Information Systems Project Management—David Olson

8-1

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-2

Chapter 8: Network Scheduling

Methods
Critical path method (CPM)
Buffers
Leveling & Smoothing

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-3

why networks?
• Gantt charts don’t explicitly show task
relationships
• don’t show impact of delays or shifting
resources well
• network models clearly show
interdependencies

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-4

Logic Diagrams
• network of relationships
research research
what’s what needs
been done doing pick
final write print
topic
internet
research

elements & relationships (sequence)

this is ACTIVITY-ON-NODE
can have ACTIVITY-ON-ARC

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-5

Network Diagrams
• activity duration
• milestone milestone activity
(duration)

• immediate predecessors
identified by arrows leading
into
• durations can include in parentheses
• dummy activities need for AOA
© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-6

networks
• networks make a good visual
• they are TOTALLY UNNECESSARY for
identifying
– early starts earliest an activity
can be begun
– late finishes latest an activity can
finish
– slack spare time
– critical paths activities with no
© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-7

Project Scheduling
MODEL COMPONENTS
• activities from WBS
• predecessors what this activity
waits on
• durations how long
– durations are PROBABILISTIC
– CPM DETERMINISTIC
– PERT considers uncertainty, but UNREALISTIC
– simulation
• all assume unlimited resources
© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-8

Critical Path Method

• INPUTS: activities, durations, immediate
predecessors
• ALGORITHM
forward pass schedule all activities with no
unscheduled predecessors
ES/EF determine early starts & early finishes (start
ASAP, add duration)
backwards pass schedule in reverse (schedule all
activities with no unscheduled FOLLOWERS)
LF/LS determine late finishes, subtract duration to get
late starts
slack difference©between LS-ES (same as LF-EF)
McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-9

CPM Example
FORWARD PASS
activity duration
predecessor
A requirements analysis 3 weeks -
B programming 7 weeks A
C get hardware 1 week A
D train users 3 weeks B, C
schedule A start 0 finish 0+3 =3
schedule B 3 3+7 =10
&C 3 3+1 =4
schedule D 10 10+3 =13
© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-10

CPM Example
backward pass
schedule D finish 13 late start= 13-3 = 10
schedule B 10 10-7 = 3
&C 10 10-1 = 9
schedule A 3 3-3 = 0
slack A LF= 3 EF= 3 3-3 = 0
B LF= 10 EF= 10 10-10= 0
C LF= 10 EF= 4 10-4 = 6
D LF= 13 EF= 13 13-13= 0
critical path: A-B-D

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-11

Gantt Chart
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

x x x
A
x x x x x x x
B
x
C
x x x
D

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-12

CPM
• can have more than one critical path
activity duration
predecessor
A requirements analysis 3 weeks -
B programming 7 weeks A
C get hardware 7 weeks A
D train users 3 weeks B, C
• critical paths A-B-D
A-C-D
both with duration of 13 weeks
© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-13

Buffers
• Assure activities completed on time (Goldratt, 1997)
• Project Buffers: after final project task
• Feeding Buffers: where non-critical
activities lead into critical activities
• Resource Buffers: before resources
scheduled to work on critical activities
• Strategic Resource Buffers: assure key
resources available

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-14

Project Buffer
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

x x x
A
xxxx x x x
B
x
C
x x x b b
D

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-15

Resource Limitations

critical path crashing

(cost/time tradeoff)
other methods

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-16

Crashing
• can shorten project completion time by
adding extra resources (costs)
• start off with NORMAL TIME CPM
schedule
• get expected duration Tn, cost Cn
• Tn should be longest duration
• Cn should be most expensive in
penalties, cheapest in crash costs

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-17

Time Reduction
• to reduce activity time, pay for more
resources
• develop table of activities with times
and costs
• for each activity, usually assume linear
relationship for relationship between
cost & time

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-18

Crash Example
Activity: programming
Tn: 7 weeks
Cn: $14,000 (7 weeks, 2
programmers)
if you add a third programmer, done
in 6 weeks
Tc: 6 weeks
Cn: $15,000
© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-19

Example Problem
activity Pred Tn Cn Tc Cc
slope max
A requirements none 3 can’t crash
B programming A 7 14000 6
15000 -1000 1 week
C get hardware A 1 50000 .5
51000 -2000 .5 week
D train users B,C 3 can’t crash
Crashing Algorithm:
1 crash only critical activities B only
choice
2 crash cheapest currently critical
© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
B
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-20

Crash Example
Import critical software from Australia: late
penalty $500/d > 12 d
A get import license 5 days no
predecessor
B ship 7 days A is
predecessor
C train users 11 days no
predecessor
D train on system2 days B,C predecessors
can crash C: $2000/day more than current for
up to 3 days
B: faster boat 20046 days
© McGraw-Hill/Irwin $300
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-21

Crash Example
Original schedule: 14 days, $1,000 in penalties
= $1000
crash B to 6 days:13 days, $500 penalties, $300
cost = $800*
crash B to 5
C to 10: 12 days, no penalties, $400+2000
cost = $2400
to 11 days is worse
NOW A SELECTION DECISION
risk versus cost

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-22

Crashing Limitations
• assumes linear relationship between
time and cost
– not usually true (indirect costs don’t change at
same rate as direct costs)
• requires a lot of extra cost estimation
• time consuming
• ends with tradeoff decision

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-23

Resource Constraining
• CPM & PERT both assume unlimited
resources
NOT TRUE
– may have only a finite number of systems analysts,
programmers
• RESOURCE LEVELING - balance the
resource load
• RESOURCE CONSTRAINING - don’t
exceed available resources

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-24

Resource Leveling
unleveled leveled

40 25
35
20
30
25 15
analysts analysts
20
programmers 10 programmers
15
trainers trainers
10 5
5
0 0
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st 2nd 3rd 4th
Qtr Qtr Qtr Qtr Qtr Qtr Qtr Qtr

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-25

Work Patterns
• natural resource demands tend to have
lumps
• maintaining a stable work force works
better if demand leveled
• HOW TO LEVEL: split each activity into
smaller activities, schedule them at
different times
• USUALLY NOT THAT EASY

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-26

Resource Leveling
this leveling often works for specific
activities, but complicated even more
when resources shared

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-27

Resource Leveling
Methods
• split up work, stagger
• eliminate some activities (subcontract)
• substitute less resource consuming
activities (use CASE tools)
• substitute resources (hire spot work
programmers)

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-28

Resource Smoothing

• Adjust schedules to level workload

– expand duration for peak load
– compress durations where load low
• Fill in gaps of work
• Requires balancing resources
– for activities with heavier load, use multiple
crews

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-29

Resource Loading
• MUST schedule activities to not
overschedule critical resource
• If there is only one training room, and it
includes the only delivery system
– can’t speed up training
– can’t conduct two training activities at once
• LINEAR PROGRAMMING
• heuristics

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-30

Recap
• cost/time tradeoff
– time consuming, still makes assumptions
• resource leveling
– manual shuffling
• resource constraining
– pure solution to optimality a research issue
– heuristics have been applied in software
• NO IDEAL SOLUTION METHOD

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-31

Criticisms of CPM

• Rarely to activities proceed as planned

– critical path therefore very volatile
• options to speed some activities available
– crashing
• resource limits not reflected
– resource leveling
• schedule likely to be very lumpy
– resource smoothing

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004
Information Systems Project Management—David Olson
8-32

Summary
• Critical path provides managers valuable
information
– What activities interfere with project completion
– Estimate of project duration
• Buffers a means to manage risk
• Crashing a means to analyze cost/time tradeoff
• Resource management
– Leveling
– smoothing

© McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004