999 PMI accredited as a Standard Development Organization (SDO) by ANSI
  • 2000 PMBoK Guide - 2000 Edition (Second edition) was published an is recognized as standard ANSI/PMI 99-001-2000
  • 2004 PMBoK Guide - 2004 Edition (Third edition) was published an is recognized as standard ANSI/PMI 99-001-2004

I guess this will do as a acceptable source. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 01:32, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Sections removed[edit]

30 May 2009 00:10 (UTC) the following sections have been removed by Centrx. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 21:54, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Certification
Although there are other project management certification programs, the PMI certifications are widely acknowledged with the project management community.
PMI offers the following professional certifications:
PMI Global Congresses
Four PMI global congressess<ref>[http://congresses.pmi.org/ PMI global congressess]</ref> are held each year in the different regions of the world—North America, Latin America, Asia Pacific and Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA). These professional networking and educational events are open to everyone and include presentation topics in different Areas of Focus such as "Trends in Project Management," "Communication" and "Consulting Skills."
PMI certification holders<ref>[http://www.pmi.org/CareerDevelopment/Pages/Our-Credentials.aspx PMI certification holders]</ref> can earn Professional Development Units (PDUs) for attending congress sessions and other pre- and post-congress events like the PMI Research Program Working Session and the PMI Standards Program Working Session.
At the PMI Global Congress 2008—North America in Denver, Colorado, General Colin Powell will give the keynote address.<ref>http://www.pmforum.org/blogs/news/2008/06/general-colin-powell-to-keynote-pmi.html</ref>
Researching the Value of Project Management
In July 2008, PMI released preliminary results from its "Researching the Value of Project Management"<ref>''[http://www.pmi.org/Value/default.htm Researching the Value of Project Management]''</ref> study. Conducted with Athabasca University, the study was led by principal investigators Janice Thomas, Ph.D.,<ref>http://www.mba.athabascau.ca/titan/aucimwebsite.nsf/AllDoc/731902b120d74fc0872574830066dce3!OpenDocument&Click=</ref> and Mark Mullaly, PMP. The multi-million dollar study, which involves more than 60 case studies from organizations around the world and more than 440 interviews with project managers, suppliers and contractors, set out to prove that project management does equal organizational success.
In "Solid Proof", a supplement on the study, Mark Mullaly said of the studies results: "We have clear, compelling evidence of value, and at the same time we have demonstration that value is being leveraged in different ways in different organizations both in terms of the tangible things they think they're looking for [and the intangible], but the intangible seems to deliver the greatest value to the greatest number of organizations."<ref>http://proggex.com/downloads/PMNSupp200808.pdf</ref>
PMI Scheduling Professional Credential
In 2008 PMI launched a new credential called the PMI Scheduling Professional credential (PMI-SP)SM for project team members who specialize in scheduling.<ref>http://www.scheduleassociates.com/scheduling-professional.asp</ref>
To receive the credential, you must meet certain eligibility requirements set by PMI. For those with bachelor degree holders, that includes three to five years of project scheduling experience, a minimum of 3,500 hours of non-overlapping scheduling experience and 30 contact hours of formal education. For those with a high school diploma or associates degree, that includes three to five years of project scheduling experience, a minimum of 5,000 hours of non-overlapping scheduling experience and 40 contact hours of formal education.<ref>http://www.mosaicprojects.com.au/Training-Planning.html</ref>
PMI Educational Foundation
PMI Educational Foundation was founded in 1990 by the Project Management Institute (PMI®). It is a non-profit, non-political, public charitable organization. As a charitable organization, it is dependent on contributions to provide the income necessary to undertake its purposes.
The PMI Educational Foundation has adopted the slogan "Empowering the future of project management" to demonstrate its commitment to advancing project management knowledge and the application of project management concepts and theory by society.
The purpose of the PMI Educational Foundation is to promote economic, educational, cultural, and social advancement through the application, development, and promotion of project management concepts, theories, and life skills.
The PMI Educational Foundation has a goal: to enrich lives through knowledge of and education in Project Management Life Skills.
Further comments on the removal of these sections

These sections have been removed by Centrx with the argument:

Delete advertising sections, some copied directly from PMI literature. Delete redundant list in Certifications section.

I personally agree with this removal for two more reasons:

  • Two sections: "Researching the Value of Project Management" and "PMI Scheduling Professional Credential" seems to report recently new lanched and onging events. These new developments normally aren't considered notable enough to be mentioned in a Wikipedia articles.
  • If they are mentioned they should be referenced by reliable third sources, which at the moment they don't seem to comply.

I do have my doubts about:

  • The removal of the "PMI Global Congresses" already held four times, and "PMI Educational Foundation" founded in 1990.
  • Other sections about prizes by the institute, and other regular things listed in wikipedia articles like these seem to be missing as well.

But I do think we owe it to the people. who contributed these sections to explain why, and give them the opportunity to question these removals. So I hope people will respond here. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 21:54, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Further non-reliable sources + primary sources tag removed[edit]

To further clean this article from advertisements I have removed the following non-reliable sources:

  1. http://www.certmag.com/read.php?in=1851 : Free speech on line article in Certification Magazine by Denny Smith, Ph.D., is the manager of the certification program with PMI
  2. http://www.gantthead.com/blog/Project-Management-2.0/?userTagIDSort=20 : Seems a blog, which is generally not considered a reliable reference in Wikipedia.
  3. http://www.pmhut.com/10-quick-and-easy-ways-to-earn-pdus-for-re-certification : seems a blog on project management
  4. http://www.pmi.org/Resources/Pages/Standards-Development.aspx Direct link to PMI webpage on "Standards Overview"

With the removal of these references I also removed the primary sources tag, about "Primary sources or sources affiliated with the subject are generally not sufficient for a Wikipedia article". -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 22:11, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Adverttag[edit]

I would like to propose to remove the adverttag. It seems to me the article has been almost completely rewritten since dec 2008, see here for the difference between then and now. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 22:22, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

I see very little remaining that would classify the article as advertising. No objections to the removal of that tag. I would be very careful in restoring any of the above material unless secondary sources are clearly provided. Kuru talk 00:56, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
Ok thanks. I have removed the advert tag. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 22:12, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Some more phrases[edit]

The article hasn't been rewritten a day, or an anom user has changed several phrases in the article.

  1. added the phrase "registered with the Internal Revenue Service as" in the opening sentence
  2. changed the phrase "It is the world's leading association" into just "a professional association"
  3. added "unpaid volunteers" voluntairs twice

Now I think:

  1. To my knowledge this is a highly irregular phrase in Wikipedia articles, so I already removed the first phrase
  2. I partly oppose the second change because, if you like it or not, the PMI is the largest institute world wide. The phrase itself was from a reliable source, and shouldn't have to be removed.
  3. And last. It seems adding "unpaid" and "volunteers" is double and should be removed.

This may require some more action. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 21:54, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

It is "a professional association", is easy to source, but if the phrase "It is the world's leading association" that is an opinion, and unless there are multiple independent third party sources that claim it is true (eg a several independent trade journals, major news papers or whatever), then the source making the claim should be included in the text of the article (see WP:ASF).-- PBS (talk) 09:44, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I appreciate all the help I can get, but I am not sure what you mean. The current artice doesn't contain the phrase "It is the world's leading association" any more.. !? -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 09:51, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I am not saying that it does, but "The phrase itself was from a reliable source, and shouldn't have to be removed." implies that you were thinking of reinstating it. -- PBS (talk) 10:39, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
BTW you also say above "the PMI is the largest institute world wide." If there is a third party reliable source (not a Wikipedia article or an article by PMI or its affiliates) then that is a fact an probably should be included in the article. "It is the world's leading association" is an opinion, and as I said, see WP:ASF for guidance on this. --PBS (talk) 10:53, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. You are right, I overlooked. I think I did reinstalle that particular phrase and somebody else removed it again. Eversince I left it that way.
If I am not mistaken I took that "fact" from the Sebastian Nokes, Sean Kelly (2007). The Definitive Guide to Project Management: The Fast Track to Getting. p.331. which seems like a good reliable third party source. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 10:59, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

History section removed[edit]

I removed the history section for now after a firm request at the Talk:Gregory Balestrero#Further comment. I hope to (correct and) restore it as soon as possible. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 11:05, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Now I still haven't got a clue, what PBS was talking about, see here, when he claimed "there are others that are clear copyright violations. Would you please fix them in the article Project Management Institute#History?"

So I will analyse the whole section from source to source

  1. The Project Management Institute was founded in 1969 at the Georgia Institute of Technology by five volunteers: James Snyder, Gordon Davis, Eric Jennett, A.E. Engman, and Susan C. Gallagher. Their initial goal was to establish an organization where members could share their experiences in project management and to discuss issues.[1]
  2. In 1999, the PMI was accredited by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) as an Standard Development Organization (SDO).[2]
  3. In 1996, the first edition of A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide) was published. This book outlines project management knowledge areas, processes, and practices, and became a standard for generally recognized good practices in project management. The second edition, published in 2000, is recognized by ANSI as standard ANSI/PMI 99-001-2000, and the third 2004 PMBoK Guide as standard ANSI/PMI 99-001-2004.[2] In 2008, with
  4. its third edition, the PMBOK Guide has sold more than a million copies worldwide.[1]
  5. From 1997 to 2002, the president of PMI was Virgil R. Carter, under whom PMI experienced a 350 percent net growth in membership to 90,000-members and expanded its global component organizations in 120 countries. Carter also spearheaded PMI's financial growth from an $8 million budget in 1997 to $30 million in 2001.[3]
  6. Carter was succeeded in 2002 by Gregory Balestrero.[4]
  7. PMI almost tripled the number of members again in the next seven years. Balestrero's two primary goals for PMI are building a superior project management practice and gaining global acceptance for the profession.[4]
  8. During his tenure, PMI has grown from 93,000 in 2002 to over 260,000 members in 2008 in over 150 countries worldwide.[4]
  9. In 2008, the organization reported more than 260,000 members in over 171 countries. PMI also has offices in Washington, D.C., and Beijing, China, as well as Regional Service Centres in Singapore, Brussels, Belgium and New Delhi, India. Recently, an office was opened in Mumbai, India.
Sources
  1. ^ a b Sliger, Michele; Broderick, Stacia (2008). The Software Project Manager's Bridge to Agility. Addison-Wesley. p. 26. ISBN 0321502752. 
  2. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference Bon06 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  3. ^ "ASME names new executive director". ASME news. May 2002. Retrieved 2 December 2008. 
  4. ^ a b c "NASA Project Management Challenge" (PDF). NASA. 2007. Retrieved 2 December 2008. 

Now I still don't understand where all those clear copyright violations are? I did learn today here that the initial burden of proof is on the person who alleges plagiarism. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe PBS should make clear what he is talking about, and maybe suggest who to reapir it.

I did move the section here as Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Repairing_plagiarism suggested... !? Maybe PBS can just explain what he means...!? -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 22:48, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Marcel! The "burden of proof" has been met in various places you and I have discussed this, by various people. There is a burden of responsibility on the part of editors who begin or contribute to articles, and that is: don't misrepresent other people's words as your own. You persist in demanding that people who have already made themselves clear "should make clear what [they] are talking about." You have made a mess of a lot of pages, by filling them with text that you have admitted is not your own. You have stated on various talk pages your belief (at the time you made your edits) that quotation marks were a matter of "choice" on your part. They are not. As for Philcha's insistence that I failed to live up to the "burden of proof", Philcha was incorrect. I provided proof at the very start of this issue on the Systems Psychology page. The proof was the plagiarized paragraph that you 1)should not have put there to begin with, and which you, 2) when I noted the pov content of the paragraph (not knowing that you had plagiarized it) -- by complaining about me being unfair in my vocabulary in expressing my annoyance at its non-neutral quality, made me think that you had written it, which you hadn't. You put me in the position of unfairly criticizing someone who was entirely uninvolved in the discussion, that is the person who actually had written the (copyrighted) material. That was dishonest of you, and unfair to her. Philcha failed to check the history, in accusing me of not offering "proof". So don't lean so hard on what you "learned today" regarding this burden of proof. You have, on at least one other page, reverted removals of material you plagiarized, thus committing the act twice, and willfully. Your protestations of not understanding the issue are wearing thin. I have many many paragraphs of stuff you have put in many pages that I plan to ask you about, in the relevant talk spaces. The fact is, you have muddied the situation tremendously, making it an extremely difficult and time consuming process to provide the kind of proof that Philcha, I presume, would be satisfied by. But believe me, specifics are on the way. Call me Bacrito. (the guy you thought was "Marrakech". I have a page you may reply on, if you wish. I don't know how to redirect the temporary page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:72.229.55.73 that you posted to before to my current page. Sorry for any confusion. Bacrito (talk) 05:45, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

In Talk:Gregory Balestrero#Further comment and Wikipedia talk:plagiarism#People are not getting the message it has been made clear to you that this is not so much a case of plagiarism as copyright violation.
I gave you an example of what is a copyright violation in Talk:Gregory Balestrero#Further comment. But here it is again:
Extended content

"spearheaded PMI's financial growth from an $8 million budget in 1997 to $30 million in 2001." is directly lifted from the article word for word. If it is not in quotes it is a copyright violation.

...

Sorry I still don't understand what I should fix. But I removed the whole Project Management Institute#History section for now to be on the save side. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 10:39, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

If some text is copied from a copyright source then it must be be in quotes. -- PBS (talk) 10:45, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Sorry it must be getting late because again I don't understand. The text I removed (see here) was a composition of at least 7 to 8 quotes from 4 or 5 different sources. Not just copied from a copyright source... -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 11:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Then you must quote each one, or summarise the sources, what you can not do is use sentences or phrases from the original sources without putting them in quotes so "spearheaded PMI's financial growth from an $8 million budget in 1997 to $30 million in 2001" must be in quotes, if you want to paraphrase it then something like this would do: between 1997 and 2001 PMI's budget grew nearly four fold, from eight to 30 million dollars. Usually it is more difficult to summarise just one source, it is much easier to summarise multiple sources. -- PBS (talk) 12:37, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I will make an effort of analyzing all of these 7 to 8 quotes from 4 or 5 different sources. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 13:19, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
See also Wikipedia:Copyright violations and Wikipedia:Copyright problems. --PBS (talk) 08:20, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Burden of proof[edit]

Sorry guys, the only thing I mean with burden of proof is a listing of possible copyright infrigments. Only one thing has been mentioned so far:

  1. "... "spearheaded PMI's financial growth from an $8 million budget in 1997 to $30 million in 2001." is directly lifted from the article word for word. If it is not in quotes it is a copyright violation..." by -- PBS (talk) 12:37, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I only like to know waht are those alledged others "clear copyright violations"...??? -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 09:42, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

I think you are confused. There is no burden to prove that something is or is not a copy violation, you should check the wording you wish to add to an article to make sure that the wording to Wikipedia that is not a copy violation, because if you repeatedly add wording that is a copy violation, your account will be blocked (see Wikipedia:Copyright violations#Dealing with copyright violations and Wikipedia:Copyright problems#Repeated copyright violations). Now that you know that you must quote text taken from another source, you are just as capable of checking you own work as anyone else for copyright violations. Have you checked the rest of the section that you have placed here to see if any other clause is copied from another source? If you have, then you are capable of deciding if it needs to be quoted, and if you have not then you are in danger of breaching the restrictions in the WP:COPYVIO POLICY for which the sanctions are clearly laid out in the section "Dealing with copyright violations". -- PBS (talk) 11:07, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Insofar as there is a burden of proof, it is on the contributor who copies text from another source into Wikipedia, to prove that it is copyright free. Of the history section, the first two sentences are blatantly pasted from [3]. Unless verification is provided that this text is free, this is a copyvio under Wikipedia's policies. The second paragraph also seems to be substantially copied: [4]. Clearly that passage is not, as WP:C mandates, rewritten in entirely new language. Phrases such as "became a standard for generally recognized good practices in project management" are amply creative to warrant copyright protection. The material on Virgil Carter was taken almost wholecloth from [5]: "experienced a 350 percent net growth in membership to 90,000-members and expanded its global component organizations in 120 countries. Carter also spearheaded PMI's financial growth from an $8 million budget in 1997 to $30 million in 2001." This varies from the source by only three words. Again, this constitutes a copyright violation under Wikipedia's policies. Wikipedia's policies are clear in that if contributors copy text from a non-free source, they must follow the guidelines at WP:NFC. If they do not, they are in violation of our copyright policy. And as the bottom of every edit screen says, "Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted." --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:40, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Ok, thank you. This is the feed back I wanted. Now I understand. I will study on this some more first, and get back on this how to solve this...!? -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 11:56, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Further comment[edit]

I have doublecheked the other contributions I made to this article and I have rewritten some of it. I will leave it with tis for now, maybe rewrite a history section (if nobody else does in the mean-time). Again sorry for the inconvenience. -- Mdd (talk) 21:39, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

History of PMI[edit]

In order to recreate the history section, I first started collecting some more quotes:

About it's foundation
  • "A new association - designed to serve the needs and interests of individuals active in project management - has been set up. The Project Management Institute has been under development since 1964. The institute, which accepts only individual memberships, is headquartered at Drexel Hill, Pa. Mailing address is Box 43. PMI's first activity was jointly sponsoring with Georgia Institute of Technology a seminar on advanced project management concepts". Source: Petro/chem engineer, Volume 41‎ - p.20. 1969.
  • "The Project Management Institute (PMI) was founded in October 1969 as a nonprofit organization devoted exclusively to the field of project management. PMI's objectives are to: foster recognition of the need for professionalism in project management: provide a forum for the free exchange of project management problems solutions and applications; coordinate industrial and academic research efforts; develop common terminology and techniques to improve communications". Source: US NBS (1975). NBS special publication, Editie 417 Door United States. National Bureau of Standards. p.141.
  • "Project Management Institute. Originally the Society of CPM Consultants and affiliated with SAM (see separate entry below), this group was founded in 1969 and currently has 2500 members...". Source: Carl Heyel (1982). The Encyclopedia of management‎. p.642
  • "Project Management Institute (PMI) The Project Management Institute was created in 1969 in New Castle, Pennsylvania". Source: Ronald B. Cagle (2005). Your successful project management career‎. p.18.
  • "This organization was begun in 1969 by a group of concerned managers to help improve the quality of project management work." Source: James Taylor (2006). A survival guide for project managers. p.10
  • "The Project Management Institute was founded in 1969 at the Georgia Institute of Technology by five volunteers: James Snyder, Gordon Davis, Eric Jennett, A.E. Engman, and Susan C. Gallagher. Their initial goal was to establish an organization where members could share their experiences in project management and to discuss issues." Source: Michele Sliger & Stacia Broderick (2008). The Software Project Manager's Bridge to Agility. Addison-Wesley. p. 26. ISBN 032150275

Comments:

  • It seems to me that the 2008 source doesn't correspond with the 1969 and 1982 sources, but there seems to be more inconsistencies here.
    • All seem to agree on the year 1969,
    • The backround seem to differ from : five years of development, a start as Society of CPM Consultants, or just five volunteers at the Georgia Institute of Technology...?
About it's members
  • "Project Management Institute. Originally the Society of CPM Consultants and affiliated with SAM (see separate entry below), this group was founded in 1969 and currently has 2500 members...". Source: Carl Heyel (1982). The Encyclopedia of management‎. p.642
  • "This institute was started in 1969 with only a small cadre of members. By 1981, it had 3500 active members". Source: David I. Cleland, William Richard King (1983). Systems analysis and project management‎. p.193
  • "the Project Management Institute has been bringing together the discipline's practitioners for 16 years. It has 5.000 members and chapters in many major cities in the United States and abroad." Source: InfoWorld 1 april 1985, p.35 (see here)
About it's further development
  • "In 1981, the Project Management Institute formally recognized the development of uniform standards for management of projects as its responsibility and in 1987 published... the PMBOK guide." Source: Timothy J. Kloppenborg, Joseph A. Petrick (2002). Managing project quality. p.70. (see here)

Comment:

  • In a way the history of project management and the PMI are interconnected.
About it's presidents
  • "...engineer James J. O'Brien, president of Project Management Institute and an experienced value analyst,..." Source: American Institute of Architects (1974). American Institute of Architects journal. Volume 62‎. p.43.
  • "... Harvey Levine, a project manager at general Eletric in Schenectady, New York..." Source: InfoWorld 1 april 1985, p.35

This is just a start for now. -- Mdd (talk) 20:09, 9 November 2009 (UTC) -- Mdd (talk) 20:09, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

About it's foundation[edit]

In "The Project Management Institute : In the Beginning..." Wideman (1985) explains the background those five volunteers mentioned in Sliger & Broderick (2008):

According to Wideman three of them first met fall of 1967 in Philadelphia, when Engman from Houston visited Snyder and Gallanger at the SK & F laboratories in Philadelphia.

Furthermore according to Wideman (1985):

  • There was a meeting Feb 1968 in New Orleans, Louisiana were Messrs, Engman, Jenett, King, Davis and Snyder agreed to initiate an "American Project Management Institute" with several objectives.
  • Eventually the organization registration in the State of Pennsylvania under the name of Project Management Institute, Inc. was signed by James R. Snyder, Edward A. Engman, Eric Jenett, Michael Homyak and Susan C. Gallagher.
  • In Oct 1968 a two day seminar was held at the Georgia Institute of Technology on the subject of "Advanced Project Management Concepts".

According to Wideman (1985) "on the evening of the first day [of that two day seminar], October 9th, at the American Hotel in Atlanta, the existence of the Project Management Institute was announced to a group of approximately eighty people. A total of twenty-four "founders" joined the new Institute on the spot".

Interesting in this matter was the New Orleans meeting, February, 1968, five objectives of the institute to come were drawn in the minutes, four out of five already listed by the US NBS (1975):

  • foster recognition of the need for professionalism in project management:
  • provide a forum for the free exchange of project management problems solutions and applications;
  • coordinate industrial and academic research efforts;
  • develop common terminology and techniques to improve communications, and
  • develop guidelines needed for instruction and education

Now I guess I missed a year here, because according to Wideman (1985) "a news release on October 21, 1969, announcing the launching of the new organizationlaunching of the new organization designed to serve the interests of individuals active in the field of project management"...!? -- Mdd (talk) 22:48, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

There seem to be something(s) strange in Wideman's article. First, he wrote "So in January, 1968 (p.4)... In October that year a two day seminar (p.5)... a news release on October 21, 1969 (p.5)..." So there seems to be a year missing..?? That "Seminar in Advanced Project Management Concepts‎" at the School of Industrial and Systems Engineering of the Georgia Institute of Technology, cofounded by the Project Management Institute and the Dept. of Continuing Education of the Georgia Institute of Technology was definitly in 1969. The New Orleans meeting, Wideman (1985) describes cannot be earlier in "that same year" in February, 1968...!?
And second: That text in the Petro/chem engineer, Volume 41‎ - p.20. 1969 could be the result of the late Oct 1969 press release, because that publication already mentioned the joint sponsored seminar at Georgia Tech. It however mentioned four years of preparation, and not the one or two yeas Wideman described.
And third: In the invitation for the New Orleans meeting Ned Engman had proposed, agina according to Wideman (1985), "to form a National CPM Society". Maybe this is what Heyel (1982) ment with "Originally the Society of CPM Consultants"..??
One way or on other Widerman's article has explained several thing but left some things unanswered. -- Mdd (talk) 23:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
On the latest 2009 PMI Global Congress North America there seem to have been a "nostalgic and thought-provoking discussion" between PMI Founders Jim Snyder, Susan Gallagher (both from Philly) and Gordon Davis (from Atlanta). (Source: here). -- Mdd (talk) 23:44, 11 November 2009 (UTC)