I am often asked by people looking to get into litigation support and electronic discovery, or those looking to take their career to the next level, whether they should consider obtaining a PMP or other project-management certificate. Generally, I advise those newer to the field to focus on gaining relevant training first and software certifications second. Your overall experience and familiarity with specific software applications tend to matter more for these positions. Also, until recently, I've advised that other than some litigation-support vendors, project-management certifications are generally not valued in the legal industry. Recently, however, this has changed.
Attorneys and litigation-support professionals looking to bolster their marketability in a tight job market should consider obtaining a PMP if they meet the experience requirements. That those in the legal industry are increasingly aware of--and increasingly value--project-management credentials is further reflected in recent threads on the Litsupport Yahoo Group and the E-legal LinkedIn group; job trends noted by the Cowen Group and The Posse List; and the increasingly common appearance of the PMP in desired-qualifications lists on job posts for litigation-support and e-discovery positions.
Those who do not meet the work-experience requirement for the PMP may want to look at obtaining a Certified Associate in Project Management (CAPM) certificate, which only requires 23 hours of project-management education, passing an exam, meeting annual continuing-education requirements, and adhering to PMI's Code of Ethics. The CAPM is not as well recognized as the PMP, but I assume that will change as awareness of project-management standards continues to grow in the legal industry.
Let me make one thing clear, however, before my mail box, LinkedIn message box, and blog-comments section are inundated with the typical anti-PMP snark and umbrage that posts like this typically elicit:
Obtaining a PMP or other project-management certification does not mean that you can competently manage e-discovery or other legal/litsupport projects.
Having a PMP means that you passed a test covering project management best practices, as defined by PMI; have documented project-management experience and education; have continuing education requirements; and are subject to PMI's Code of Ethics. It does not, however, measure your success as a project manager. There are many who believe that because the PMP does not indicate success at project management, it is useless to help make informed hiring decisions.
While I understand that a PMP doesn't guarantee competence, I do think that it has some value. First, it shows a not-insignificant commitment to the art of project management. I've had some project managers argue that it doesn't even show this, that most people get their PMPs just to have something to put on their résumé. Perhaps, but you don't obtain and maintain a PMP without making a significant investment in time. Documenting your experience is not a trivial process. Having had the unpleasant experience of having my application selected for random audit, I can personally attest to this.
Preparing for and taking the test is also not a walk in the park. While the PMP exam was certainly not as time consuming and challenging as passing the bar exams of the U.S. states I'm licensed to practice law in, it still required a not insignificant amount of preparation. You also have to commit to continued study, something any competent project manager should do, but having a PMP means you have to document it.
Second, having a PMP does come with some level of accountability. If you do not meet the continuing education requirements, PMI will suspend your PMP credential. Also, while PMI's Ethics Review Committee may not have the clout of the disciplinary committees that police the licensed professions, it can suspend or terminate the membership and credentials of PMP-holders who violate the Code of Ethics. Anyone with evidence of a violation can file an ethics compliant against a PMP holder.
So I do think that the PMP credential has value to litigation-support project managers. That said, even if you have the requisite project management experience in other fields, if you are new to litigation support, you are probably better served by gaining industry-specific experience and training in litigation-support technology. As I've discussed in other posts, industry experience and technical skills are generally more important than project-management training for litigation-support positions.
As for those doing the hiring, my advice is that while hiring experienced project managers and considering project-management credentials may make sense for organizations with a high level of project-management maturity, you may want to consider training your existing resources rather than trying to hire project-management professionals. Even the most experienced and talented project manager is not going to single handedly bring project-management excellence to an organization. Most firms and legal departments looking to implement better project-management practices are probably going to be better served by what Jim Hassett refers to as a "just in time, just enough training" approach and less process-heavy project-management models tailored for legal work, such as those promulgated by LPM-gurus Mr. Hassett and Steve Levy.
Become a Fan of LPM
