It is a common sight in the project kickoff meeting
room: as the introductions move round the table, people explain
what they do, what they know, what they have worked on. This gives
everyone else a succinct insight into what their role in the
meeting and project will be, and what can or should be expected of
them. And then somebody will add theirPrince2 practitioner certificationto
their auto-description, even though the project is not being
managed using Prince2 and they have never actually worked on a
Prince2 project. What's the point?
The cynical view (and I do so love to take the cynical view) is
that our intrepid Prince2 practitioner is either a poor judge of
what's actually relevant to the situation, or is hoping that
everyone else is. However, it is probably just a project manager
desperately trying to let everyone know that they have verifiable
IT project management skills, even if the only proof they have of
it is both irrelevant and unimpressive.
Some may consider this assertion to be a little bold. Even if
Prince2 is not being used on a project, it still contains many
useful tools and embodies many best practices with potential for
broader application. But a properly equipped project manager needs
a diverse toolkit, drawn from more than just one methodology, and
an understanding of the underlying principles in order to apply
those tools appropriately. And Prince2 certification does not
necessarily demonstrate that at all.
Many people who have the certification pass the open book exams
after a one week cram course, which is typically their first
contact with the methodology. The experience is not exactly
conducive to learning anything other than how to pass the exam, and
then forgetting anything apart from a couple of isolated factoids.
With some course providers quoting pass rates as high as 98% or
99%, it is hard to argue that being able to pass the exam
demonstrates any special qualities. A qualification which anyone
can pass without previous knowledge or long-term learning tells you
precisely one metric nothing.
What we have here is a credentialing problem. Organisations find
it difficult to assess the knowledge and skills that they need in
project managers without actually having the candidates manage a
project first. Using past project successes as a guide does not
tend to help, because the IT industry is one where pretty much any
project outcome short of blowing up the sun and casting all the
many lands into gloom and shadow tends to be classified as a
successful delivery. So they look for an objective measure they can
tick off instead.
This kind of proxy assessment can be effective, assuming its
judgement is adequate. Prince2 certification is not. More
appropriate certifications exist - postgraduate degrees, BCS
membership - but require significantly more effort, time and
expense to acquire and in consequence are rarely used. There's a
need for a middle ground which is not currently being fulfilled,
but even so, certifying people who do not practise Prince2 as
Prince2 practitioners is more like a bad zen
koan than a
rational means of validating general IT project management
skills.
John Prior is a senior consultant at Sense Internet