Content deleted Content added
m En dash fix (via WP:JWB) |
A.conway20 (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 31:
==History==
Earlier versions of the ''PMBOK Guide'' were recognized as standards by the [[American National Standards Institute]] (ANSI) which assigns standards in the United States (ANSI/PMI 99-001-2008) and the [[Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers]] (IEEE 1490–2011).<ref>{{citation |url=http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/servlet/opac?punumber=6086683 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20120717053622/http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/servlet/opac?punumber=6086683 |url-status=dead |archive-date=July 17, 2012 |title=IEEE Guide--Adoption of the Project Management Institute (PMI(R)) Standard A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK(R) Guide)--Fourth Edition |author=IEEE |year=2011}}</ref>
The evolution of the ''PMBOK Guide'' is reflected in editions of the Guide.
Line 118:
The PMBOK is a widely accepted standard in project management, however there are alternatives to the PMBOK standard, and PMBOK does have its critics. One thrust of critique has come from the [[critical chain]] developers and followers (e.g. [[Eliyahu M. Goldratt]] and [[Lawrence P. Leach]]),<ref>[[Eliyahu M. Goldratt]] . {{ISBN|0884271536}} and Lawrence P. Leach. (Artech House Professional Development Library). {{ISBN|1580530745}}</ref> as opposed to [[critical path method]] adherents. The PMBOK Guide section on Project Time Management does indicate Critical Chain as an alternative method to Critical Path.
A second strand of criticism originates in [[Lean Construction]]. This approach emphasises the lack of two way communication in the PMBOK model and offers an alternative which emphasises a [[language/action perspective]] and [[continual improvement]] in the planning process.<ref>Koskela, L. & Howell, G. (2002) 'The underlying theory of project management is obsolete', Proceedings of the PMI Research Conference 2002, 293-302. [https://
==See also==
| |||