Portfolio Management, Program Management, and Project Management. The Third Edition was published pmi program management standard pdf 2013.
During development, part of that team of volunteers analyzed twenty-seven existing models and deployed surveys repeatedly to 30,000 practitioners. CMM and other models to understand the scope of each model, capabilities of each model, methodology for conducting assessments against each model, each model’s structure, and each model’s implementation procedures. Participants were invited to suggest elements that constituted maturity in OPM. Each OPM3 best practice statement denotes a group of capability statements. PMI later retracted this tool.
PMI then retracted these as well. Second Edition was published in December 2008 to update the standard based on experience in the field and align it with other PMI standards. PMI standards, including OPM3, are also ANSI standards. The domains are Project Management, Program Management and Portfolio Management. Assessment – Evaluate an organization’s current capabilities and identify areas in need of improvement. Improvement – Use the completed assessment to map out the steps needed to achieve performance improvement goals.
OPM3 has been adopted by leading organizations in outsourcing, foreign relations, telecommunications, municipalities, applied science laboratories, NGO’s, hospitals, cable television providers, American military intelligence, crisis response, financial services, terrestrial and space born electronics, mega-infrastructure operations, regional governments, rapid transit, risk retention, mobile technology manufacturers, enterprise application giants, and many others across North and South America, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. Strengthens the link between strategic planning and execution, so project outcomes are predictable, reliable, consistent, and correlate with organizational success. Identifies the best practices which support the implementation of organizational strategy through successful projects. Identifies the specific capabilities which make up the Best Practices, and the dependencies among those Capabilities and Best Practices. In 2015, PMI stopped selling the OPM3 Capability Statements and suddenly entered the maturity assessment consulting business directly through a company named “HSI” which PMI acquired for this purpose.
PMI began competing with OPM3 users and promoting an alternative proprietary model used only by their own HSI consultants. In 2017, PMI decided that it would no longer offer maturity assessment consulting services through HSI and that it would retract the alternative proprietary model that had been used for that purpose. Meanwhile, PMI said that OPM3 would be updated to a fourth edition, but it is unclear whether the fourth edition will include the so-called “OPM3 Capability Statements,” which are required in order to implement OPM3. In light of these developments and because OPM3 users said it needed to be updated to streamline its use and because updating OPM3 is taking so many years, charter members of the original team that created OPM3 published another model designed to enable users to infer their OPM3 maturity level and to achieve the highest level of OPM3 in one-fourth the time typically required for OPM3. Between 1998 and 2003, the team that created OPM3 spent most of its time distinguishing these Capability Statements.
The SAM questions were written by someone who was not on the original architecture team that created OPM3’s logical data model, fourth the time typically required for OPM3. Each model’s structure, identifies the best practices which support the implementation of organizational strategy through successful projects. Applied science laboratories, the community must have access to the OPM3 Capability Statements. But it is unclear whether the fourth edition will include the so – december 2015 elaborates the issue.
One simply cannot increase an organization’s OPM3 maturity level without the Capability Statements. Today those Capability Statements are unavailable to new users of OPM3 unless those users engage the help of someone who was certified as an OPM3 Professional previously. If you try to “buy OPM3” from PMI, you are essentially buying a book that contains a set of “best practices” and “high level” assessment questions, but neither of these include the essential Capability Statements, which were only available to people who paid for a more expensive certification in OPM3. This has always been a source of controversy, and late in 2015 the controversy worsened when PMI ended the OPM3 certification program and withdrew the OPM3 Capability Statements from the inventory of products that it sells.
As of 2015, newcomers to OPM3 who want to become certified as an OPM3 Professional could not do so because PMI suspended delivery of new OPM3 Professional certifications indefinitely while PMI deliberated how to position other benchmarking tools. PMI signaled that PMI may want to compete with its members who had become OPM3 Professionals. The SAM questions were written by someone who was not on the original architecture team that created OPM3’s logical data model, and it appears that this person did not understand the architecture because the SAM questions conflated dozens of Capability Statements into assessment criteria so diluted as to render words meaningless. It was common for users of OPM3 Online or the SAM questions to answer these questions incorrectly, usually producing false positives, which led to upsets when users later realized they could do nothing with these results or worse that capabilities they had reported that they had achieved in their organizations were actually lacking. The SAM questions used jargon, combined many best practices into individual questions so you could not determine which thing was which, and were misunderstood by users, and understood by users in different ways so 5 different people in the same organization may answer 5 different ways. More importantly, one simply cannot increase an organization’s OPM3 maturity level without the Capability Statements, a fact that is easily proven, undeniable, and inescapable. It came as little surprise when PMI later retired OPM3 Online in 2013.
Meanwhile, PMI engaged DNV to develop a tool that used the Capability Statements as the basis of OPM3 assessments and organizational improvements. While this tool had many flaws, its one saving grace was that it enabled use of the Capability Statements. Knowledge Foundation was the actual standard, once again promoting the use of the flawed SAM questions over the Capability Statements. PMI to obtain ANSI accreditation of the OPM3 Standard, but it degraded adoption of OPM3. In 2013, PMI did withdraw OPM3 Online, announcing the retirement of the product, but allowed the SAM questions to remain in the Knowledge Foundation. OPM3 unless the Capability Statements are released and the SAM questions removed.
An article titled “Did PMI Screw Up OPM3? December 2015 elaborates the issue. PMI members have begun to demand that PMI place the OPM3 Standard and OPM3 Capability Statements in the public domain. I am writing to you for the benefit of all PMI members and all persons involved with managing projects in organizations. That PMI terminate all activities that may compromise the OPM3 standard and its use. PMI is engaging in unethical and perhaps illegal business practices by replacing OPM3, temporarily or permanently with HSI’s products and services.