Technology, training, learning and development blogs

New PRINCE2 exams bring new challenges

Last year the training community became aware that the APMG, the people responsible for the PRINCE2 exams, were thinking about changing the format of the practitioner exam. Xpertise are always keen to be heavily involved with any new developments and so some of my colleagues and I got our hands on these new exams as soon as possible.

The new format is called the practitioner ‘objective test examination’.  This is the second of the PRINCE2 exams, the first being the foundation, which has stayed the same.  In the old days (pre-September) the practitioner candidate was given a three-hour written paper based on three mandatory questions.  This meant that there was always some debate on what questions would be ‘in’ and which would be ‘out’.  It also meant you could get very lucky, you got the only three subjects you actually understood, or unlucky – it was a bit of a lottery for some delegates.  The best thing about it was that, with PRINCE2 being a management technique, there was never one definitive answer to a question. So long as you argued your point you could win the examiner over, if you thought person A would make a better project manager than person B you could still win points with your argument even if the examiner didn’t agree.  The worst thing about the old exam was that delegates found themselves staring at a blank sheet of paper with the question ‘explain quality for an hour’ spinning around their head.

The new objective test format is totally different, it is multiple choice: but that is where the similarity with the foundation exam stops.  When I attended the various reviews with the APMG along with peers from other companies there was nothing short of outright mutiny as trainers were not happy with the new format.  It is multiple choice, therefore the answers are black and white, which is not the case in PRINCE2, no longer can you “argue your point and win the examiner over”, tick the wrong box and its no points for you, or even negative marks! The meetings would degenerate into the trainers picking over a question and saying “ah but, what if this happened, the answer would be B instead wouldn’t it?” PRINCE2 trainers can be very geeky at times; you should hear us at the bar!

The objective test has a lot of positive features however.  The turnaround for exams results with the written format was about 3-4 months, but with the new one it is 2-4 weeks.  Although the questions are open to misinterpretation, you are not at the mercy of the examiner.  In the past I have had to manage a few appeals where it was simply the examiner’s opinion that had caused the candidate to fail, even though the answer followed the PRINCE2 method.  With the new format, you are not staring at a blank piece of paper; you have options to choose from, so you can get started quicker and manage your time better, taking each module in 20-minute ‘slots’ in the three hours.  It is also a much broader test of the candidate; there are now 9 modules out of 11 tested, so it is more a case of “I wonder which two WON’T be in there?” rather than “I wonder which three will?”  This means it is much harder for the less professional trainers out there to ‘coach’http:// delegates, which is great for the overall standard.

Change is not always for the better of course, the objective test is not perfect, but no exam is.  Is it an absolute and complete test of a candidate’s ability to apply PRINCE2 in the real world?  Not entirely.  Is it better or worse than the old format?  I would say just different, although the current pass marks are higher than the old format, so you can draw your own conclusions there.  The objective test is a much fuller test of the candidate’s knowledge, it gives them options rather than a blank piece of paper and it gives us trainers a much better insight into how the method works, at least from the examiners perspective.

Only time will tell if it is a change for the better, but I think it will be.