Project Management World Today Viewpoints
January 2006

Editorial | Viewpoints | Papers | Case Studies | Tips & Techniques | Community |Scene | Publications

Viewpoints are submitted and invited editorials intended to promote discussion on issues of importance to project management. The views expressed in articles published in Viewpoints are those of the authors alone. They do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of pmforum.org or its staff.

IS PMI REALLY GETTING VALID INPUT?

by Hugh Woodward

PMI released the exposure draft of its revised Code of Professional Conduct earlier this month and is soliciting comment from PMI members. The PMI web site declares: “Your thorough review of the entire document and your submission of any recommended additions, deletions, or changes, are encouraged.”

PMI then proceeds to exclude a large number of members from participation.

The problem arises in that PMI insists on an “Assignment of Copyright” before allowing anybody to review, or indeed view, the document.

PMI adopted this policy for standards development in the late 1990’s. And there are good reasons why a standards publisher must have clear ownership of its publications. It needs to be able to issue revisions and updates, for example, without having to seek permission from previous contributors, and risk that permission may be withheld. And it protects the users from unauthorized and erroneous versions.

Some PMI members have opted not to assign the copyright for their contribution to PMI. That is their right, of course. But more importantly, there are a large number of experienced and knowledgeable practitioners who cannot assign copyright for their work to PMI. They are simply not at liberty to do so because their work is owned by somebody else.

Project managers who work for large corporations, and many small corporations, find themselves in a situation where their employer claims ownership of all their work. A typical employment contract reads:

All right, title, and interest of every kind and nature whatsoever, whether now known or unknown, in and to any intellectual property, including any inventions, patents, trademarks, service marks, copyrights, films, scripts, ideas, creations, and propertied invented, created, written, developed, furnished, produced, or disclosed by Employee in the course of rendering his services to Employer under this Agreement shall, as between the parties hereto, be “works for hire’ and shall remain the sole and exclusive property of Employer for any all purposes and uses whatsoever, and Employee for any all purposes and uses whatsoever, and Employee shall have no right, title, or interest of any kind or nature therein or thereto or in and to any results or proceeds therefrom, unless otherwise agreed in writing between Employee and Employer.

Some employers exempt material that is clearly not in the domain of the employee's scope of work. A scientist who writes children’s books during weekends could certainly argue the employer has no intellectual property right to the children’s books, for example. But it would be a stretch to argue developing professional standards is out of scope for a practicing project manager.

Employees under such a contract, or subject to similar conditions of employment, cannot assign copyright for their work to PMI. Neither can U.S. federal government employees.

U.S. law is quite explicit on this point. “Copyright Basics (Circular 1)” issued by the United States Copyright Office states tersely: “Works by the U. S. Government are not eligible for U. S. copyright protection.” Documents developed by U.S. Government employees are automatically in the public domain, purchased and owned in effect by the tax-paying citizens of the United States.

PMI could of course accommodate comments and input by both of these groups if it chose to do so. The U.S. Copyright Office suggests that claimants include a “statement that identifies either those portions of the work in which copyright is claimed or those portions that constitute U. S. Government material.”

It is not clear why PMI demands the copyright for comments submitted by members. It arguably needs to establish ownership of material it eventually chooses to publish, but material submitted and discarded is another matter entirely. And one could question of validity of standards developed by excluding input from a large percentage of the profession, namely project managers in large corporations and the U.S. Government.

It is particularly perplexing that the Code of Professional Conduct is being developed under these rules. Once adopted, the Code will supposedly be binding on every member of PMI and every PMP. It would be reasonable for a professional association to give such a document the widest possible circulation and consider feedback from every pertinent source. To deliberately exclude a large number of members from reviewing, or even viewing, the proposed Code does not bode well for its eventual acceptance.

PMI’s decision to exclude this input is truly perplexing!

Would you like to comment on this article? Visit the Message

About the Author:

Hugh Woodward is the President and Managing Editor of pmforum.org, and an internationally recognized leader of the project management profession. He served two terms as Chair of the Project Management Institute and almost six years as a member of PMI's Board of Directors. His professional experience includes projects and programs in manufacturing, construction and IT, and involving both the public and private sectors. He continues to promote the profession as a frequent conference speaker, having addressed audiences in Argentina, Australia, Canada, China, France, Hungary, Israel, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Russia, Singapore, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Top of Page

Express your views on any PM World Today Viewpoints article!

Visit the PMFORUM Discussion Center

Editorial Policy: The PMFORUM® has no connection to any national or international project management organization nor does it reflect the policy of any project management professional or commercial organization. The PMFORUM® maintains an objective and impartial view of project management affairs. In the interests of advancing professional project management the PMFORUM® will publish contending and objective views on issues that reflect collegial differences and perspectives