Discovery Resources

by Matthew Lane, PMP, Ph.D., Director of Client Services, Fios, Inc.

Every profession has its own set of terms and acronyms.  They are useful as shortcuts and are integral to just about any industry.  Terms and acronyms a/k/a “lingo” can also be difficult to pick up and may prove to be a barrier to assimilating in a company.  Project management is no different.  Once a person begins to immerse him or herself into project management activities, training, and groups, it is natural that new words will become part of a person’s vocabulary.  In no time, people begin talking “critical paths,” “earned value,” “PERT,” and “PMBOK.”  See PM Essentials for a great list of 3,000+ project management terms.

However, there is some debate as to the degree to which project management lingo should be utilized within an organization.  There are two basic positions within the debate:

1. Yes, absolutely, the use of project management terminology is critical in introducing valuable organization change through project management.  Developing an accurate and consistent usage of project management terminology is important in building a culture of project management within my organization.  
2. No, utilizing new terms that don’t relate to the legal environment risks losing the acceptance of project management within the firm.  We can exercise the tools and techniques of project management without alienating critical people within the firm.

My perspective on this debate falls somewhere in the middle.  I believe it is important that, over time, the organization as a whole comes to understand and accept the value of project management.  Further, the use of appropriate project management terminology is important as the individuals involved in project management expand their interests and expertise.  In short, words do matter in professional groups, including project management.  But perhaps it is a matter of timing in introducing new lingo.  Using terms and acronyms more freely among “project management folks” yet limiting it firm-wide early on may minimize strange looks and the potential risk of losing important support.  On the other hand, introducing the lingo slowly into the organization may help others warm up to the presence of a second set of professional terminology.  Finally, substituting words that are more universal may also help ease acceptance within the firm.  For example, using the term “timeline” rather than “project schedule” sounds less formal and is more generalized.

I’m sure that each organization will find its own way within this debate.  It is important that attention be paid to this topic to ensure both project management professional terminology grows within the firm without unnecessarily losing support.  I’m interested in your opinions and input regarding this topic — feel free to comment!

Filed under Discerning e-Discovery, Home Page Featured.

 Email This…   Print This…