12 of 12 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Very High Level, 26 Jun 2007
By Craig Humphreys "BearH" - Published on Amazon.com
This review is from: The Standard for Program Management (Paperback)
Complex and very high level. Doesn't give practical examples to program managemment. The concepts are easily understood but the implementation detail is very limited. I'll be looking for a book that complements this standard with practical examples and advise in applying the concepts of the standard.
10 of 10 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Excellent standard - unless you're just prepping for the exam, 4 Aug 2008
By Douglas Brown - Published on Amazon.com
This review is from: The Standard for Program Management (Paperback)
As a program managers' guide this is an excellent book. Given a few hours of thought you can follow it along to a decent program office roll-out.
As a study guide for the PGMP exam, which is supposed to be based on the standard, you're going to be pretty confused. The PGMP exam is nothing like the PMP exam, with its rigid focus on what processes are sub-sets of other processes. For the exam, the main take-aways from this standard are its constant references to: the business-benefit link, to the need for governance, and of course PMI's constant (and usually, tragically, ignored) pleas for the use of a WBS. Those are the only parts you will recognize again on the exam.
Of course you need to read the standard before taking the exam. Ironically, however, this standard is actually considerably more useful as an operational program management reference - which, of course, is what the standard is really meant for. So kudos to the folks who put it together.
8 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
All right for first version..., 23 Sep 2007
By Naomi Wong - Published on Amazon.com
This review is from: The Standard for Program Management (Paperback)
I do not expect examples in a Standard. But it's too short and incomplete. For example, there are no tools and techniques for the processes. Also there are some silly errors which could have been corrected by a careful copy editing. I hope PMI does a better job in the second version of this standard.