<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Are Project Management Standards Like PMP, PRINCE2, PMBOK, etc Worth the Paper they&#8217;re Written on?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pmhut.com/are-project-management-standards-like-pmp-prince2-pmbok-etc-worth-the-paper-theyre-written-on/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pmhut.com/are-project-management-standards-like-pmp-prince2-pmbok-etc-worth-the-paper-theyre-written-on</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 04:07:24 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Matt Whyndham</title>
		<link>http://www.pmhut.com/are-project-management-standards-like-pmp-prince2-pmbok-etc-worth-the-paper-theyre-written-on/comment-page-1#comment-664</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt Whyndham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 08:22:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pmhut.com/are-project-management-standards-like-pmp-prince2-pmbok-etc-worth-the-paper-theyre-written-on#comment-664</guid>
		<description>There's nothing wrong with certificates, bodies of knowledge and standard methodologies.

There's a lot wrong in assuming that they are all the same type of thing, that they all fit all projects, or that having them is a substitute for thinking.

One project might find PRINCE2 to be exactly what it needs, whereas others will want to avoid it like the plague.

I'd expect a competent PM to know their way around a few of them (and yes we do need different ones, to account for differing national or domain cultures as much as anything else), but not to waste effort trying to collect the (non-existent) set.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There&#8217;s nothing wrong with certificates, bodies of knowledge and standard methodologies.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s a lot wrong in assuming that they are all the same type of thing, that they all fit all projects, or that having them is a substitute for thinking.</p>
<p>One project might find PRINCE2 to be exactly what it needs, whereas others will want to avoid it like the plague.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d expect a competent PM to know their way around a few of them (and yes we do need different ones, to account for differing national or domain cultures as much as anything else), but not to waste effort trying to collect the (non-existent) set.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

