Showing 1–10 of 140 reviews (4 star)
I've really enjoyed the content and pace. Lisa was a fab faciliator - from the first session I felt assured by her manner, knowledge and the way she paced our learning.
It was helpful to go through the theory and have chance to role play a scenario at the end of the day. However, I needed more time to fully engage with the role play as there was so much detail to read and 6 issues to negotiate was a lot for me. I like hearing real examples from colleagues during the training.
The chance to meet other PMs and colleagues working on projects was really valuable as we could share experiences and good practices. The focus was on managing construction contracts but we also manage consultant services contracts and managing those through the NT SFA is not the same as there are not the same controls and mechanisms set within the contract. I'm specifically facing issues with consultants challenging our T&Cs and not wanting to sign up to them. I think the conflict part of the training was weaker than the contract side. It didn't address major issues such as poor performance, it was more about identifying conflict situations and stopping them escalating but less about typical reasons for conflict to arise and how to deal with that. I think overall I was expecting it to be more specific to working in the National Trust and less generic.
Wanted a bit more specific discussion time and feedback identifying internal issues and how topics aligned with those issues
The Tutor was great and the content covered made giving the exam easier.
Overall, I found the APM PMQ course to be a valuable qualification and I would like to reiterate that the quality of the training itself was very high. Becky was an excellent trainer who delivered the content professionally, kept the sessions engaging and was extremely supportive throughout the week. My concerns relate primarily to the structure and pace of the course rather than the training delivery. Compressing a programme that is normally delivered over seven weeks into five consecutive days created a very intensive learning environment and, in my view, did not allow sufficient time for delegates to properly absorb, consolidate and apply the material before being assessed. The volume of content covered each day was significant, and without opportunities between sessions for reflection, independent study and reinforcement, I found it increasingly difficult to retain and confidently recall information as the week progressed. By the time of the examination, I did not feel as prepared as I would have expected to feel after completing the course. While I understood many of the concepts when they were taught, I did not have enough time to practise applying that knowledge or identify and address gaps in my understanding. As a result, I believe the delivery model placed unnecessary pressure on delegates and may have impacted examination performance. The examination conditions also contributed to the overall experience, as the lack of air conditioning made the environment uncomfortably hot and affected concentration during an already demanding assessment. In summary, I believe the content, trainer and organisational support were all strong. However, the accelerated delivery format significantly reduced the effectiveness of the learning experience. Given the choice, I would strongly favour a delivery model that includes time between sessions for study, revision and mock exam practice, as this would better support knowledge retention, confidence and exam readiness.
The quick turn around of the marking of the homework questions was incredibly helpful The online portals and study guide had a lot of information
Great insight. Maybe a slightly bigger proportion of time should be spent on exam questions.
Good content but far too fast paced for the info to be digested