13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August Review of AIPM Competency Standards for Project Management

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August Presentation Outline Presentation Outline Competency Standard Review Profession Development Program Professionalisation of Project Management Member Protection Schedule The Benefits The Downside Questions

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August AIPM’s Competency Standard Review and Development

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August The Standards – What are they? A new set of standards, designed specifically for the AIPM incorporating: –Competency requirements –Professional requirements A sound basis for development of a new set of National Competency Standards for Project Management

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August The Development of AIPM’s New Competency Standards AIPM developed PM competency standards for AQF 4, 5 and 6 during the early 1990’s These were approved as National Competency Standards in 1996 and reviewed in The 2004 version is being used for RegPM assessments and is the current version of the PM domain in the Business Services Training Package. Since 2004 the PM body of knowledge and industry expectations of project management have increased substantially.

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August Reason for Review The National Standards (AQF 4, 5 and 6) are overdue for review Industry voiced the need for: –Upgrading the standards to meet industry needs –Higher levels of Project Manager performance particularly at the senior management level –More consistent assessments

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August WE MUST LIFT THE BAR We need consistent, quality assessment of competency against a robust standard

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August Who is developing the new standards? The new standards are being developed under the direction of the AIPM’s Recognition Council through the: –Technical Standards Working Group – a group of practising project management practitioners –Assessor Working Group – a group of practising project management work place Assessors

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August Who is reviewing the new standards? The new standards are being reviewed by: –an Industry Reference Group –Assessors –Trainers –AIPM Chapters –an ExecPM cohort –AIPM’s Recognition Council Standards will be available on the website for Public Comment to meet ISO requirements

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August Titles The post nominal RegPM gets confused within the RegPM Program. This review recommends that we reassign titles to the new standard levels and that certified titles other than ExecPM carry the lead-in words “Certified Practising” so that we have: –Executive Project Manager (ExecPM) –Certified Practising Project Director (CPPD) –Certified Practising Senior Project Manager (CPSPM) –Certified Practising Project Manager (CPPM) –Certified Practising Project Practitioner (CPPP) As well as a: –Project Team Member

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August Why CPPM and CPSPM? This has to be a good question to postulate right now! So why? A Senior Project Manager (CPSPM) needs: Knowledge required to manage projects across a wide spectrum of complexity, and Experience in order to manage major projects which are likely to be more difficult. WE ARE SEEKING INDUSTRY GUIDANCE TO VALIDATE THESE DIFFERENTIALS

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August Relationship to AQF We must not lose sight of the fact that: –the proposed new AIPM Competency Standards for PM are for AIPM use in it’s RegPM Program, and –the intent is to modify the AIPM Competency Standards for PM to suit AQF requirements and then submit to IBSA for their endorsement/approval

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August AIPM Professional Development Program

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August Professional Development Program The AIPM Professional Development Program (PDP) RegPM Sub Program Includes ExecPM, CPPD, CPSPM, CPPM, CPPP, Team Member Continuous Professional Development (CPD) Sub Program

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August Competence Progression Executive Project Manager Project Director Project Manager Project Practitioner Project Team Member Entry points Traditional PM competence Attributes & Behaviour competence

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August Comparison of Competence Levels Project Director Team Member Project Practitioner Project Manager ExecPM Current Standards / TitlesProposed Standards / Titles Project Practitioner Project Manager Master Project Director AQF 4 AQF 5 AQF 6 Standards AIPM Level 1 AIPM Level 2 AIPM Level 4 Standards Competence AIPM Level 3 Titles

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August Relationship between Competence and Project Complexity AIPM Title AIPM Competency Standard Level AIPM Post Nominals Indicative Project Complexity Index Executive Project Manager 4ExecPMPCI 4 Project Director3CPPDPCI 3 Project Manager2 CPSPM (Note 1) PCI 2 CPPM (Note 1) PCI 1 Project Practitioner 1CPPPAny Project Team Member NoneAny Note 1: The competence requirements for CPPM and CPSPM are identical. The difference is experiential driven.

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August The AIPM and the Profession of Project Management

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August Competence is one thing Workplace Performance Professionalism is another Performance. Body of Knowledge. Ethics

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August Title versus Professional Recognition Requirements (still under development) AIPM Title AIPM Post Nominals (Current) AIPM Post Nominals (New) AIPM Standard Level Education (Note 1) Indicative Project Complexity Index Indicative years of PM experience & employment Complex PM (Note 2) Professional Complex15 plus Executive Project Manager ExecPM4 Masters in Project Management PCI Managed a Portfolio or more than 1 Program Project DirectorMPDCPPD3 Grad Dip in Project Management PCI Managed a Program Project ManagerRPM CPSPM (Note 3) 2 Grad Cert in Project Management PCI Managed 2 or more major Projects CPPM (Note 3) Para Professional Diploma in Project Management PCI Managed 2 or more minor Projects Project Practitioner QPPCPPP1 Cert IV in Project Management Any 1-4 Performed as an experienced team member Project Team Member (Note 4) None Cert III in Project Management Any 0-2 Performed as a team member Note 1: Post graduate education can be in either the VET sector or the Higher Education sector but have material applicability to the project Note 2: The Complex level is not a component of AIPM's RegPM Program. It is shown only for the purposes of relativity. Note 3: The competence requirements for CPPM and CPSPM are identical. The difference is experiential and project complexity driven. Note 4: Project Team Member is a new entry level. This level does not carry AIPM post nominals

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August The AIPM and Protection of Members

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August Protection for Existing Certified Members (Grandfathering) - 1 Three year period of grace QPP – automatic certification as CPPP RPM options –Upgrade to CPPD. All requirements apply –Certify as CPSPM. Educational and experiential requirements apply. Assess competency differences –Certify as CPPM. Assess competency differences –If none of above, certification lapses

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August Protection for Existing Certified Members (Grandfathering) - 2 MPD options –Upgrade to ExecPM. All requirements apply –Certify as CPPD. Educational and experiential requirements apply. Assess competency differences –If neither of above, recognise as CPSPM

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August The Schedule

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August The Schedule - AIPM Develop and review – Complete 31 st August 2007 National Council review/endorse – 9 th September 2007 Launch Exposure Draft – 8 th October 2007 Post Launch –Develop implementation documentation eg New RegPM booklet –Open for Public Comment –Distribute to Universities and Trainers –Final Review –Final approval by National Council – March 2008 Release AIPM Standards – 30 th June 2008

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August The Schedule - AQF Commence development of Australian Qualification Framework (AQF) version of AIPM Competency Standards for Project Management – October 2007 Submit AQF version to Innovation and Business Skills Australia (IBSA) – March 2008 IBSA review period Formal introduction of IBSA - BSBPM Standards – 31 December 2008

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August And the Benefits Are?

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August Effect on Membership and RegPM Program Membership will be more desirable Quality of certified members will be higher RegPM credibility will be regained AIPM will regain control of Competency Standards – for both AIPM and the IBSA subsets Bridge to complex project management Platform for sub specialist competencies eg schedule, cost estimating/control, risk

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August And the Downside is?

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August Effect on Membership and RegPM Program MPDs who do not gain certification as ExecPM or CPPD will be recognised as a CPSPM Many MPDs do not like the dropping of “Master” RPMs who do not gain certification as CPPD, CPSM or CPPM will lose their certification

13/8/2007 Presented to ACT Chapter Forum by Peter Dechaineux 15th August QUESTIONS PLEASE