CHAPTER # 9

Allocation of physical resources

Directly relates to scheduling

Goal of Resource Allocation is to Optimize Use of Limited Supply

Requires making trade-offs
time constrained resource constrained

Normal: Most likely task duration, like m in Chapter 8 Crash: Expedite an activity, by applying additional resources
Specialized or additional equipment More people (e.g., borrowed staff, temps)

More hours (e.g., overtime, weekends)

Crashing buys time, but nothing comes free Potential cost areas

Additional equipment/material Extra labor Negative effects on other projects Reduced morale, from excessive hours/shifts Lower quality, from the pressure of time, inexperienced and tired staff
If you want it bad, youll get it bad . . .

Two basic principles

1. Generally, focus on the critical path Usually not helpful to shorten non-critical activities Exception: When a scarce resource is needed elsewhere, e.g., in another project 2. When shortening project duration, choose least

expensive way to do it

Compute cost/time slope for each expeditable activity

Slope = crash cost normal cost crash time normal time

Activity a b c d* e**

Predecessor a a a b

Days (normal, crash) 3, 2 2, 1 2, 2 4, 1 3, 1

Cost (normal, crash) $40, 80 20, 80 20, 20 30, 120 10, 80

* Partial crashing allowed ** Partial crashing not allowed

Activity
a

Slope ($/Day)
-40

b
c D

-60
-30

-70 (2 days)

9-12

Different terms for similar concept

Fast-tracking (construction), Concurrent engineering (manufacturing) Both refer to overlapping project phases
E.g., design/build, or build/test

Pros:
Can shorten project duration Can reduce product development cycles

Can help meet clients demands

Cons:
Can increase cost through redesigns, excessive

changes, rework, out-of-sequence installation, and more

9-15

Assuming fixed performance specifications, tradeoff areas must be in time or cost Time-limited or resource-limited
If all three dimensions are fixed, the system is overdetermined
Normally, no tradeoffs are possible But, something has to give . . .

9-17

Resource loading: types and quantities of resources, spread by schedule across specific time periods
One project, or many
Identifies and reduces excess demands on a firms

resources

9-19

9-23

Resource leveling minimizes period-by-period variations in resource loading, by shifting tasks within their slack allowances Advantages

Less day-to-day resource manipulation needed Better morale, fewer HR problems/costs Leveling resources also levels costs, simplifies budgeting

and funding

CONSTRAINED RESOURCE SCHEDULING (CRS)

Major Resource Constraints:

Failure of a supplier to produce Failure of a supplier to deliver the assignment Loss of a resource Theft of a resource

Approaches to CRS
Heuristic Method Optimization Model

Heuristic Methods
Results are good enough for many purposes Used for large, non linear, complex problems

Identify priority rule Analyze resource usage

Allocate the scarce resource

PERT/CPM

Common Priority Rules

As soon as possible As late as possible Shortest task first Most Resources first Minimum slack first Most critical followers Most Successors Arbitrary

Minimum Schedule slippage Best utilization of facilities Minimum system occupancy time

Optimizing Method
Mathematical Programming Enumeration

MULTI-PROJECT SCHEDULING AND RESOURCE ALLOCATION

Criterias of Project Scheduling

Schedule Slippage
Most Important Time past a Projects due date Penalty costs Loss of goodwill of producer

Resource Utilization
Smoothes peaks and valleys of resourse usage Eliminate the concept of WAIT

In-Process Inventory
Amount of work waiting due to shortage of resources Requires trade off between cost of inprocess inventory and cost of resources

Heuristic Techniques
1. Resource Scheduling Method

dij= increase in duration resulting when activity j follows activity i =Max [0;EFi-LSj]
EFi= early finish of activity i; LSj= latest start of activity j

2. Minimum Late Finish Time 3. Greatest Resource Demand

Priority= djrij
dj= duration of activity rij=per period requirement of resource i by activity j

4. Greatest Resource Utilization

5. Most Possible Jobs

A Multi-Project Sceduling Heuristic

A project plan is a nested set of plans, composed
of a set of generalized tasks, each of which is decomposed further.

The Problem:
The amount of resources is limited in successive scheduling periods

The Solution:
Find a schedule best satisfying sequence and resource constraints A schedule minimizing overall duration of entire network

 Before allocation of resources, consider the quantity of resources available Weists heuristic allocates resources to activities in order of their early start times Depletion of resources before completing task lists results in delay of remaining task We may borrow resources or deschedule currently active noncritical task

GOLDRATTS CRITICAL CHAIN

The Problems
Thoughtless optimism
o o PMs dont accept lateness to be their fault Ignore risk management

Capacity should be set to equal demand

o o Dont consider projects to be assembly lines Deny that capacity is needed to exceed demand for projects

The Student syndrome

o o Students always want more time to complete a project Given more time they delay near deadline

 Multitasking to reduce time

o Ignoring that switching back and forth between tasks is not an efficient and effective way

Complexity of network makes no difference

o Complexity, uncertainity and merging paths all join to make trouble

People need a reason to work hard

o o Project workers keep a lot of slack time Cut back on time allowances

Game playing
o o Workers add extra time, resource and budget to their portion of work Blaming each other

EXAMPLE The Inefficient Way

A1
10 30

B1

20

A2
A3

B2

40

50

B3

60

EXAMPLE The Right Way

A1
10 20

B1

40

A2
A3

B2

50

30

B3

60

The Critical Chain

Scheduling on the basis of availability of scarce resources

Addition of time buffers

Duration should be decreased enough to avoid the student syndrome

Activities to be carried out in parallel are not independent

Activities can be ordered according to:

Resource dependencies Technological requirements

The longest of the paths is the Critical Path

Two sources of delay:
Delay in one or more critical activities
Delay in one more activities in feeder chain

THE END OF CHAPTER 9

QUALITY ASSURANCE AGENCY

ADRESSING A PROBLEM
The present status of Quality in higher learning institutions of Pakistan is quite questionable. Pakistani Universities are not capable of meeting the international standards of higher education. Goal of International compatibility and competitiveness is not achieved.

Mission: To integrate the concept of quality assurance in higher

learning with enhanced levels of international compatibility through capacity building.

Vision Statement:
Developing a viable and sustainable mechanism of quality assurance in higher learning sector to meet the rising challenges of transforming the country into a knowledge economy.

GOALS

Policy making and developing practical guidelines of quality assurance in cross cutting areas of higher learning.

Developing guidelines for establishing of Quality Enhancement Cells and Monitoring & Evaluation of these QECs.

Capacity building to enhance the standards of quality assurance in higher education at national level.

Authorities Responsible for:

Sponsoring: Higher Education Commission

Execution: Higher Education Commission

Operation and Maintenance: Concerned University/Institution

Time required for completion of project:

18 months (6 months for preparatory work)

Location of Project:

Area to be served:

Cost Estimates:

HEC (Main campus)

Pakistan as a whole. People of all age groups and income levels.

Total annual recurring budget Rs.19,700,000 Break down of 10,000,000 for QECs @ 1,000,000 per QEC and 9,700,000 for QAA.

Functions of QAA
Developing practical guidelines and policies for establishing QECs at public sector universities.

Monitoring& Evaluation of all QECs.

Evaluation of the activities and uniformity of pace and standards across country. Capacity building of all professional staff of Quality Enhancement Cells. Providing Foreign trained personnel as Master Trainers to the staff.

GUIDELINES FO DEVELOPMENT OF QEC

The Quality Enhancement Cell (QEC) will be established in each University/degree awarding institute. Promoting public confidence. Review of quality standards by auditing academic standards and the quality of teaching, learning and management. Review of academic affiliations with other institutions. Defining clear and explicit standards as points of reference to the reviews to be carried out. Developing qualifications framework. Developing program specifications. Develop quality assurance processes and methods of evaluation. Capacity building training from HEC.

Sr #
1 2

Item
Capital cost Annual recurring cost of QAA during execution

Estimated cost
3,660,000 9,400,000

Financial allocation
HEC and 10 relevant public universities HEC

Annual Recurring cost for 10 QECs@ one million per QEC

Total

10,000,000

10 Relevant public Universities

23,060,000

Sr#

Items

Quantity for (QECs)

20@ 2/QEC

Estimated cost in Pak-Rs(i)

1,000,000

Quantity for QAA

3 1

Estimated cost Pak-Rs(ii)

150,000 140,000 300,000

1 2 3

Computers Laptops Telephone/fax/mail

Included in recurring cost

Will be shared by the relevant University

@25,000 per month

Printers

10@ 1/QEC

100,000

150,000

5
6

Scanner
Furniture

As per requirement
As per requirement 200,000

1
As per requirement Cartridges for Professional Colour printer 1 1,500,000

20,000
200,000

Papers/catridges

200,000

200,000

8 9

Motor vehicle for MD Total of (i) & (ii) =3,660,000

1,000,000 2,160,000

Sr# 1 2

Title Managing Director Programme Coordinator

Number 01 01

Salary 80,000 30,000

3
4 5 6 7 8

Training Coordinator
Data Analyst P.A/Stenographer Naib-Qasid Driver Total salaries per month

01
01 01 01 01

25,000
10,000 8,000 3,0000 4,000 160,000

Total salaries per annum

1,920,,000

18 months (6 months for preparatory work)

Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) is engaged in systematic implementation of quality enhancement procedures/criteria to attain improved levels of international compatibility and competitiveness at institutional and program level.

Established in 2005, QAA is engaged in developing a viable and sustainable mechanism of quality assurance in the higher learning sector in order to meet the rising challenges of transforming the country into a knowledge economy.