Last week I managed to catch one of the Association for Project Management‘s roadshows on the new RPP – Registered Project Professional standard. The presentation by the Product Development Manager, John Zachar was clearly presented and threw up a few more things about the RPP that hadn’t registered with me before.
- The RPP is aimed at the senior and experienced end of the project management practitioner spectrum
We know the RPP is all about demonstrating your experience and competence levels in project management specifically within “complex project” settings – however this is also recognition for the older project professional too. You need to demonstrate at least 8 years in a complex project setting so let’s say you started out in project management managing uncomplex projects for a fair few years; it’s going to be a while until you’ve gained the eight years in a complex setting to qualify
- It’s not a walk in the park
Which I was delighted to hear because if something is worth having surely it’s got to be difficult, challenging or ambitious to get there – this ain’t PRINCE2, thank goodness!
- It’s about the “Responsible Leader”
The process you go through – a portfolio of evidence needs gathering which includes writing about your experiences across 29 core competencies and 18 complementary competencies; an additional statement of experience; evidence of CPD (35 hours per 12 months) and a professional review / interview, seems pretty thorough. The bottom line is, no matter how well you can write about your experiences – the key is demonstrating that you are a responsible leader – someone who knows what to do as much as what not to do. It’s good to see “leadership” taking a front seat in this process
- It’s not a god given right
Just because you’ve worked within projects and programmes for a number of years the profession does not owe you a badge. It’s a level playing field where everyone has to go through the same process if they believe they have reached that point in their careers where they need external recognition for their achievements. The presentation made it clear that some have not been successful in the process because of a lack of CPD evidence (there are a number of ways to gain CPD “points” but that’s a post for another day!) or because their experience was out-of -date or indeed more than 8 years ago.
My first attempt of mindmapping using the iPad 
Click to enlarge
Lindsay
Thanks for this update on the RPP. I have also listened to the Parallel Project Training podcast on the subject, as well as reading your article above, and the one last week from Paul Naybour I commented on.
I am more of the opinion that this standard is wrongly named. It is not Project Professional, but Project Manager Professional or Programme Manager Professional.
This is because it assumes that you are a practising project manager working on ‘managing complex projects’. So this automatically excludes 2 of the other types of project professional who may pass through the other parts of the standard. It excludes PMO professionals,who despite having the experience in complex projects have not, by the nature and definition of the role ‘managed’ any of it. The other one I realised it excluded was a Portfolio Manager, as they again do not get ‘hands-on managing’ any project or programme. Whilst someone working as a portfolio manager could get RPP, this could only be based on their recent (within last 8 years) experience in ‘managing’ a complex project or programme.
Please don’t get me wrong I think there is a lot to like about this standard. The fact it isn’t easy, the basis on practical experience in the real world (consultants & trainers need not apply), the link into Continuous Personal Development to keep people current, the link into competencies.
However please change the name as it excludes some people who would have thought themselves project professionals namely PMO & Portfolio Managers.
Lindsay – thanks for the article and bringing RPP to the awareness of more people, and your mind map looks good (if only a little small).
Stuart
Twitter: parallelproject
Hi
Lindsay I think it is experience delivering complex projects in the past eight years. Not eight years of experience. The point is you have to demonstrate competence as a recent practitioner. Also I think John has also said several PMO people have already achieved RPP as part of the pilot so they are not excluded.
Worth double check with John and the APM as I think its important to make sure everything is square at this early stage.
Twitter: APMProjectMgmt
Hi Lindsay,
Your article raises some interesting points, especially about PRINCE2. But, I just wanted to confirm the “8 year rule”, as some people may be confused with what was outlined above.
The 8 year rule actually ensures people’s evidence is current and recent, and does not mean that they have to have 8 years experience in a complex project environment. The 8 year rule, as outlined in the candidate guidance, explains that the majority of evidence supplied in the portfolio must have been acquired in the last 8 years. This ensures that the knowledge and competence of a candidate is up to date and current. So, therefore, it can be exhibited by someone of any age (whether they are 21 or 61), as long as they have the required experience of managing others in a complex project environment exhibiting responsible leadership. I must admit that, yes, they will be an experienced project manager to gain the standard as it is a demanding process. But, we have had people go through the pilot with the required competence and experience who could be considered “young”. Below is the extract from the candidate guidance, which may explain better than I can:
“The majority of evidence must be current and recent, and therefore typically considered to have occurred in the last eight years. There may be circumstances in which this current and recent evidence may be supplemented and extended beyond the eight year expectation, but no portfolio in which the majority of the evidence is not current or recent will be acceptable.”
Stuart – I thought I’d also comment on your post if I may. We have had both PMO professionals and portfolio managers go through the pilot and gain RPP, so the standard obviously doesn’t exclude these people. It all depends on the experience of a PMO or portfolio manager and how a business sees that role fitting in with the organisation’s direction. For instance, a portfolio manager may have the required experience from other roles or some organisations may ask the PMO to have more PM experience in order to drive certain projects through. My point being is that everybody’s situation is different and the standard certainly doesn’t exclude people who have the required PM experience. The standard is pan-sector so it doesn’t favour anyone from a particular industry either. The key aspect a candidate needs to consider is not to provide their job role, but to provide the evidence of being a responsible leader while exhibiting professionalism and ethics, in addition to addressing the core competences through managing others.
I hope this helps.
Dayner Proudfoot
PR & Marketing Manager
APM
APM on their website state:
“APM Registered Project Professional (RPP) is a pan-sector standard for those able to demonstrate the capabilities of a responsible leader, who have the ability to manage a complex project and use appropriate tools, processes and techniques.”
OK, let’s scrutinise this for the sake of proving why standardisation of the path to success is bound to fail (i.e. success path being such pan-sector recognition). First of all, what are “complex projects”? Every single project that requires more than one individual and/or company is complex by definition and drawing a line at a certain point in value or size is overly simplistic. Increasing the number of individuals/teams/companies inevitably leads to greater complexity because it is more difficult to predict the behaviour of a project as a system. That’s all fine but where do we draw a line then? There might be a large project delivered by well-synchronised teams driven by established relationships from the past projects. A project of this kind would have a great chance of delivering agreed objectives within a specified budget and time. On the other hand there might be a smaller project where, beyond project manager’s control, such relationships do not exist and are yet to be established. Does that mean one could simplistically conclude that the larger project is led by a better or more successful project manager? Definitely not! It might well be that the project manager of the smaller project is actually far better at managing unsynchronised teams because he or she has got past experience of running inherently difficult projects. However, looking back at the APM wording it would appear that the first project manager would have easier job in terms of the RPP recognition. I wonder therefore whether APM would take into account experience of delivering agreed objectives in such almost delinquent projects where relationships need to be established from scratch.
Going further, what are appropriate tools, processes and techniques? They surely are not referring back to standard methodologies. There are exceptional companies out there employing extraordinary project managers who have singlehandedly developed their own internal tools, processes and techniques. These are substantially different from their standard alternatives but they deliver exceptional results. Would that be recognised as a viable alternative to cross-sector standardisation?
I really hope APM have thought this through really well and are not expecting project managers to be moulded into a one-size-fits-all path to recognition. The 29 core competences plus 18 complementary competences are promising but the “Portfolio of Evidence Application Form” is weak if it relies on retrospective self-reporting.
Thank you all for your comments, and thank you Lindsay for helping start this debate. It is good to get some constructive criticism and feedback on such an important matter for the project professional. I feel glad to be in at the birth of this, even if I seem to cynical and anti, think of it as questioning. In the years that I have been doing PMO I feel the profession has moved on considerably, and the reason I am questioning so much is I do actually want this standard to be worthy of obtaining, and not narrowly focussed.
Based on the comments above, and the comments on Lindsay’s other blog I have quite a few things to follow up on. Thank you all for adding considerably to my knowledge, and the discussion.
Stuart
Twitter: APMProjectMgmt
Stuart – I am glad Lindsay’s blog has opened up a useful debate and hopefully given more answers than creating more questions.
Just to follow up on Milan’s comments; the definition of a complex project is taken directly from APM’s Competence Framework, which itself is from the IPMA definition. Likewise the phrase “appropriate tools, processes and techniques”. We understand and welcome debate around those definitions, but for the purposes of the standard it has gained quite a lot of agreement across the national and international project management community. The definition does recognise that complex does not necessarily mean large.
Every candidate has to give two referees on their Portfolio of Evidence Application Form. These referees are then contacted by APM as part of the application process so they can confirm the candidate has worked in a complex project environment and demonstrated responsible leadership by managing others. There is then a portfolio assessment and face-to-face professional review with trained and experienced project professionals who are also RPPs. In essence, the portfolio assessment assesses the evidence, while the professional review assesses the candidate. Having passed those assessments, if the candidate’s retrospective self-reporting is still found to be misleading, then they are still subject to the APM Code of Professional Conduct, which they need to adhere to in order to stay on the register. Alongside the CPD requirement, the ongoing commitment to the standard is essential to maintaining competence and enhancing performance.
Dayner Proudfoot
PR & Marketing Manager
APM