sppn.info Science The Standard For Program Management Pdf

THE STANDARD FOR PROGRAM MANAGEMENT PDF

Tuesday, June 25, 2019


The Project Management Institute, Inc. (PMI) standards and guideline publications, of which the document contained herein is one, are developed through a. Project Management InstituteThe Standard for Program Management$ CHF The Standard for Prog. The Standard for Program. Management – Third Edition. Update. Ray Mead PMP MBA,. Director, PM-Partners group. “PMI” is a registered trade and service.


The Standard For Program Management Pdf

Author:ARDEN HELMLY
Language:English, Spanish, Japanese
Country:Ecuador
Genre:Lifestyle
Pages:
Published (Last):
ISBN:
ePub File Size: MB
PDF File Size: MB
Distribution:Free* [*Regsitration Required]
Downloads:
Uploaded by: REYNALDA

The Standard for Program Management – Fourth Edition is the definitive guide for individuals and organizations seeking to mature their program management. Chapter 1 – Introduction. ▫ Contains. ▫ Purpose of The Standard for Program Management. ▫ What is a Program. ▫ What is Program Management. PMBOK Guide – Sixth Edition (ENGLISH, SPANISH, FRENCH, RUSSIAN, PORTUGUESE) - PDF. Managing Change in Organizations: A Practice Guide PMBOK.

Effective program performance reporting supports appropriate preventive and corrective actions at the program level, especially during the delivering benefits phase of the program life cycle.

In addition, these corrective actions could also be a result of governance oversight, especially when programs require statutory compliance with external and governmental agencies. For programs, integrated change control involves redirecting or modifying the program as needed, based on feedback from individual projects or work packages.

In addition, changes could originate from interfaces with other subsystems of the program or factors external to the program. The latter could be due to government regulations, market changes, the economy, or political issues. This process controls the approval and refusal of requests for change, escalates requests in line with authority thresholds, determines when changes have occurred, influences factors that create changes, makes sure those changes are beneficial and agreed-upon, and manages how and when the approved changes are applied.

Analysis of the change request involves identifying, documenting, and estimating all of the work that the change would entail, including a list of all of the program management processes that need to be carried out again such as updating the program work breakdown structure PWBS , revising the program risk register, etc. Integrated Change Control is performed throughout the entire program life cycle from initiation through closure.

Inputs for this process include change requests from components and from program-level and non-project activities. The outputs from this process feed back to the component level and, as such, the process is iterative between the program and component domains. Resource Control is the process of monitoring human resources to ensure that committed resources are made available to the program consistent with commitments, resources are allocated within the program according to the plan, and resources are released from the program as dictated by the plan.

Resource Control may include authorized cross-charging or other forms of allocation of expenses between the program, component, and contributing functions within the organization. Other resources include plants, test beds, laboratories, data centers, office space, and other facilities, including real estate leases or downloads, equipment of all types, software, vehicles, and office supplies.

Some resources, such as office supplies, are consumed by the program and must be managed as an expense. Integrated Change Control: Inputs and Outputs downloadd non-consumable resources must be tracked to ensure that they are returned for other use or made available for sale when they are no longer needed for the purposes of the program, and to allow accurate financial tracking and reporting.

Some resources e. Leased resources must be tracked to ensure that they are returned at the expiration of the lease or when they are no longer required, to avoid penalties or the hidden expense of ongoing lease payments.

Finally, Resource Control includes analysis of resource expenses assigned to the program to ensure correctness and completeness. Resource Control: This is similar to risk management; however, it is focused on performance as opposed to risks. The consolidated information can be made available to stakeholders through the Information Distribution Process. Monitor and Control Program Work: This alignment can be accomplished by several approaches, including modification of requirements or the program scope, adjusting organizational policies, or changing stakeholder expectations.

Issue Management and Control at the program level can also include addressing the issues escalated from the constituent projects that could not be resolved at the project level. These unresolved project issues can impact the overall progress of the program and must be tracked. When an issue is identified, it is recorded in an issues register and subjected to analysis by a reviewing authority or body.

Issue reviews should be conducted on a regular schedule to track the status of all open issues. It is essential that each issue be associated with an owner who has the authority and means to resolve and close the issue; when an issue is unresolved, it is then escalated progressively higher on the authority scale until resolution can be achieved. There should be a governance process and procedures that selectively allow issues to receive appropriate visibility for possible impact across other portfolios within the organization.

The Issue Management and Control Process is carried out in parallel with controlling risk, especially those risks which do not get resolved at the project level. Issue Management and Control: This is a formal process for accomplishing the following tasks: Scope Control: The activities in this process include tracking the actual start and finish of activities and milestones against the planned timeline, and updating the plan so that the comparison to the plan is always current.

It involves identifying not only slippages, but also opportunities. Schedule Control: Cost Control is proactive, analyzing actual cost as incurred against the plan to identify variance from the plan, and, where possible, doing trend analysis to predict problem areas early.

Cost Control is also reactive, dealing with unanticipated events or necessary but unplanned activities that affect the budget either negatively or positively.

Cost Control is frequently thought of as merely holding down cost so that the program remains on budget, or bringing it back to budget when there is an overrun. However, of equal importance, cost control involves identifying opportunities to return funding from the program to the enterprise wherever possible.

Cost Control: This process identifies faulty outcomes and allows the elimination of causes of unsatisfactory performance at all stages of the quality loop, from the identification of needs to the assessment of whether the identified needs have been satisfied or not. The Perform Quality Control Process ensures that quality plans are executed at project levels, via quality reviews and project management health checks. Perform Quality Control is performed throughout the program.

Program results include both products and services, such as deliverables, management results, and cost and schedule performance. Perform Quality Control: The Communications Control Process ensures that policies and procedures are received, recorded, and routed to the intended recipients through the Information Distribution Process.

The scope and extent of this process is much wider at the program level than at the project level. Apart from the program sponsor, the other stakeholders involved in a program could include product managers, financial managers, and senior management personnel, especially those involved in strategic planning. Furthermore, since programs tend to be of larger size, greater cost, and much longer in duration, proactive communication is required with the community at large.

Such external communications will not only include addressing issues specific to a program, such as environmental issues, but also managing public and media relations at the social and political level as may be appropriate to the program.

Performance reporting aggregates all performance information across projects and non-project activity to provide a clear picture of the program performance as a whole. Communications Control: Inputs and Outputs This information is conveyed to the stakeholders by means of the Information Distribution process to provide them with needed status and deliverable information.

Performance Reporting: They include oversight of risks and responses at the project level within the program. Risk Monitoring and Control is an ongoing process. Risk monitoring involves tracking program-level risks currently identified in the risk response plan and identifying new risks that emerge during the execution of the program, for example, unresolved project-level risks that demand resolution at the program level. Risk control focuses on risks that threaten to develop into actual problems or have already done so.

Risk control involves implementing the response actions and contingency plans contained in the risk response plan. When risks remain unresolved, the program manager ensures that these risks are escalated progressively higher on the authority scale until resolution can be achieved. Governance process and procedures should be in place to allow risks to be assessed as necessary for possible impact across the organization.

Program risk situations, plans, and the status and the effectiveness of ongoing or completed risk responses should be included in program management reviews.

All modifications resulting from reviews and other changes in risks should be entered in the risk response plan. Risk Monitoring and Control: The process includes downloads and procurement of outside resources that span the program domain and that are not covered by a specific project.

The program management team must be aware of the legal, political, and managerial implications during implementation, since contractual issues can affect deadlines, have legal and costly consequences, and can produce adverse publicity. The team must effectively communicate with sponsors, sellers, governing bodies, and the project and program management teams. At the program level, program contract administration relies on the interaction of other program and project processes.

Program Contract Administration: The Closing Process Group includes the processes required to terminate formally all the activities of a program, finalize closure of a project within the program and hand-off the completed product to others, or to close a cancelled program or project within the program. The purposes of the Closing Processes include the following: Program closure activities happen throughout the program, not just at program completion.

As specific projects and other activities are completed, closing activities must occur. Otherwise, valuable program information will be lost, and there is a potential that the program will not meet its closure obligations.

Global program management

Closing Process Group 3. However, administrative closure should not wait until the program has completed the execution process. Projects under the program need to be closed before the program is closed. As each project or each non-project activity closes, the Close Program Process should be performed to capture information and records, archive them, communicate the closure event and status, and obtain sponsor or customer sign-off.

Once the review is complete, the sponsor or customer is asked to acknowledge a final acceptance by signing the closure documents. During this process, the lessons learned are input from other program management processes that created them as outputs.

In this process, they are analyzed, significant lessons learned are incorporated into the closure report output, and all lessons learned are included in the program archives.

9 Project Management Methodologies Made Simple

Close Program: Program component closure deals with these closure issues at the program level, that is, it is informed by and performed at a higher level than normal project closure occurring at the project level. This process involves validating and ensuring that the project closure has indeed taken place at the project level.

The resources that become available may be reallocated to other components that are either active or awaiting activation within the program. Project records must be closed and archived as needed. Communications to a larger or different set of stakeholders than those at the project level may be needed, as well. The information required for this process is obtained from each of the projects or work packages.

For a program, component closure will normally be done at the end of the project life cycle. However, project closure may need to be done if a project is being terminated before the completion of its life cycle.

Related Post: ENGLISH BOOK FOR ING

This can be the result of a program benefits review or changes in the external environment. Component Closure: This process also applies to cases of premature contract termination. Contract Closure involves both product verification i. In the case of premature termination, it involves documentation of actual work performed plus work not performed, the circumstances that caused termination, and the updating of all contract records.

Contract records are important and include the contract itself and other relevant documentation, such as progress reports, financial records, invoices, and payment records. These are often kept in a contract file, which should be part of the complete program file.

Contract documentation is also important should a procurement audit or legal action be initiated. Such an audit is a structured review of the procurement process from procurement planning through contract administration. In case of legal action, accurate and complete documentation is critical for swift resolution. Contract Closure: Processes receive inputs from processes that logically precede them and send outputs to successor processes. In some cases, an output from a process becomes an input to the same process, for example, when a Planning Process iteratively updates a plan over time.

The complexity of the program management process model is increased when inputs and outputs flow between the project domain, the program domain and the portfolio domain. This can be illustrated with a few examples: In the table below, the program management processes are associated with their respective Process Groups and correlated to the nine Knowledge Areas in which most of the activities associated with the program take place. Next, the PPMS Team looked at whether the two subjects should be combined as one standard or treated separately.

A sub-team was formed to perform a literature survey and poll the PM community to determine the differences and similarities between program and portfolio management processes. The research confirmed that while program management processes provide for the management of a group of interdependent projects, portfolio management comprises continuous, repeatable, and sustainable processes designed to map business requirements and objectives to projects and programs. As a result of this investigation, the PPMS Team concluded that the profession would be best served with two standards.

Despite the differences in these processes, the PPMS Team believed that because of the relationships between the two subjects and that these were first time standards, it would be best to manage them both under one program.

The Core Team developed a program plan and general team orientation, which was mandatory, to help volunteers engage effectively. Development of both standards began in early The team recognized early that the processes for program management closely paralleled those of project management, but were larger in scope. In addition, program management further distinguished itself by containing three broad themes that are common throughout each program: While most of the work was done virtually, the team gathered for a meeting in Philadelphia in October to finalize the document.

This broader review emulated the eventual global exposure draft review that PMI would conduct. The overwhelming majority of those voting indicated acceptance of the proposed standard without reservation.

The SPT engaged independent subject matter experts to augment the review process. From there, minor refinements were made and the proposed standard went on to a day exposure draft process starting in June More than half of these comments were accepted, accepted with modification, or identified for review in the next version of the standard.

No simple list or even multiple lists can adequately portray all the contributions of those who have volunteered to develop The Standard for Program Management.

Appendix B describes specific contributions of many of the individuals listed below and should be consulted for further information about individual contributions to the project. The Project Management Institute is grateful to all of these individuals for their support and acknowledges their contributions to the project management profession.

David W. Kent Bettisworth Peggy J. Logan, PMP J. Aydemir Darwyn S. Bigness, Jr. Susan S. Bond, Ph. Bonk, PMP, P. Brian R.

Clemente Sr. Cruise, M. Ebner Daniella Eilers Michael G. Elliott Michael T. Fauntroy Linda A. Gonzalez D. Grymes Claude L. Jones, Jr. Kaerner, Dr. Craig L. MayerWarren V. McClarty, Sr. Melnik, M. Mileham M. Morgan, P. Nair 82 Vinod B. Petalas Ph. Candidate Susan Philipose D. Michele Pitman Charles M. Poplos, Ed. Rohovit Dennis M. Sanap Nandakumar Sankaran Kulasekaran C. Scott Stephen F. SmithNoel Smyth Jamie B. Solak, M. Keith J. Stockwell LeConte F.

Tait Martin D. Toney, Jr. Eugenio R. TuIan Turnbull Dr. Ulagaraj, Ph. Valle, M. Cantlie, PMP, P. John M. Hunt Matthew D. Schlatter Gregory P. Winston, Esq. Julia M. They are those influences on the processes that the program team brings to the program. Among the tools and techniques common for many program management processes are those presented below. Expert Judgment Expert judgment may be obtained from a variety of sources both internal and external to the program.

These sources often include functional and technical area specialists assigned to the program and in other organizational units within the enterprise, external consultants, professional and technical associations, and specialized governmental and industry bodies. Meetings All Program Management Process Groups require some form of deliberation and discussion before decisions are made or output of a process is achieved. Meetings can be face-to-face or in a virtual setting.

Since many of the program management processes require participation from various personnel, groups or functions, conducting meetings serves as an effective technique that provides benefits from the synergistic approach taken. Reviews Reviews are typically internal activities such as management or peer reviews conducted before communicating with program stakeholders. Reviews can take other forms as well. Project reviews provide insight into status and plans for each project and the impact on the overall program.

As stated in Chapter 1, benefit reviews are also very important to ensure that the outlined benefit process is followed, and that each benefit is being monitored and tracked effectively. Phase gate reviews are carried out at key decision points in the program life cycle to provide an independent assessment of the status of the program and to provide an assurance that identified critical success factors, best practices, and program risks are being addressed.

Policies and Procedures Policies and procedures serve to implement standards, processes, and work methods, resulting in the completion of the work required by the program.

Policies and procedures cover classification of information, restrictions on distribution, and requirements for retention. Organizational policies dictate required contents of a program management artifact such as a plan, the specific methodology used to create the artifact, and the approval process for the artifact. Risk responses may include taking steps to mitigate or avoid a risk, developing plans to be carried out if a risk becomes real, transferring a risk by means such as subcontracting or third-party insurance or accepting the risk.

Conversely, risk responses may include an effort to increase the likelihood of capitalizing on known opportunities. It is important that the program management involvement in risk should support the risk activities of the program component. These other aspects are firmly grounded in previous project management standards but apply less universally in program management organizations.

Many programs also include elements of ongoing operations. These editions went on to cite other examples that include multiple releases over time and repetitive or cyclical undertakings.

The intent is confirmed in OPM3 paragraph 4. The ongoing activities discussed above can be said to focus on benefits assurance during the continuing delivery and benefits sustainment during the field support of the product.

Programs, on the other hand, can continue beyond the project life cycle to continue the delivery or deployment of the product developed by a project. This program activity focuses on management activities such as production of additional product and the preparation of additional customers to receive and use the product. Clearly, the groundwork for ongoing deployment must be laid by the project during its life cycle, but the activity involved in continued deployment and sustaining the benefits after deployment is beyond the scope of the project.

It is an inherent element of project management to ensure that the intended customer can use and maintain the product. This levies a responsibility for product support planning and execution on most projects.

The responsibility for benefits sustainment product support to ensure that the customer remains able to use and maintain and that the product continues to deliver the benefits expected by the customer falls outside the traditional project life cycle, but very often within the program life cycle.

While it may follow a structured approach, ongoing product support does not usually define its work with a WBS and control activities such as earned value management are generally not applicable. Program Management of ongoing product support can entail the following activities: This can include the continued viability of interface with other products and the continued completeness of the product functionality. Such issues can include the need to improve reliability problems, address software anomalies, update configurations to ensure continued effective interface with other products or to provide additional functionality to meet evolving requirements.

Such issues can include the continued ability to support a physical product or associated support equipment with spare parts which may require engineering retrofit changes to ensure continued supportability. In some product-oriented organizations, a program team is continually monitoring the performance of, and customer satisfaction with delivered products.

Such organizations use program management to coordinate the processes of performance assurance, launching of new projects to improve products or satisfy emerging customer desires, and ongoing delivery of products both baseline and improved. Still others maintain a close working relationship between program and operational management, but ensure that the functions and responsibilities are separate after some point in time in the product life cycle. In most cases, the functions of product support from a logistics perspective are separated from program management once the project or program has ensured the successful deployment of a properly supported product.

The value added by that management must be greater than the cost of management. Since every product has a life cycle and every project has a beginning and end is a temporary endeavor , project management principles can be leveraged to increase value within the program.

Program managers performing product support need to be conversant in a wide range of quality and logistics disciplines: The program manager also needs to understand the processes for determining the effectiveness of a scheduled maintenance program and optimizing such a program. Program managers also need to understand how to respond to customer experience with the products to properly influence redesign efforts to correct problems. It is essential to consider that updated support must be made available on a schedule pacing the actual deployment of the changed end items.

The requirement for new configuration equipment and support for training of personnel prior to fielding for operational use must be considered.

The program manager must be able to effectively plan and manage retrofit efforts. Program management controls can be thought of as common knowledge. Chapter 3 of The Standard for Program Management does not associate specific controls with the program management processes described therein. However, because of the importance of this concept, this appendix provides a general discussion of the role played by controls with respect to the program management processes.

Among the controls applicable to many program management processes are those below. Standards Industry and trade associations, governmental bodies, including the military, and other groups have developed widely recognized and accepted standards, often international in scope. Where applicable, these standards may be invoked in contractual documents prepared by a procuring agency for a program. Standards may also be developed specifically for a program and may include quality standards, schedule standards, training standards, and work breakdown structure standards.

Policies and Procedures Policies and procedures implement standards, processes, and work methods that result in the work required by the program being performed. They cover classification of information, restrictions on distribution, and requirements for retention.

Organizational policies dictate required contents of a program management artifact such as a plan, the specific methodology used to create the artifact, and approval process for the artifact. Program Plans Typically, a program is driven by a strategic plan, which includes the statement of the business goals for the program. All work in a program should contribute to one or more business goals. Business goals are the criteria against which potential program activities are judged.

The program management plan comprises a number of subsidiary management plans, such as a: These and other subsidiary management plans may be incorporated directly into the same document as the program management plan or may exist as individual document artifacts. Reviews Reviews are typically internal activities such as management or peer reviews with their outcomes communicated to program stakeholders.

Reviews are executed as controls on numerous program management processes in all of the Program Process Groups. Reviews may include periodic program risk reviews and program management reviews, including phase-gate reviews as noted in Chapter 2.

Reviews of projects within the program provide insight into status and plans for each project and the impact on the overall program.

Oversight Oversight by an executive review board or an individual executive may cause modifications to the program if the overarching business or strategic needs change.

Executive oversight plays the key role in evaluating the proposed program management plan with respect to the business objectives and constraints. Resource contention at the program level will typically involve other programs or activities outside of the program. These are the responsibility of first the stakeholders and then the executive level of the organization.

Oversight is required during estimating and budgeting to ensure that they are well within limits of overall organizational plans. Audits Audits may be an internal control or may be an activity imposed by the client.

In either case, the audit would require that information distributed be substantiated by stored program information from which reports and distributions were compiled. Additionally, audits could require demonstration of a process that meets certain criteria as spelled out in the contract or agreement.

Types of audits may include: Contracts Standard contractual terms and conditional clauses may be pre-developed and approved for inclusion in contracts awarded by a procuring agency. These may be specific to an enterprise or in the case of government agencies may apply to all government contracts awarded.

Directories and Distribution Lists Standard lists are established and maintained to control the routing and recipients of all of the formal communications and messages sent to program stakeholders. This may include documents, presentations, reports, and memoranda in electronic or paper media, electronic mail, information uploaded to web sites, and information to be formally transmitted by other means and media.

Documentation Documentation controls may include requiring that all formal documents relating to the program conform to style guides and documentation templates to be created and used for documentation of a repetitive nature, such as plans, specifications and periodic reports. Regulations Regulations may stipulate the collection of pertinent data.

Regulations can include environmental legislation, government regulations and laws, legal opinions, legislative requirements, legislative restrictions, organizational legislation, and regulations regarding the sale or disposal of equipment, facilities, or other property.

The relationships between portfolios, programs and projects, as illustrated in Figure of Section 1. Take, for example, an organization that has project portfolios and whose strategic business plan identifies three strategic initiatives: The initiative to develop a new product line is the highest priority and two programs are initiated to deliver the expected outlined benefits. The relationship between the portfolio, programs and projects is depicted in Figure G On the other hand, if the organization is not using portfolio management, the relationship might consider the program as the highest level of the hierarchy.

Therefore, the relationship between the business plan, programs and projects is as displayed in Figure G-2, where the new product line initiative triggers a single program.

Relationships among Portfolios and Programs Figure G The variances between the two standards are discussed below in Section H. OPM3 introduced the concept of program management processes, the Program Domain, and described them briefly in Appendix I of that document, with the expectation that this standard would expand and elaborate upon them. As a companion standard, The Standard for Program Management addresses program management and focuses on the processes that apply to program management.

Although these processes are similar to project management processes in many respects, they are not equivalent to them. Furthermore, not all of these processes are the same. Table H-1 provides a comparison of the two sets of processes. Program management and project management processes may have many similarities at the descriptive level. However, there are very significant differences in program management process inputs, controls, outputs and tools and techniques and the inputs, outputs and tools and techniques associated with project management processes.

This is attributable to the differences in the roles played by processes for program management and those of project management processes.

Program management processes operate on a broader scale and at a higher level than project management processes and must accommodate the management of multiple projects within a program at any given point of time. This is further complicated in that different projects in the program may be in different life cycle phases concurrently and program management processes must allow for this situation.

Programs are made up of a variety of projects. This project selection may also have to take into account any interdependencies of the projects.

This implies that the program will either define a project selection criterion or will use one that the organization already has in place. Either way, the program will need to consider the projects that it will formulate and initiate for the solution, and track any work required to get them through a selection process.

While project may be targeted at one particular aspect e. For example, on a major computer application upgrade, the following areas should be included in the program: The requirement to consider different phases during the life of the program also provides some freedom for the program manager.

For example, trade-offs can be made between spending more resources during the development stage, in order to reduce costs during support e. The duration of programs tend to be longer than that of projects. This has an impact on the planning and the management of a program in different ways compared to a project.

Infrastructure Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program. Infrastructure might cover offices, version control , and IT. Planning Develop the plan bringing together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control. Comparison with project management[ edit ] There are the two different views of how programs differ from projects. In one view, projects deliver outputs, discrete parcels or "chunks" of change; [3] programs create outcomes.

By combining these projects with other deliverables and changes, their programs might deliver increased income from a new product, shorter waiting lists at the hospital or reduced operating costs due to improved technology. The other view [5] is that a program is nothing more than either a large project or a set or portfolio of projects. In this second view, the point of having a program is to exploit economies of scale and to reduce coordination costs and risks.

The project manager's job is to ensure that their project succeeds. The program manager, on the other hand, is concerned with the aggregate outcome s or end-state result s of the collection of projects in a particular program. For example, in a financial institution a program may include one project that is designed to take advantage of a rising market and another that is designed to protect against the downside of a falling market.

The former seeks to leverage the potential upside; the latter to limit the possible downside. This highly pressurized aerosol product injects a leak sealant into a punctured tire to stop the outflow of air project A and concurrently re-inflates the tire project B , resulting together in the outcome that is a tire that is once again functional the program comprised projects A and B.

The program manager has been described as 'playing chess' and keeping the overview in mind, with the pieces to be used or sacrificed being the projects. And also according to this view, successful projects deliver on time, to budget and to specification, whereas successful programs deliver long term improvements to an organization. Improvements are usually identified through benefits.

An organization should select the group of programs that most take it towards its strategic aims while remaining within its capacity to deliver the changes. On the other hand, the view that programs are simply large projects or a set of projects allows that a program may need to deliver tangible benefits quickly. According to one source, the key difference between a program and a project is the finite nature of a project [8] - a project must always have a specific end date, else it is an ongoing program.

One view of the differences between a program and a project in business is that: A project is unique and is of definite duration. A program is ongoing and implemented within a business to consistently achieve certain results for the business. Customers who bought this item also bought. Page 1 of 1 Start over Page 1 of 1. The Standard for Portfolio Management.

Project Management. Governance of Portfolios, Programs, and Projects: The Handbook of Program Management: James T Brown. Ginger Levin PMP. Jean Gouix and Martial. About the Author The PMI provides services including the development of standards, research, education, publication, networking-opportunities in local chapters, hosting conferences and training seminars, and providing accreditation in project management.

Read more. Product details Paperback: English ISBN Start reading Standard for Program Management on your Kindle in under a minute. Don't have a Kindle?

Try the Kindle edition and experience these great reading features: Share your thoughts with other customers. Write a customer review. Read reviews that mention program management pgmp exam knowledge areas second edition project management standard for program pmbok pmi processes reference boring programs study useful concepts course office business general helpful.

Top Reviews Most recent Top Reviews. There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later. Not enough bang for the buck.

Paperback Verified download. This book only has pages of material. It is written like an outline with lots of headlines, bullet points, and white space. This book is easy to read, but I didn't realize it was such a thin textbook when I bought it.

I'm keeping it because I am starting my first position in PM and need the industry standard.

The Standard for Portfolio Management — Fourth Edition

Kindle Edition Verified download. This book did a great job of defining what a PgMP is. It did a fair job of delineating differences between program and project management. Lacking in contextual real-life examples, as well as tables and figures.

I gave it 4 stars because it is easy to understand and not a typical boring textbook. As a program managers' guide this is an excellent book. Given a few hours of thought you can follow it along to a decent program office roll-out. As a study guide for the PGMP exam, which is supposed to be based on the standard, you're going to be pretty confused. For the exam, the main take-aways from this standard are its constant references to: Those are the only parts you will recognize again on the exam.

Of course you need to read the standard before taking the exam. Ironically, however, this standard is actually considerably more useful as an operational program management reference - which, of course, is what the standard is really meant for.

So kudos to the folks who put it together.Historical information describing the successes, failures and lessons learned on past programs with respect to integrating multiple projects is especially important to program planning and management.

This can be the result of a program benefits review or changes in the external environment. I was pleasantly surprised at how easily I was able to identify the portions of the Standard that were directly relevant to my current Program needs, and how easy it was for me to lightly skim the sections that I felt less important, while still getting from it the basics out of even those parts.

Candidate Susan Philipose D. Programs are more strategic in nature than projects. Scope management: defining and managing scope, creating a work breakdown structure WBS , and requirements gathering 3.

The program manager or, for larger programs, the program management office reviews the efforts by the constituent project teams.

While most of the work was done virtually, the team gathered for a meeting in Philadelphia in October to finalize the document. It defines program management and related concepts, describes the program management life cycle and outlines related processes.