|
|
What is the difference between a Virtual Community and a Chapter?
|
Pharmaceutical SIG is an example of a Virtual Community. A chapter is geographically based and comprised of members that
live within a certain geographical boundary. Chapter meetings are physical gatherings. Virtual communities are comprised of
members from all over the world, which utilize technology to communicate with each other such as through teleconferences
or online technology. PMI virtual communities are defined as a group of members with no geographical boundary brought
together by a common interest such as a particular project management discipline or issue.
|
VCP FAQs 2008 Final
|
|
|
What is the Virtual Communities Project (VCP)?
|
Phase I of VCP closed on 31 December 2007. An outcome from the Community Transformation Project (CTP), PMI reviewed
and recommended efficiency gains aimed to deliver member value and increase member satisfaction. The principles were to:
- Normalize value at all levels of community
- Provide flexible models for community formation to encourage interaction and growth
- Develop communities only when the business case and the projected outcome clearly demonstrate
the value to the member
Following PMI strategic principle #7, “PMI structures and offerings must be creative, adaptable, and flexible to
accommodate needs of stakeholders around the globe,” VCP is developing, testing and implementing virtual community
models to deliver value and member satisfaction.
|
VCP FAQs 2008 Final
|
|
|
How will current SIGs and Colleges change in the future?
|
The goal of VCP is to develop a new and improved structural and operational model(s) for SIGs and colleges, as was done for
chapters in the first phase of the Community Transformation Project. The revised structure will be better aligned with PMI’s
strategic objectives, and will relieve challenges faced currently by SIG and college leaders.
|
VCP FAQs 2008 Final
|
|
|
How will current SIG leadership be impacted by the transition to the new virtual community model(s) that result from VCP?
|
Existing leaders are essential for the successful transition to, and implementation of, the new community models and their future
success. Since the new virtual communities will not be incorporated, leaders of these communities will not be legal fiduciaries.
They will not be responsible for legal compliance and reporting. Instead, these leaders will serve in a refreshed role as subject
matter experts of their communities. Leaders will focus their efforts and attention on delivering value to the community
participants through the creation and sharing of Knowledge. Current SIG leaders will be invited to participate in the
development of roles and responsibilities for the subject matter experts of the new communities.
|
VCP FAQs 2008 Final
|
|
|
What is the timing of VCP relative to Pharmacuetical SIG?
|
We do not expect the VCP to significantly impact the Pharmaceutical SIG until at least 2009 or possibly 2010. From a recent VCP Team presentation: “…Phase 2 Project Charter – 2008. Develop transition/implementation plans (updated for learning from the
two Pilots) for the rollout of the Virtual Community models that will be used to form new communities and transition existing
communities, including appropriate training and mentoring. (Q4 2008)…”
|
March LIM Presentation
|
|
|
Which model has the Pharmaceutical SIG Board Chosen?
|
The Pharmaceutical SIG Board has not chosen a model. The Board has not yet reached a point where they feel they
can make an informed decision about which path to pursue.
|
Board minutes: Available upon request
|
|
|
How are other SIGs reacting to VCP? What are they doing about it?
|
Several SIG leaders have formed an informal discussion group to develop strategy for reacting to the VCP initiative. Eleven of
about 30 SIG and College Chairs drafted and submitted a formal letter to the PMI Board of Directors expressing displeasure with
the direction VCP is taking. Several of these leaders feel it is not in their best interest to pursue any of the models VCP is
proposing. Philip Diab Chair of PMI Board of Directors responded to the letter to reinforce the PMI Board’s commitment to VCP
and to counter many of the claims made in the letter. Since it is unclear whether the discussion group is basing its positions
and actions on fact or on rumor and since the PMI Board of Directors seems willing to listen to input, the Pharmaceutical SIG
Board has not chosen to participate or endorse the work of the discussion group.
|
Discussion Group
Letter from Discussion Group to PMI Board of Directors
Response from PMI Board Chair Philip Diab |
|
|
How is PMI communicating information regarding VCP?
|
Many avenues are being used to communicate progres related to VCP.
|
|
|
|
Under the new model, will members have input regarding who will lead the SIG?
|
Currently, the plan appears to be to have member nomination (election) with PMI confirmation of leaders.
|
|
|
|
Will PMI limit the services a SIG can offer?
|
The current position seems to be that PMI does not want to limit a SIG’s offerings if they are valuable to members. The
primary focus seems to be the technology and administration of services and the normalization of value (if one SIG offers
something valuable, should other SIGs offer it also).
|
|
Logout
About
