Dr. Paul D. Giammalvo: Open Source Trends and the Future of the Project Management Body of Knowledge……

In the first video clip, http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/richard_baraniuk_on_open_source_learning.html Professor Richard Baraniuk, Rice University http://www.dsp.rice.edu/~richb/ talks about the creation of a virtual “knowledge ecosystem” for virtual learning communities.  Through his Connexion project http://cnx.org/ , he shares with us examples of how knowledge, when placed in the “public domain” under “Creative Commons” licensing allows ANYONE to collaborate to create cost effective and timely training materials. This approach enables those at the right hand tail of power log distributions to be able to contribute to the knowledge base. This is especially important to enable those in the DEVELOPING NATIONS to be able to contribute.

In the second video clip, http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/clay_shirky_on_institutions_versus_collaboration.html Clay Shirky, http://www.ted.com/index.php/speakers/clay_shirky.html talks about the limitations, constraints and obstacles that INSTITUTIONS pose in the creation of new knowledge.

Why are these two very entertaining video clips so important?

As Peter Morris et al concluded as part of their “Reinventing Project Management” research, “project management is a discipline stuck in a 1960’s time warp”. Essentially, what this UK funded research discovered is nothing new of any significance has been developed in project management since the advent of the PC in the mid 1980’s enabling Harvard Graphics, Primavera and other CPM scheduling software to move from the main frame to the desk top.  More examples that significant problems exist within the existing Body of Knowledge associated with Project Management- Aaron Shenhar and Dov Dvir, writing in the Project Management Journal http://www.allbusiness.com/company-activities-management/product-management/8905514-1.html state that “Project management is one of the fastest growing disciplines in organizations today. However, ironically, the statistics of project success suggests that most projects still fail and many projects do not accomplish their business results.”

Why is this?  Both Shirky and Baraniuk makes compelling arguments that what we are facing is Pareto’s 20/80 rule in action. That is, 20% of the “experts” are producing 80% of the knowledge.  Because of this we are missing out on the “tail”- the 80% of outlier contributors who have important ideas to share, but are not “mainstream” authors. Specifically, I feel the development of the practice of project management is being hindered by some professional organizations by enticing members to donate our collective IP, aggressively copyrighting this donated IP, compiling it, and then selling it back to us at inflated prices. Another problem is, as Shirky points out, that our organizations are not enabling the “outliers” to contribute- when in fact, it is those outliers who may well hold the key to help us deliver projects more effectively.

In order to remedy this, organizations such as PMI, IPMA, APM et al need to STOP trying to copyright the collective knowledge of the practitioners.  We need to take the advice of Clay Shirky and Richard Baraniuk and open up the Body of Knowledge to EVERYONE to contribute to with ownership placed in the Creative Commons. http://creativecommons.org/ . Taking this approach, we can select the “best” of PMI, AACE, AIPM, IPMA, APM et al and using Baraniuk’s terms “create, rip, mix & burn” to create something new from the best of each.

Some individuals and organizations are taking the lead in this.  Perhaps the first person to exemplify this concept was R. Max Wideman with his Comparative Glossary of Project Management Terms. http://www.maxwideman.com/ Yet, because of aggressive copyright enforcement, by some organizations, his latest comparative glossary does NOT contain definitions from all organizations. This is sad.

Another organization which is taking a lead in open source licensing is the Global Alliance for Project Performance Standards (GAPPS- www.globalpmstandards.org ) This Australian based organization has developed COMPETENCY standards and if you look at page 2 of 48, http://www.globalpmstandards.org/downloads/the-standards/GAPPS_Project_Manager_v1_7a_301007_A4.pdf you can clearly see we have put the collective efforts into the “public domain” under “copy left” licensing.

The International Council of Systems Engineering (INCOSE- www.incose.org) has put their BoK on line for anyone to access at no cost. http://g2sebok.incose.org/ . Furthermore, they have opened it up so that anyone, member or not, can offer suggestions or improvements.

Another forward thinking organization is the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering International. (AACE- www.aacei.org )  Not only has AACE put their “Total Cost Management Framework- Integrated Portfolio, Program and Project Management Methodology” on line at no cost, http://www.aacei.org/tcm/ this organization also offers their “recommended practices” (best practices) guides at no cost. http://www.aacei.org/technical/rp.shtml. Although AACE has yet to recognize the advantages of putting their IP on line under “Creative Commons” licensing, the organizations collective IP is on line at no cost.

Bottom line- colleagues, project management, as we are practicing it today, is NOT working.  I believe one of the reasons is because we have allowed the professional organizations to try to “own and control” our collective knowledge, which has resulted in stagnation and failure to attract and embrace the “psycho milts” (see Shirky, 10:37)- those “outliers” with new or innovative ideas.  Quoting from Clay Shirkey (last two minutes of the video clip) “Institutions who are rigidly managed and who create information monopolies are going to be coming under increasing pressure”.  At this point, I honestly believe that with few exceptions, most professional organizations such as PMI have become obstacles and not enablers. (See Shirky, 11:45)