PMP vs. PgMP: When an Issue Becomes a Risk (Yes, Really)
- Bill Holmes
- 54 minutes ago
- 4 min read
“There will always be external and internal factors that influence [your] plan. Issues will arise, and you can only plan against so much risk. Therefore, the plan is as critical as the need to adjust it.” Winston Churchill
“The real challenge in crafting strategy lies in detecting subtle discontinuities that may undermine a business in the future. And for that there is no technique, no program, just a sharp mind in touch with the situation.” Henry Mintzberg
As I was teaching the PgMP course this week, a student asked a question that highlighted one of the most important mindset shifts between project and program management: “Why does PgMP say an issue can become a risk? Isn’t that backwards?”
It’s a fair question—and one I’ve heard more than once when experienced PMP-certified professionals begin to explore the broader, more strategic responsibilities of program leadership. Because in the PMP world, the relationship between risks and issues is clearly defined—and strictly one-way. But PgMP reframes that relationship to account for scale, complexity, and perception.
Let’s explore that.
PMP View: Clean Lines and Tactical Control
In PMP, the definitions are tight:
A risk is an uncertain event or condition that may occur—and it can be positive (an opportunity) or negative (a threat).
An issue is a current, known problem that has already occurred and needs to be resolved. It’s always negative.
The direction is linear: Risk becomes an Issue if it materializes. That’s it.
So if you identified the chance of a vendor delay (risk), and then they actually miss the delivery (issue), that flows. But once something’s an issue, PMP doesn’t loop it back into being a risk again.
PgMP View: Strategic Scope and Stakeholder Perception
At the program level, PgMP alters that perspective:
A risk is still an uncertain future event—positive or negative.
An issue is any known event or condition that has occurred and may affect program objectives. While typically negative, PMI doesn’t explicitly limit it to that.
Issues are often raised not by the delivery team but by stakeholders or customers.
PMI states in the Standard for Program Management: “An unresolved issue may become a program risk.”
In practice, that means today’s issue—say, an executive’s dissatisfaction with a pilot result—could, if left unresolved, lead to future funding constraints, reputational damage, or missed benefit realization. In PgMP, an issue can become a strategic risk.
It’s Not Just Semantics—It’s Scope
This isn’t PMI contradicting itself—it’s PMI acknowledging different scopes of responsibility. The project manager handles tactical impacts. The program manager is accountable for long-term value and alignment across multiple projects.
Here’s a side-by-side breakdown to make that shift clear:
Aspect | PMP | PgMP |
Risk | A future uncertain event; can be positive (opportunity) or negative (threat) | Same definition, applied at strategic/program level |
Issue | A current, negative event or condition that has occurred and needs resolution | A known event—typically negative—but not explicitly limited to that; often identified by stakeholders |
Source of Risk | Internal or external; identified through planning, analysis, and scanning | Same, plus strategic inputs including benefits realization risks |
Source of Issue | Internal or external; often emerges during project execution | Often raised by stakeholders or customers in program reviews |
Flow | Risk → Issue if it materializes | Issue → Risk if unresolved and creates future uncertainty |
Focus | Tactical: address impact to scope, cost, time | Strategic: evaluate long-term impact on value, perception, alignment |
Why This Matters
If you approach PgMP using PMP logic alone, you’ll miss the bigger picture. In PMP, the focus is on resolving today’s known problems and planning for tomorrow’s potential disruptions. In PgMP, the focus is on how today’s unresolved problems might create tomorrow’s strategic failures.
That includes perception-based issues, stakeholder dissatisfaction, and anything that might derail benefit realization. That’s why PgMP allows an issue to evolve into a program risk—it reflects the reality that in large, complex environments, unresolved “knowns” don’t always stay contained.
Final Takeaway
This isn’t a contradiction. It’s a shift in altitude. At the project level, your job is to manage knowns and unknowns efficiently. At the program level, your job is to understand how those knowns, if left unchecked, might unravel everything you're trying to deliver. So yes, in PgMP, an issue can become a risk—not because logic changed, but because the scope and consequences did.
If you're navigating the transition from project to program leadership—or preparing for the PgMP exam—and want a second set of eyes or someone to talk through your approach, feel free to reach out. I've helped many professionals strengthen their strategic mindset and connect the dots between theory and execution.
Coda
We know how to do things correctly! We know how to run projects. We know how to run portfolios. We know how to run programs. And we know how leadership and change management work. So why don't we do that? Because "leaders" let us down by refusing to do things correctly! Since I retired as an executive for the IRS, I've had a lot of time to think about leadership, and I've come to the conclusion that many organizations have a fatal flaw, and that is how they pick and promote their leaders. More to follow on this topic.
#PgMP #PMP #ProgramManagement #ProjectManagement #RiskManagement #IssueManagement #StrategicThinking #PMI #BenefitsRealization #StakeholderEngagement #Governance #LeadershipDevelopment #PortfolioManagement #PMO #ValueDelivery #ProjectLeadership #ExecutionToStrategy #EnterpriseStrategy #PgMPPreparation #PgMPExamTips #ProfessionalGrowth #SystemsThinking #PMICertifications