Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Project Management
By Jack T. Marchewka
Northern Illinois University
Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. all rights reserved. Reproduction or translation of this work beyond that
permitted in Section 117 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act without the express permission of the copyright owner
is unlawful. Request for further information should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
The purchaser may make back-up copies for his/her own use only and not for distribution or resale. The Publisher
1
assumes no responsibility for errors, omissions, or damages caused by the use of these programs or from the use of the
information contained herein.
Cost estimating
Cost budgeting
Cost control
Projec
t Plan
WBS
Gantt Charts
Project Network Diagrams
Activity on the Node (AON)
Critical Path Analysis
Program Evaluation and Review Technique
(PERT)
Precedence Diagramming Method (PDM)
Dwight Eisenhower I have always found
that plans are useless, but planning is
indispensable
7
Gantt Charts
10
DESCRIPTION
IMMEDIATE
PREDECESSORS
Build high-temperature
burner
D, E
F, G
Build Internal
Components
Construct
Collection Stack
Install Control
System
Start
Build Burner
Inspect
and Test
Modify Roof
and Floor
Pour Concrete
and Install Frame
Install Pollution
Device
Finish
Start
2
Finish
t
EF
LF
t =2
EF = 0 + 2 = 2
B
ES = 0
t =3
EF = 0 + 3 = 3
Start
ES and EF times
A
0
2
2
C
2
2
4
F
4
E
4
Start
B
0
3
3
D
3
4
7
3
7
4
8
H
13
G
8
5
13
2
15
Finish
For activity H
LS = LF t = 15 2 = 13 weeks
LS and LF times
A
0
0
2
2
2
C
2
2
2
4
4
F
4
10
E
4
4
Start
B
0
1
3
3
4
D
3
4
4
7
8
3
7
13
4
8
8
H
13
13
G
8
8
5
13
13
2
15
15
Finish
ACTIVITY
EARLIEST
START,
ES
EARLIEST
FINISH,
EF
LATEST
START,
LS
LATEST
FINISH,
LF
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
10
13
No
13
13
Yes
13
15
13
15
Yes
SLACK,
LS ES
ON
CRITICAL
PATH?
Critical path
A
0
0
2
2
2
C
2
2
2
4
4
F
4
10
E
4
4
Start
B
0
1
3
3
4
D
3
4
4
7
8
3
7
13
4
8
8
H
13
13
G
8
8
5
13
13
2
15
15
Finish
None
Set-up Server
C,D
D,E
F,G
Train users
H,I
23
24
Critical Path
C 4
7 11
8 12
A 2
0 2
0 2
B 5
2 7
2 7
D 3
7 10
7 10
E 1
7 8
9 10
F 4
11
15
12
16
G 3
10
13
10
13
H 2
15
17
16
18
J 1
18
19
18
19
I 5
13
18
13
18
25
Total
18
17
16
19*
17
26 Path
* The Critical
Critical Path
Longest path Path 4 (19 days)
Shortest time project can be completed
PERT
28
Activity Times
Activity Times
an activity
will take if everything goes as well
as possible. There should be only
a small probability (say, 1/100) of
this occurring.
Pessimistic time (b) = time an
activity would take assuming very
unfavorable conditions. There
should also be only a small
probability that the activity will
really take this long.
Most likely time (m) = most realistic
time estimate to complete the
activity
Activity Times
Variance
ba
Predecessor
Optimistic
Estimates
(Days)
Most
Likely
Estima
tes
(Days)
Pessimistic
Estimates
(Days)
Expected
Duration
(a+4b+c)
6
Variance
((b-a)/6)2
None
2.2
0.3
5.2
0.7
3.8
0.3
3.3
0.4
1.0
0.0
C,D
4.0
0.4
D,E
3.0
0.1
F,G
2.3
0.4
5.5
0.7
H,I
.5
1.3
0.2
32
PERT Computations
Path
Total
Path 1
A+B+C+F+H+J
18.8
2.2+5.2+3.8+4.0+2.3+1.3
Path 2
A+B+D+F+H+J
18.3
2.2+5.2+3.3+4.0+2.3+1.3
Path 3
A+B+D+G+H+J
18.6
2.2+5.2+3.3+3.0+2.3+1.3
Path 4
A+B+D+G+I+J
20.5*
2.2+5.2+3.3+3.0+5.5+1.3
Path 5
A+B+E+G+I+J
18.2
2.2+5.2+1.0+3.0+5.5+1.3
* The Critical Path
34
20.5Weeks
(Expected Completion Time)
0.967
1.55 weeks
From the Area Under the Standard Normal Curve table (
http://www.danielsoper.com/statcalc3/calc.aspx?id=2) we
find the probability of 0.833 associated with this Z value
That means there is a 83.3% probability this project
can be completed in 22 weeks or less
The probability of completing in 23 weeks would be
94.6%
PERT/COST
A
B
Activity
C
D
E
F
G
H
1
Figure 13.9
7
8
Week
10
11
12
13
14
15
EARLIEST
START,
ES
LATEST
START,
LS
EXPECTED
TIME, t
TOTAL
BUDGETED
COST ($)
BUDGETED
COST PER
WEEK ($)
22,000
11,000
30,000
10,000
26,000
13,000
48,000
12,000
56,000
14,000
10
30,000
10,000
80,000
16,000
13
13
16,000
8,000
Total
Table 13.5
308,000
ACTIVITY
11
11
10
10
C
D
10
11
12
13
14
15
10
TOTAL
13
30
13
12
26
12
12
14
14
14
10
10
10
22
12
TableG 13.6
48
14
56
30
16
16
16
16
16
80
8
16
308
ACTIVITY
11
11
10
10
11
12
13
14
15
TOTAL
22
10
10
30
13
13
26
12
12
12
12
48
14
14
14
14
56
F
G
16
16
10
10
10
30
16
16
16
80
H 13.7
Table
16
308
11
21
23
23
26
26
26
26
16
16
26
26
26
250,000
Budget Using
Earliest Start
Times, ES
200,000
150,000
Budget Using
Latest Start
Times, LS
100,000
A manager can
choose any
budget that falls
between the
budgets presented
in the two tables
The two tables
form feasible
budget ranges
50,000
0
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
| | |
| | |
|
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Figure 13.10
Weeks
ACTIVITY
TOTAL
BUDGETED
COST ($)
PERCENT OF
COMPLETION
22,000
100
30,000
100
26,000
100
48,000
10
56,000
20
30,000
20
TableG13.8
80,000
Overrun0
16,000
ACTUAL
COST ($)
ACTIVITY
DIFFERENCE
($)
22,000
20,000
2,000
30,000
36,000
6,000
26,000
26,000
4,800
6,000
1,200
11,200
20,000
8,800
6,000
4,000
2,000
Activity difference =
Actual cost
Value of work completed
Project Crashing
Projects will sometimes have deadlines
that are impossible to meet using normal
procedures
By using exceptional methods it may be
possible to finish the project in less time
than normally required
However, this usually increases the cost of
the project
Reducing a projects completion time is
called crashing
Project Crashing
Crashing a project starts with using the
normal time to create the critical path
The normal cost is the cost for completing
the activity using normal procedures
If the project will not meet the required
deadline, extraordinary measures must be
taken
The crash time is the shortest possible
activity time and will require additional
resources
The crash cost is the price of completing
the activity in the earlier-than-normal time
COST ($)
ACTIVITY
NORMAL
CRASH
NORMAL
CRASH
CRASH
COST PER
WEEK ($)
22,000
23,000
1,000
Yes
30,000
34,000
2,000
No
26,000
27,000
1,000
Yes
48,000
49,000
1,000
No
56,000
58,000
1,000
Yes
30,000
30,500
500
No
80,000
86,000
2,000
Yes
H
Table 13.9
16,000
19,000
3,000
Yes
CRITICAL
PATH?
General Foundry - QM
General Foundry - QM
A-C-E-G-H
B-D-G-H
NODE
Time
ES
EF
LS
LF
12
12
12
12
14
12
14
Finish-To-Start (FS)
Start-To-Start (SS)
Finish-To-Finish (FF)
Start-To-Finish (SF)
PDM Relationships
Task A can not finish until task B starts. Ex., nurse working midnight
63
8AM shift can not leave until nurse from next shift arrives
64
65
68
TOC Methodology
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
11-070
Path Merging
71
FIGURE 11.7
Copyright 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall
11-72
FIGURE 11.8
Copyright 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall
11-73
CCPM Assumptions
Feeding buffers
CCPM Assumptions
Resource buffers
Reduce resource contention
With task C on the critical path, it has the potential
to become a bottleneck if the resource assigned to
it must multitask on other projects
CCPM takes a project portfolio view and suggests
that other projects begin so that the resource
needed for task C can be dedicated solely for that
task
CCPM proposes that a resource buffer be created
so that the resource assigned to task C can be
expected to complete the task with a 50%
probability in 5 days
75
CCPM Changes
No blame culture
11-76
77
CCPM Critiques
No milestones used
Not significantly different from PERT
Unproven at the portfolio level
Anecdotal support only
Incomplete solution
Overestimation of activity duration padding
Cultural changes unattainable
11-79
80
81
82
83
84
85
http://www.profsr.com/msproject/msproj01.ht
m
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/training/F
X100565001033.aspx
http://www.project-blog.com/
86