I appreciate that Agile is an umbrella for a variety of approaches to doing software development. That will make it harder to test on, but will make this a stronger certification than a method-specific certification.

I agree with others who have said that agile is best learned by practicing. I'm not too particular on how one learns, but putting the learning into practice in a team environment with frequent and effective retrospectives to adjust your process is key to internalizing agile. Hopefully the experience qualification ensures real agile project experience, not just observing agile teams. The "observing" level of experience won't show that the practitioner has the "capability to lead basic Agile teams" and so would dilute the value of the PMI certification. What kind of observing is going to qualify as agile experience?

Why must an individual have prior management experience in an Agile environment in order to sit for the Agile mgmt certification? I'm very familiar with the standard responses to this question as it relates to similar certifications, so I hope I receive some more creative ones here.

My logic for the question follows: If an individual is already a seasoned, senior manager with other respected industry credentials - including say PMI PrMP, PMP, RMP, etc; and say if the individual has attended numerous Agile seminars, webinars, training, etc; and the individual has the desire/knowledge/capabilities to receive an Agile Cert; then why should those individuals be penalized just because they have not yet had the opportunity to work in an Agile environment?

Thomas Taylor
PMP, RMP, CAM, Tivoli Enterprise Consultant

@Rebecca

Rebecca,

I'm not sure where the "observing" reference is coming in. The experience qualification requires individuals to be working on Agile project teams. Now, they may be working in a role other than Project Manager; however, they must be working on the project team.

Thanks,
Rory

@Thomas

Thomas,

When we were going through the process of researching the Agile certification, extensive research was done with practitioner, hiring managers, and organizations regarding the eligibility criteria. It is this research that led to the finalized criteria, including the experience requirement. There are a variety of certifications in the Agile space, many of which do not require experience but only training or an examination. For PMI, we determined, based upon the research mentioned, that is was incredibly important for this certification to go beyond simply training and interest. As others have mentioned, there is definite value in learning through experience, which will be a crucial part of this certification.

Thank you,
Rory

Rory,

My reference to observing is on this page under the title that starts "The eligibility requirements ..." and above the blue title box for "PMI Agile Certification": http://www.pmi.org/en/Agile/Agile-C...ents.aspx. The bullet point on experience says: Experience leading, working on, or observing Agile projects.

Thomas,

As Rory stated, those who want a certification that indicates in an interest, training and some study can get that elsewhere. Some of those certifications are not held with much regard because of the lack of an experience requirement, but they exist and we don't need more of them. Experience turns knowledge into skills.

Hi I am looking for someone based in Wellington who has used the Agile project approach in a business project versus IT/ IS environment. Can some one get in touch with me on this? angela.brown@brightumbrella.co.nz

@ Rebecca

The bullet was actually a misprint - the eligibility requirements are stated in the table below that (and I have had the bullets removed from the page). The requirement around Agile is:

1,500 hours working on Agile project teams or in Agile methodologies. These hours are in addition to the 2,000 hours required in general project management experience. These hours must be earned within the last 2 years.

So, individuals need to be working on Agile projects. They may not be a project manager for these projects - they may be serving other roles - but would need to be actively working on the project.

Thanks and sorry for any confusion

I'd like to offer a few comments on this - I've just published a book called "Making Sense of Agile Project Management" that might be helpful to people in this forum:

http://www.breakthroughsolns.com/Bo...Agile.aspx

There's a fundamental shift in thinking that has to take place in the Project Management profession - I've seen a similar transformation in the quality management profession some years ago...years ago, quality managers used to have a narrow focus on control of defects - they needed to learn to take a broader focus on maximizing customer value (of which controlling defects is one component. The transformation that the PM community has to go through is similar - Many PM's have been deeply schooled in managing costs and schedules and that's what they're measured on in many cases...shifting to a more agile project management approach requires a new way of thinking that recognizes a project can meet its cost and schedule goals and still be unsuccessful in delivering customer value if a rigid approach is used to control costs and schedules that isn't adaptive to customer needs.

There is still a perception that "agile=Scrum" in many communities and if you're not doing Scrum, you're not agile at all...there is a huge middle ground between purely agile methodologies like Scrum at one extreme and pure Waterfall approaches at the other extreme in many situations, PM's have to operate in that middle ground and find the right balance of control and agility for a given business and project environment. The mistake many PM's make is to force-fit a project to a given methodology (whatever it might be) - the right approach is to fit the methodology (or combination of methodologies) to the project. That requires a lot more skill to do that - you have to understand a broader range of methodologies and understand the principles behind them at a deeper level in order to mix-and-match them as needed to fit a given situation. In my book I use the analogy of a project manager as a "cook" vs. a "chef". A "cook" knows how to prepare a limited number of standard recipes by the book, a "chef" knows how to prepare a much broader range of more exotic recipes and also knows how to create his/her own recipes when required.

I'm concerned about some of the statements I've seen about the requirements for this certification. For example,

"1,500 hours working on Agile project teams or in Agile methodologies. These hours are in addition to the 2,000 hours required in general project management experience. These hours must be earned within the last 2 years...So, individuals need to be working on Agile projects. They may not be a project manager for these projects - they may be serving other roles - but would need to be actively working on the project."

I have two concerns with the above statements:
1. This seems to present agile as a set of well-defined methodologies (e.g. Scrum) rather than a way of thinking - in other words if you're not doing Scrum, you're not agile at all
2. It seems to preclude the possibility that someone could be a project manager on an agile project and that perpetuates the notion that you can't mix project management and agile approaches together and I strongly disagree with that notion

The challenge here that PM's face is figuring out how to develop a hybrid approach that blends control and agility to fit a given situation. For example, I'm managing a large government project at the moment that demands a hybrid approach - because of the government contractual requirements, a pure agile (e.g. Scrum) approach would not work.

The value-add that PMI can provide in this area is helping PM's see how to integrate traditional PM principles and practices with agile principles and practices to create the right approach to fit a given situation. If this certification does nothing more than test knowledge of standard agile priniciples and practices, I think it will have missed the mark.

Chuck Cobb

Rory,
I appreciate your responses to some very challenging questions. Would you do me the honor of addressing mine. In case it was missed, I wanted to know if any consideration had been given to preferential costing or any other kind of benefit for those already certified via the pioneering Agile bodies (Scrum Alliance) given that we've already completed hours of training and moreover have years of practical experience?

I would encourage such to ensure that there are ample numbers of authentic certificants. Looking at the PMP as a model, we know that unfortunately many of those PMP certified are just folks who studied for and passed an exam. No more can we count on that credential as a calling card for a competent PM. I see the Agile certification going the same way much earlier on if we don't give significant thought to leveraging those already experienced and allowing those to a get value and add value.

Angela Scott, PMP CSM

Hey Chuck,

I have to say that there are some problems with your assumptions from the start. First and foremost, you imply that using Agile methodologies means less control which is completely misleading. You can't get much more control over a delivery project than by using Agile techniques.

If you are talking about adding additional documents to support external dependencies (such as regulators) there is nothing 'hybrid' about doing that within the framework of Scrum, or even Extreme Programming for that matter. These additional stakeholders get their due attention as they should. That's still Agile.

Similarly, your statement that the 1,500 hours in an Agile team and 2,000 additional project management hours within the last two years implies a given methodology is an obvious misunderstanding. Notice that the terminology says Agile. That leaves the door open to the different flavors (XP, Scrum, DSDM, FDD, etc.) and yes, Agile consists of some basic techniques and philosophies regardless of the flavor you choose. So that requirement is defensible.

Your book blurb makes good points about the difference between PMP-style 'on-time, on-budget' definitions of success, and the reality that just spending an agreed amount of money in an agreed amount of time does not a successful project make. We 'agilists' talk about delivering value as the most important element in which schedule and budget are constraints, not goals.

I have different problems with the Agile Certification because I've been an Agile practitioner for 10 years and it's hard to certify ability even with experience requirements. Unfortunately for me, my last two years have been spent defining an Agile Framework and Governance for one of the largest Banks in the world (I know about handling regulated environments), so I don't have direct Agile 'project' experience of 1500 hours over the requisite 2 year period. Ironic.

Good luck with the book, though I suspect I'd disagree with your conclusions.

Best - Jonathan Harley

Jonathan,

I think there is a misunderstanding of what I mean by "control"...By the word "control", I'm primarily referring to "control" over costs and schedules. Maybe "predictability" is a better word than control. In many situations, there is a need for some level of predictabiliity and control over costs and schedules and that requires more of a plan-driven approach. For example, I don't believe anyone would seriously consider using an agile approach for building a bridge across a river where the requirements can be well-defined upfront and there is a need for having some control over costs and schedule of the project. In that environment, a Waterfall approach makes a lot more sense...there are other situations that require more of a hybrid approach. For example, in a government project, the government expects too have relatively accurately defined costs and schdeules upfront and even expects to use EVM milestones to measure progress against those goals. That requires a hybrid approach - at a macro layer we use a plan-driven approach to define the overall envelope that the project needs to operate in and at a micro layer we use a more adaptive approach (similar to Scrum) to develop detailed requirements for the design.

You can't have both tight control and predictability over costs and schedules and at the same time have a completely agile approach that allows the requirements to be defined as the project progresses. Those two things just don't go together but there are creative ways to find a compromise position that provides a balance of control/predictability with a level of agility to allow the requirements to be adaptive. That's the challenge for many PM's...I hope that this certification process addresses that challenge - as I've mentioned, simply knowing how to implement an agile methodology like Scrum (or whatever other agile methodology you want to pick) "by the book" won't accomplish that goal in my opinion.

Chuck Cobb

@ Angela Scott

At this time, we are not looking at offering any special pricing for any other groups other than PMI members. I will certainly bring this suggestion back to the team and Steering Committee for consideration. This said, while having a certification like a CSM provides a leg up on the education requirements, it does not guarantee experience.

With regard to the PMP, PMI has taken a number of steps to ensure that individuals meet the eligibility requirements when they take the PMP. As always, I would recommend that if you know someone who you know fabricated evidence or was dishonest on their PMP application, that you submit this information via PMI's Ethical complaint process: http://www.pmi.org/en/About-Us/Ethi...Cases.aspx

This said, PMI continues to invest and improve our review processes for certification applications to become better at ensuring all certification candidates meet the requirements for the certification for which they are applying. We will certainly take these lessons learned and improvements into account for the Agile certification process.

Rory

Chuck,

I appreciate your concerns on the eligibility requirements. However: 1) We are not precluding that someone could be a project manager on an Agile project. Rather, this certification is not solely intended for those who are project managers, but a broader audience (including project coordinators, team leads, contributing team members, etc.). 2) I do not believe that we are making Agile equivalent to any single predefined methodology - rather, we are focusing on the overall philosophy of Agile and its implementation in project management.

I agree that some project managers simply plug in a methodology regardless of consideration of the project context. PMI does wish to continue to educate project managers on various approaches to project management, Agile included, in order to ensure that practitioners are using the right approach for that project.

Rory,

Thanks for your clarification...the wording you used in your original post on this threw me off:

"...so, individuals need to be working on Agile projects. They may not be a project manager for these projects"

It sounded like you were saying that you couldn't be a project manager on an agile project to qualify for this certification. I understand what you're saying now.

However, if you accept the notion that there can be a legitimate project management role in an agile project, it raises a much broader question of what exactly is an "Agile Project Manager"? As I'm sure you're aware, there is no formally recognized role for a project manager in many agile project methodolgies (e.g. Scrum) and I've even heard a widely recognized agile consultant make a statement that "Agile Project Management is an oxymoron".

What I think is needed is for PMI to create a vision statement of what "Agile Project Management" is (that's what I've tried to do in my book). The certification should support that vision of course - without a clearly defined vision of what an "Agile Project Manager" is, the certification might easily go in the wrong direction. Here's my suggestion for a vision statement:

"An 'Agile Project Manager' is someone who has a deep understanding of both agile and traditional project management principles and practices and is able to blend and integrate those principles and practices in the right proportions to provide an appropriate balance of control and agility to fit a given business and project environment"

That's a very ambitious vision statement, but I believe that's exactly what is needed. The PMI agile certification should go beyond the existing agile certifications if it is to add value...it shouldn't be just another CSM certification - it has to be positioned at a higher level with a clear vision behind it of the role that an Agile Project Manager is intended to play.

I'm sure that you are aware that there is a fairly deep polarization between some people in the agile community and some people in the PMI community and I think it is essential to bridge this gap. Creating a vision for what value-add the project management community brings to the table is critical to breaking down the polarization that exists.

Chuck

I will echo Chuck Cobb's quesion of "what 'Agile Project Management' is". Without this, I do not see how anyone could claim 1500 hours of Agile Project Management experience in order to qualify for the exam. Does PMI have anything define what it is that it is testing people for?

Wayne,

PMI will be published the Agile Certification Examination Content Outline in this coming week. When that document is published, I would ask you to review this, as this will define many of these concepts, in the context of the Certification.

Rory,

I'm anxious to see the material you mentioned, but I doubt that an "Examination Content Outline" is going to be sufficient if all it does is identify the knowledge areas that will be covered in the exam. What's needed is to:

1. Better define the vision of what role(s) that a PM might play in an agile project and how to integrate traditional PM principles and practices with agile principles and practices,

2. Identify the knowledge areas that are needed to fill that role, and

3. Then (after 1 & 2 above are accomplished) define the content of questions to test mastery of those knowledge areas

The problem we have is that the whole idea of "Agile Project Management" is a very new concept, it is not well understood and/or accepted by many people, and it is also a topic that is fairly contentious in the agile community - there is no well-defined role for a PM in an agile project and there is a perceived conflict between traditional PM principles and practices and agile principles and practices.

If all PMI does is to develop a certification exam that simply tests knowledge of basic agile principles and practices without addressing some of these bigger issues and questions, I don't think it will go far enough.

Chuck

Chuck,

Unlike the PMP and PgMP, which are role-based credentials and aligned to role of a project and program manager, this certification is focused on the understanding of Agile and being able to apply the knowledge to projects. What you identify here would be attributes for an identified role-based credential for an Agile PM - we identify and answer these types of questions for our other credentials via a Role Delineation Study. When we were researching this certification, we spent extensive time determining what our stakeholders required and, at this time, did not find that this role had solidified sufficiently to credential against it. Rather, we will continue working with the Community of Practice (CoP) to further define and advocate for this practice. PMI will also continue to monitor our research and determine when and if this type of credential would be required.

Rory

Agile Experience
1,500 hours working on Agile project teams or in
Agile methodologies. These hours are in addition
to the 2,000 hours required in general project
management experience. These hours must be
earned within the last 2 years
----------------------------------------------

I have over 2 years (2006-2008) full-time agile/SCRUM project management experience and several hours in 2010. I co-developed our company scrum process for a particular software in 2010. Also, I have been a member of the Scrum Alliance since 2006, have conducted training, read numerous whitepapers, books and attended webinars. Yet, I am not eligible for PMIs certification and have been denied after 2 appeals. Therefore I am going to get a scrummaster cert through one of the well-known agile companies. .

Someone asked why PMI was getting into this? 1) I think it makes sense, but, I am afraid one of the key reasons is to jump on the money-making bandwagon.

I share Marcia's concern about PMI just "jumping on the agile money-making bandwagon" and, as I've mentioned, I don't think this certification really goes far enough.

My recommendations to PMI on this are:

1. PMI should clearly define a vision for where this is going in the "future state" and make it clear that this is only step one in achieving that vision so that this doesn't appear to be just a shallow attempt to get certification revenue

2. PMI has to make a stronger commitment to better defining what agile project management is and helping PM's learn how to integrate agile and traditional PM principles and practices in real world situations. In my opinion, there's a major transformation needed in the project management profession to fully embrace and integrate agile principles and practices and it's a non-trivial task to make that transformation happen successfully.

I also suggest that PMI take an agile approach to making this transformation happen...a traditional "Waterfall" approach would be to wait until the concept of agile project management is 100% mature and stabilized to move forward...I agree that the concept of "agile project management" is still at an early stage of maturity; however, there are plenty of people including myself who have lots of real world experience in making this work in actual practice who are willing to help move this forward much more rapidly.