The PMI-Agile Merger: A Threat to Project Management Diversity

By: Salam Jaroshi

December 31, 2024, marked a turning point in the project management world—the Agile Alliance officially merged with PMI, forming the PMI Agile Alliance. While some celebrate this as progress, I see it as a dangerous consolidation of power that will erode the very essence of Agile and stifle innovation in project management.

A Contradiction 2 Decades in the Making

Since the Agile Manifesto in 2001, Agile and PMI have represented fundamentally opposing philosophies:

• Agile values adaptability, self-organizing teams, and responding to change over rigid processes.

• PMI, through PMBOK and predictive methods, has long emphasized structured planning, documentation, and control.

For over a decade, these two ideologies coexisted in tension—and that tension was healthy. It forced practitioners to think critically about methodology rather than blindly follow institutional dogma.

Now, with PMI absorbing Agile, we risk losing that balance.

The Fallout: Agile’s Subjectivity Under Threat

Agile was born as a rebellion against bureaucratic, top-down project management. Its strength came from its flexibility—its ability to be molded to fit different industries, teams, and cultures.

But PMI has always been about standardization. Its frameworks (PMBOK, PRINCE2) thrive on consistency, certification, and compliance. By bringing Agile under its umbrella, PMI will inevitably dilute Agile’s core principles in favor of a more controlled, "one-size-fits-all" approach.

What’s at stake?

• The death of true self-organizing teams in favor of PMI’s hierarchical structures.

• The erosion of iterative adaptability as PMI imposes rigid phase-gate processes.

• The commodification of Agile into just another certification scheme, rather than a mindset.

The Bigger Problem: Monoculture in Project Management

This merger accelerates a dangerous trend—the homogenization of project management. We’re heading toward a world where:

• Every methodology is forced into PMI’s compliance-driven model.

• Independent frameworks (like Scrum, Lean, or my own PYTHEO) are sidelined as "niche" rather than embraced for their unique strengths.

• Human-centric approaches (like IPMA’s focus on leadership and social skills) are drowned out by process obsession.

Where’s the Counterbalance?

I fully support customized, practical methodologies—whether it’s:

• Joel Carboni’s GPM/P5/PRISM (2009) for sustainability,

• Jim Koch’s IPMD (2012) for integrated delivery,

• Or my PYTHEO & Pyramid Framework (2017) for value-driven execution.

But we also need rigid, structured systems—not because they’re superior, but because some projects demand predictability over agility. PMBOK, PRINCE2, and IPMA’s competence-based approach serve a purpose.

Now, with PMI swallowing Agile, who will defend the other side?

A Call to Action

This merger should be a wake-up call for the project management community:

1. Resist the monoculture. Don’t let PMI become the only voice in the room.

2. Protect Agile’s independence. Fight against its transformation into just another PMI process.

3. Celebrate methodological diversity. No single framework fits all projects—whether predictive, Agile, or hybrid.

The future of project management should be pluralistic, not monopolistic.