During the course, we were required to review an academic article on project management and respond either supporting the article or disputing its findings. I chose to respond to Hallgren, M., Nilsson, A., Blomquist, T., & Soderholm, A. (2012). Relevance lost! A critical review of project management standardisation. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 5(3), 457-485. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.libproxy.db.erau.edu/10.1108/17538371211235326 Links to an external site.

The article is an academic review of the relevance of project management standards and status as a profession.   I chose to rebut their argument.  See my paper below titled Project Management Relevance amid Skepticism, and text only version of their article, Relevance lost! A critical review of Project Management Standardization by Markus Hällgren and Marcus Lindahl.

Abstract

Markus Hallgren, Andreas Nilsson, Tomas Blomquist, and Anders Soderholm's article in the International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Relevance lost! A Critical Review of Project Management Standards argues that Project Management has or may become an irrelevant occupation.  This assumption is based on several factors: its designation as a profession, lack of consistency in training, lack of consistency in results, standards, and other criteria.  This paper discusses the appointment of Project Management as a profession and whether or not that discussion is relevant to Project Management's relevance. It also shows how variability is a positive quality that allows for greater efficiency and enhances project management's relevance, as each variable is based on the standard, meaning The Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide). Recent data on growth, current and proposed, in the career field also demonstrate greater relevancy in project management as a practice and potential profession.