Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Introduction
The intent of this paper is to acquaint the reader with the contents of the Practice Standard for Work Breakdown
Structures-Second Edition, explore a few of its key concepts in detail, and to motivate the reader to consult the
Practice Standard regularly as a reference.
The Project Management Institute (PMI) recognized the unique importance of the Work Breakdown Structure
(WBS) when it published, in 2001, a Practice Standard devoted exclusively to the WBS. This document was the first
practice standard. It focused on providing guidelines on the mechanics (e.g., nuts and bolts, basics,
fundamentals, step-by-step usage guide, how it operates, how to do it) for the WBS (PMI, 2001, p. 29). A Practice
Standard is intended to be more prescriptive than the PMBOK Guide (PMI, 2001, p. 30). Increasing
sophistication in the use of the WBS has stimulated production of an updated and revised edition Practice
Standard for Work Breakdown StructuresSecond Edition.
The Practice Standard for Work Breakdown StructuresSecond Edition addresses many of the recommendations
received since the first publication, including the need for more detail, a broader overall perspective, more and
varied examples, checklists, and reference material, while ensuring that this material accurately reflects the
application of standard practice in the industry. Throughout the standard, the reader will find more guidance about
the characteristics that make up a high-quality WBS, as well as a discussion about the use of the WBS in real-life
practical experience. The Practice Standard for Work Breakdown StructuresSecond Edition is consistent with A
Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide) Third Edition.
The primary objectives of the Practice Standard for Work Breakdown StructuresSecond Edition are 1) to provide
a common ground for understanding the concepts and benefits of the WBS, and 2) to present a standard application
of the WBS as a project management tool. The intent is to encourage consistency in applying this tool and, as a
result, to improve project planning and control.
are called work packages and contain the work to be performed and tracked. These can be later used as input to the
scheduling process to support tasks and milestones which can be cost estimated, monitored, and controlled.
A central attribute of the WBS is that it is deliverable orientated (Berg and Colenso, 2000). The PMBOK Guide
defines a deliverable as: Any unique and verifiable product, result, or capability to perform a service that must be
produced to complete a process, phase or project. (PMI, 2004, p. 108) In this context, oriented means aligned or
positioned with respect to deliverables, i.e., focused on deliverables.
A second key attribute of the WBS is that it is a hierarchical decomposition of the work (PMI, 2004p. 127)
Decomposition is a planning technique that subdivides the project scope and project deliverables into smaller, more
manageable components, until the project work associated with accomplishing the project scope and deliverables is
defined in sufficient detail to support executing, monitoring, and controlling the work (PMI, 2004, p. 373). This
decomposition (or subdivision) clearly and comprehensively defines the scope of the project in terms of individual
sub-deliverables that the project participants can easily understand. The specific number of levels should be
appropriate for effectively managing the project in question.
The 100% Rule (Haugan, 2002, p 17) is one of the most important principles guiding the development,
decomposition and evaluation of the WBS. This rule states that the WBS includes 100% of the work defined by the
project scope and captures ALL deliverablesinternal, external and interimin terms of work to be completed,
including project management. The rule applies at all levels within the hierarchy: the sum of the work at the child
level must equal 100% of the work represented by the parentand the WBS should not include any work that
falls outside the actual scope of the project; that is, it cannot include more than 100% of the work.
The WBS can be represented in a variety of ways including graphical, textual or tabular views. The form of
representation should be chosen based on the needs of the specific project. Exhibits 1 through 3 below illustrate the
same WBS represented in Outline View format, Organization Chart format and in the Tree or Centralized Tree
Structure:
1.0
Achieves a sufficient level of decomposition: A WBS is broken down to a level of detail sufficient for
managing the work. The appropriate level of detail to enable effective management can differ from
organization to organization or project to project.
Provides sufficient detail for communicating all work: The degree of WBS detail necessary for
conceptualization of project detail can vary.
Is appropriate for tracking, as required by the specific project or organization.
Is appropriate for control activities: A WBS provides a good balance between complexity, risk, and the
project managers need for control.
Can contain specific kinds of WBS elements, as needed for each project.
Enables assignment of accountability at the appropriate level: Some projects can require assignment of
accountability at a detailed level, while others might be satisfied with accountability at a summary rollup
level.
Has a succinct, clear, and logically organized structure to meet project management and oversight
requirements: The logic of the hierarchical decomposition of a project can vary in response to a variety of
2006, Norman, Brotherton, Fried, Ksander
4
Originally published as apart of 2006 PMI Global Congress Proceedings Seattle Washington
The level of detail in a WBS is a function of the size of the project, and reflects a balance between complexity, risk,
and the project managers need for control. The level of detail can also vary during the evolution of a project. Shortduration projects lend themselves to decomposition to a high degree of detail at the outset, while projects of longer
duration and higher complexity can preclude decomposition of all deliverables until more is known about the
project. This is especially true when employing rolling wave planning.
Not every WBS needs to include all types of work. Rather, the kinds of work included in a WBS should be dictated
by the scope and nature of the project for which the WBS is being developed. Some projects require certain types of
WBS elements, e.g., assembly or integration, while others do not. All projects require a project management WBS
element at level 2 in order to ensure that the work of planning, tracking, and reporting is adequately captured and
managed. (Practice Standard for Work Breakdown StructuresSecond Edition provides an example of a project
management WBS.) A particular organization, however, might require use of a standardized WBS template that
does not include certain kinds of project management WBS elementsfor example, administration, documentation,
or reporting elementsbecause the need for these is adequately addressed by other business processes established
by that organization.
The way that the project manager decomposes the project (i.e., the logic used for decomposing the work) can vary
depending on the needs and requirements of the performing organization and how the WBS will be used. Where
new product development proceeds in sequential stage-like phases with later work contingent on the outcome of
earlier work, it would make sense to organize the WBS in terms of the product development life cycle, rather than in
terms of physical components of the product.
The ability of a WBS to meet the needs of a project is also directly related to the level of project management
competency available within the project management team. An experienced project management team will be able
to identify a greater range of stated and implied project needs that the WBS can address. A more experienced project
management team will ensure the WBS is employed in a greater variety of project roles, and will use the WBS in
more efficient and sophisticated ways than will a novice or inexperienced project management team.
Usage Trends
In a survey conducted by the Practice Standard for Work Breakdown StructuresSecond Edition team, 87% of
respondents said that they use the WBS as a planning tool for project management activities at least half of the time
and over 60% used it more often. Their main objectives were to use the WBS to support activity definition, resource
planning, scope planning and definition, cost estimating, and risk planning. 91% of the respondents stated they were
either satisfied or very satisfied with the ability of the WBS to meet these objectives. These results illustrate the
broad acceptance and use of the WBS in project management practice today.
The concept of the WBS has evolved to meet the evolving requirements of the project management profession. This
is an evolution which has elaborated the core concept of the WBS: a tool to enable the definition, development,
communication and execution of project scope. The practice standard will also continue to evolve in parallel with
generally accepted good project management practice.
References
Berg, C. & Colenso, K. (2000, April), Work Breakdown Structure Practice Standard Project WBS vs.
Activities, PMI Network,. p. 69.
Colenso, K. (2003, April). Toward a common vocabulary. PMI Today, 3
Haugan, Gregory T. 2002, Effective Work Breakdown Structures, Management Concepts: Vienna, VA.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration. (1962, June). DOD and NASA Guide. PERT Cost Systems
Design. Washington DC: Office of the Secretary of Defense.
Pritchard, Carl. 1998. How to Build a Work Breakdown Structure. The Cornerstone of Project
Management. Arlington, Virginia: ESI International.
Project Management Institute Standards Committee. 1987. The Project Management Body of Knowledge
(PMBOK). Darby PA: Project Management Institute.1987.
Project Management Institute. 2001. Practice Standard for Work Breakdown Structures. Newton Square,
PA: Project Management Institute.
Project Management Institute. 2006. Practice Standard for Work Breakdown StructuresSecond Edition.
Newton Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
Project Management Institute. 2004. Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide) - Third
Edition.. Newtown Square, Pennsylvania: Project Management Institute Inc.
Project Management Institute. (2004). Practice Standard for Earned Value Management (EVM). Newtown
Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
Project Management Institute. (2003). Organizational Project Management Maturity Model (OPM3):
Knowledge Foundation. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.
Project Management Institute. (in development). The Practice Standard for Scheduling. Newtown Square,
PA: Project Management Institute.
Uyttewaal, Eric. (2003). Dynamic Scheduling with Microsoft Project 2002. International Institute for
Learning. Boca Raton: J. Ross Publishing Co.