The subject of management is renowned for its addiction to fads and fashions. Project Management is no exception. The issue of interest for this paper is the establishment of standards in the area, specifically the 'College of Complex Project Managers' and their 'competency standard for complex project managers.' Both the college and the standard have generated significant interest in the Project Management community. Whilst the need for development of the means to manage complex projects is acknowledged, a critical evaluation show significant flaws in the definition of complex in this case, the process by which the College and its standard have emerged, and the content of the standard. If Project Management is to continue to develop as a profession, it will need an evidence-based approach to the generation of knowledge and standards. The issues raised by the evaluation provide the case for a portfolio of research that extends the existing bodies of knowledge into large-scale complicated (or major) projects. We propose that it would be owned by the practitioner community, rather than focused on one organization. Research questions are proposed that would commence this stream of activity towards an intelligent synthesis of what is required to manage in both complicated and truly complex environments. This is a revised paper previously presented at the 21st IPMA World Congress on Project Management Cracow, Poland.Keywords: complex project management, competency standards, major projects,

No abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to resolve and remove from the governance arena in general and the project arena in particular, conflict which occurs when parties do not realise they have different meanings for common governance terms. Design/methodology/approach -Review literature on definitional confusion in general and on governance in particular and develop a method for defining an internally consistent group of terms, then apply this to a group of terms in the governance arena. Findings -Several important subjects commonly arranged under the governance banner do not actually constitute governance (strategy, behaviour, decision making). Research limitations/implications -Further work is necessary to remove similar confusion in other closely related areas, including power itself and authority as well as project and general management terms such as responsibility and accountability. Practical implications -Projects and business alike can potentially achieve significant improvements in efficiency and effectiveness through gaining consistency across current models, frameworks, policies and procedures thus reducing cross-boundary conflict. Social implications -Creation of a unifying feature within the project and management literature, shifting the understanding of the boundaries and limitations of governance. These definitions will help progress governance from complexity to simplicity, from an art to an understandable practice, from a concept that has been hijacked for partisan and political gain to a lean social tool which can be put to use for the benefit of organisations, whether public, charitable or private. Originality/value -The value is clarity -resulting in the avoidance of confusion and misunderstanding together with their consequent waste of time, resources and money.

Purpose – The Project Management Office (PMO) phenomenon is a dynamic and regularly evolving feature of the project landscape. The functions and practices expected of the PMO differ as widely as the industries and organisations, which host them. By uncovering the documented and undocumented history of the PMO and its practices the authors see how PMOs have developed to current times, how PMOs develop their ideas, how useful PMOs are, and what associated activities they partake in. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach – In this paper, the authors conduct an extensive literature review of the academic and non-academic literature. The first phase involved searching academic journals and published theses. The second, deep searches with Google Scholar and Books using a variety of parameters to capture the changing nomenclature of the PMO over many years. These searches discovered lost academic literature within university libraries, examples of very early essays on the project office and numerous government reports on PMO and project office undertakings. Findings – This research reveals how the form and use of the structure we now call the PMO has evolved and adapted over time. In recent history the PMO has evolved to be the central repository for tools and methodologies for this non-operational work. The PMO has become an asset, a commodity to be traded upon and a badge to be worn to attain certain privileges. Research limitations/implications – This research identifies a number of deficiencies in existing literature. Particularly highlighting that many practices, methods and PMO typologies exist, frequently their custodians tout these as “best practice”. Although some research has been conducted by academics on PMOs vast gaps exist in PMO literature. Practical implications – This research identifies a number of assumptions in practitioner literature and professional practice. Organisations both private and public are investing enormous resources in the pursuit of enhancing project management outcomes often turning to the PMO concept to resolve their problems. However there is limited evidence to suggest PMOs create a favourable return. If the authors were to use medicine as an example, prior to a scientific approach in medicine the field relied on potions and magic, however medicine changed to evidence-based practice this has lead to enhanced life prospects. An evolution in project management doctrine may enhance outcomes. Originality/value – This review of the PMO which possesses archaeological attributes in it’s historical context adds a rich understanding to organisational knowledge by considering the history of the PMO and the dramatic shifts in its purpose over a prolonged period of time. The discussion draws out the critical PMO topics to be addressed and includes a critique of practitioner and academic knowledge.