1 June 2009

To All PMI-CPM Members:

We are writing you today because the Governing Board (GB) of the College of Performance Management (CPM) must make a very important decision as to its future.  Since this decision will have a major impact, we as the GB need your opinions and ideas.  The decision we need to make is one that affects how we run our organization and how you as members are supported. 

As many of you know, the Project Management Institute (PMI) has created a new approach to organizing and managing its Special Interest Groups (SIGs) and Colleges.  It has created a concept called “Virtual Communities”.  Simply stated, the virtual community replaces the SIG and College concept and creates groupings of individuals centered on an interest area, industry, specific need, or knowledge area of project management without any geographic boundary but communicating or interacting with each other online.  In other words the CPM will not exist as it does today, but would be formed into a “virtual community” which focuses on project planning and control, including earned value management. 

At our annual meeting in Naples, Florida, we gave a presentation which highlighted the advantages and disadvantages of going to this structure versus leaving PMI and continuing on as an organization on our own. That presentation is attached to this email.

The next few paragraphs will provide you the information we provided our members at that meeting.  Please read this information and provide us your comments, thoughts, and ideas as to what decision we as the GB, should make.  But first we need to provide you some history as to how we got here.

In 1999, the then Performance Management Association (PMA) decided to merge with PMI and form its first college, the College of Performance Management.  The merger was an important step for PMA as its purpose was to link EVM with project management and as an integral element of PMI, this would be accomplished.  As part of this merger, PMI agreed to keep PMA (CPM) as a separate organization, incorporated and managed as a stand-alone organization (autonomous in its governance) as it had since its inception in 1984.  In fact CPM is the only organization in PMI which was its own organization prior to joining PMI.  All SIGs and the College of Scheduling were created within the PMI structure.  This makes CPM somewhat unique.

With the establishment of all the SIGs and Colleges, PMI determined that there needed to be a better way of organizing these important knowledge providers into a more consolidated institution, hence the creation of the virtual community concept.  Under the new concept, there are distinct and identified types of virtual communities:

–        Knowledge Domains

–        Industry Domains (industry focused)

–        Affinity Communities (relationship and topic focused)

Under this definition, CPM would be a Knowledge Domain because it is included in the knowledge areas of PMBOK®, has a PMI global standard (PMI Earned Value Management Practice Standard), and provides other services.  To further define this, PMI has designated that within these domains, a Community of Practice or a Forum are the options, with a Forum being the less formal structure.  CPM would be a Community of Practice (CoP) because it has a specific domain - an area of knowledge that brings the community together and defines the key issues that members need to address (EVM/Project Planning and Control); has a community—a group of people for whom the domain is relevant and the quality of the relationship among members; and has a practice—the body of knowledge, methods, tools, stories, cases, and documents which members share and develop together.   The primary business intent of the CoP is to:

–        Provide a forum for community members to help each other solve everyday work problems and engage in active networking,

–        Develop and disseminate best practices, guidelines, and procedures for use by community members, 

–        Organize, manage, and steward a body of knowledge from which community members can draw, and

–        Innovate and create breakthrough ideas, knowledge, and practices.

All of this is exactly what CPM does today.  So you would ask, what is the issue of moving toward this model?  The biggest issues for CPM and its GB is the loss of:

–        Autonomy – we must dissolve our incorporation; which means we will no longer have a Governing Board which is responsible for the day to day management of the organization

–        Name/Identity – CPM as an organization will no longer exist and will be identified only as a community of practice within PMI

–        Financial independence – since we lose our incorporation, we also lose access to the funds accumulated over years of operation which we use to service our members and the community as a whole

–        Internet access – while members of PMI can get use of the CPM website, members of the community who are not members of PMI will only have limited access

–        Administrative Staff – currently CPM as a stand-alone organization has its own facilities and staff which is separate from PMI; in other words we would have no dedicated support to address member and community needs

Other issues that concern the GB are:

–        the status of CPM’s intellectual property which will now be owned by PMI

–        CPM can no longer can sign contracts with conference venues, partnerships, etc. only PMI can

–        reliance on PMI to provide support to CPM in a timely manner to meet the needs of the organization on a day –to-day basis

–        paying PMI dues to get access to CPM dues; if we were on our own, to be a member of CPM – you would only pay CPM dues

Finally, to enter into the arrangement with PMI, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is negotiated.  The concern is that PMI may not live up to their promises. This is reinforced by the fact the GB believes PMI has broken its promise of autonomy by forcing CPM and its membership into this important decision.

But one must not evaluate this from only one perspective.  Clearly reasons for staying and participating in the virtual community initiative will have its benefits as well.  For example:

–        Governance – the focus of the new organization will be to manage knowledge dissemination through a new governance model (Community Council) and all administrative support will come from PMI

–        Name/Identity – while CPM will not be the name of the CoP, the name will focus on EVM as a Project Management tool

–        Research – the excellent research program CPM has created will not be lost and can be maintained under the new structure

–        Membership – everyone in PMI will have access to our CoP as well as all CoPs and forums through a single dues approach (i.e., no longer paying multiple dues for each SIG/College)

–        Education – as a CoP one of the primary goals is to provide an educational program which we will continue, as well as open the potential of creating an Earned Value Certification

–        Conferences – no change is anticipated so our CoP will continue the face to face conferences as well as the capability for webinars which will allow not only members but community access

–        Publications – our publication of the Measurable News and other publications will not be disrupted

Other benefits include:

–        Website – the ability to maintain and enhance our website with greater capabilities

–        Copyright – the copyright rules which PMI has maintain have been slightly altered so that the copyright stays with owner

–        Increased access to PMI activities – as part of this process we will potentially have a better integration of all PMI communities

But most of all, this change will ensure our continued relationship with the Program/Project Management community which is the reason we merged in 1999 in the first place.

So the question remains, do the benefits of leaving PMI outweigh the benefits of staying.  It comes down to:

–        Autonomy vs. PMI control

–        Continuing our business as usual vs. change in governance and structure

–        Be a known identity vs. one of many virtual communities

–        Having our own legal protection vs. a Memorandum of Understanding with PMI

–        Probably being more US based vs. PMI’s global based

–        Ensuring a total community focus vs. focusing on PMI membership

It is for these reasons, we need your comments and critiques.  What should the GB do? How should we proceed? What would be the best model for us in the future?  In either case (stay or go), we must have a vote of the membership of CPM.  It is currently a requirement of our Articles of Incorporation.  The requirement is that we need a 2/3 vote of the membership to determine our path.  In August 2009, CPM will call for this vote and each and every member must vote their desire.  The GB has not made a decision as to which direction they will take, but a decision will be made based on your comments and the Board’s honest assessment of the benefits of either option.  The decision will be announced at the time of the vote.  But until then, this is your chance to be a catalyst on the future of CPM. 

To help each of you, CPM has opened its PMI-CPM Forum on the PMI-CPM website (http://www.pmi-cpm.org/pages/home/index.html).  Just enter the forum and either register or log-in to access the Virtual Community Project discussion.  Directions for registering or logging in are on the website. 

Your support is needed.  The Board cannot move without knowing your opinions, expectations, and ideas on our future. 

Thank you in advance for your support.

Sincerely

PMI-CPM Governing Board 

Neil F. Albert

Chairman, CPM Virtual Community Assessment Committee

Past President

PMI - College of Performance Management