The Flaws of Traditional Scheduling and Their Impact on Project Management - Example

Running Head: Flaws of Traditional Scheduling The Flaws of Traditional Scheduling and their Impact in Project Management [Client’s Name] [Affiliation] Introduction Modern day project management typically requires complex functions and manipulations of resources, people, and time. Projects such as building constructions, ship building, designing and creating an ERP system in large corporations, and creating an assembly line for manufacturing are but some of the large scale projects that require proper management because of their nature and the expense associated in creating them. The success of projects relies heavily on how well these projects are managed. Some of the most common gauges for successful project management efforts are (a) the relative closeness of the actual time and the scheduled time, (b) the amount of savings acquired during the whole project, and (c) the number of lag time associated with meeting the schedule. Yet even with the relatively modern needs of project management scenarios, there are a very good number of organizations and firms that are still using the traditional project management approach on scheduling. Understanding how the flaws of traditional scheduling affect project management is necessary in order to implement effective project management process in any kinds of project. Body of the Report Project Management and Scheduling Understanding how the project would progress relies on understanding how the schedule would proceed. In most cases, the schedules just don’t fit which means that some aspects of the project must wait for the last schedule to finish before they can be started. Or in other cases, the schedules finish off earlier than expected while the next schedule would not start until weeks later. Chances are most projects do not allow this kind of set up. Some projects could not wait long enough for all the schedules to finish before starting the project while other projects do not have the available extra funds to pay the contractors for the days where delays are unexpected. Project scheduling works to eliminate these unnecessary delays and find the best possible schedule routes to bring the schedules closer to each other. As the complexities associated with project management became intense, the need to manage projects in an objective and scientific manner kicks in. Project management is the “application of tools, knowledge, tools, and techniques to project activities to meet project requirements” (PMI, 2000). One of the primary activities of project management, and probably the most complex, is scheduling. According to Brenner (2004), scheduling is the process where project management balances, projects, and predicts various goals, constraints, and resources in such a way that the project would still proceed even when these elements are present. Scheduling reduces the incalculability of the elements involved in the project by taking smaller chunks of the bigger piece into perfect control in order to impose control on the larger subject. Scheduling also reduces significant amount of risks involved in the long and short of the project. This means that scheduling predicts the future in one way or another by laying down the things that can be done in the present while anticipating and preparing for the possible alterations in the project in the future that would still yield the results wanted (Chapman, 1997). The goal of project management and goal scheduling is not to design a perfect project plan that is infallible to changes that may occur in the process. The main objective of project management is to design a plan that has the highest chance of succeeding given all the uncontrollable elements that the project may encounter in the process (PMI, 2000). The same is true for scheduling. There are a lot of unwanted things that could interfere with the achievement of the project schedule. For example, machine breakdown with no parts available can delay the achievement of the project schedule. More often than not, every delay experienced in any project entails unwanted costs as well and the longer the delay is, the higher the expense can go. So the need to eliminate inconsistencies in the project and the need to predict the best estimated schedule for the process are immense. However, employing traditional methods of project scheduling may actually bar the project from being achieved rather than completion. Then understanding what traditional project scheduling is and the associated flaws in its implementation process is necessary to achieve a cost-efficient and effective project. Critical Path Analysis Project scheduling relies on the critical path that the project should take in order to reach to its intended goal after all steps are being carried. The length of the project and the budget preparation for the project depends on how the critical path is defined. Typically, a critical path analysis is performed before each project is carried out. According to Baker (2004), it is quite difficult to separate critical path analysis from project scheduling so this means that a lot of effort must be placed in how the critical path method is analyzed in order to achieve the best possible project schedule. A traditional critical path analysis is carried on without regards to the reality of the situation. As Ismael, Rashid, & Hilo (2009) puts it, traditional critical path analysis does not take into consideration the limitation of resources which means that project estimates fall short or are too much for efficiency. More often than not, traditional critical path analysis are done theoretically which means that the planners assume that resources would not run out and the situations of each stage of the project is ideal. This means that power is assumed to be effective, there are no employee turn-over, the machines do not fail, and the weather is very cooperative at all times. Similar to theoretical project planning, traditional critical path analysis is only good when discussed on the board but it becomes ineffective when put in action. Projects performed with traditional critical path analysis are too unrealistic for efficiency and yet project managers are still using them. Some of the flaws of traditional project scheduling as well as their adverse effects in any project are discussed below. Discussion and Analysis Linearity Linearity is a primary characteristic of project scheduling. Critical project paths are typically linear and commence only when the previous schedule is finished. Traditional critical path methods aim to seek the most linear and the most convenient critical path in its calculation in order to decide for the necessary steps that would follow. The more linear the project path is, the more likely it is that the project will be done in the shortest time possible without skipping necessary processes. The calculation for critical path is focused in solving for the series of project events that do not have any slack time. When this linear path is identifies, the project can commence as planned on pen and paper. However, managing complex projects such as laying oil pipes in the ocean floors require multiple linear schedules that branch out to complex networks of project schedules. Complex projects that are huge can be composed of smaller individual projects that are equally complex. In these types of projects, the whole concept of linearity common in traditional critical path methods becomes ineffective. Employing the simplistic approach of linearity on critical path analysis and scheduling for complex projects can be a fatal mistake for project managers. Complex projects require an even complex system analysis that would allow the project to commence without unnecessary delays brought about by the inability of project managers to efficiently schedule project timelines. This is only one of those scenarios where the traditional critical path method fail and project managers need to employ more advanced and more comprehensive project scheduling approaches. Contingencies One of the important areas in project management that traditional critical path method (CPM) fails to effectively handle is working with contingency situations. As was discussed, traditional CPM focuses only on the ideal situations and blots out the possibilities of the existence of possible aberrations while the project is still on going, or assumes minimal negative consequences of the irregularities in the schedule. This may be acceptable to some degrees especially if the costs of the associated risks are minimal or the effects of the expected risks would not seriously bother the whole project. However, real world projects are not as simple as traditional CPM assumes. Uncertainties are frequent and unwanted delays happen every other time. In other words, this type of approach becomes ineffective when dealing with serious troubles which are quite common in complex projects. Project schedules must be able to handle emergency situations of all types so that the final goal will still be achieved with less possible deviations from the intended results. For example, loss of power or unexpected delays in the delivery of materials must be taken into consideration and must be prepared for in order to avoid unnecessary delays. The ability of the project schedule to foresee any unwanted delays in each phase of its schedules would make it a valuable tool. But because traditional CPM approach does not look into the finer details and scenarios of the project, there is a high probability that the project will not yield intended results which could also mean that employing traditional CPM process in complex projects is a waste of time, resources, and efforts. Without any possible provisions for contingency plans, the project will eventually feel the strain associated with the lack of appropriate steps that would help the project get back in track. Falling Short or Going Beyond Part of the goal of project scheduling is to fit the available resources for the project in the most efficient combination. This may mean that the available project funds must be able to endure the expenses that the project will incur in a given period or that the efficiency of the workers must be able to meet the required deadline for each phases. Because not all projects can have all the contingency measures it needs in order to be finished in a timely manner, project managers must need to match the project demands for materials and other resources to what is available or what can be availed in the future. Traditional CPM, being an idealistic approach towards project management, generally assumes that there is a fit between demands and resources or that whenever the project needs something it has not taken into account, these needs can be easily provided. This view distorts reality of project management. Small and large scale projects are made with definite cash funds. In most cases, top management require that the project shell out as little as possible but expect the project to generate large returns on investment to meet their current needs. Reality is any wastage or lack in the project is unacceptable because anything of that sort involves loss of money through loss of resources. These loses can be time, manpower, strategies, or materials. Because traditional CPM does not take into account these important elements, there is a high likelihood that the project would fail in the process. This calls for the employment of a more strategic and more comprehensive project management tools that would address the complex needs of modern projects. Conclusion Traditional approach in scheduling projects is not very bad as the discussion made it sound like. Traditional scheduling still works in less complex project management procedures. But the effectiveness of traditional scheduling stops when the complexity of the project starts. More complex projects require more complex solutions. In working with large project, it is imperative for project managers to search for the best available tools for best avail solutions (Chapman, 1997). This can be done by making multi-level critical path analysis or by translating business and statistical data to meaningful terms where it can use appropriately in various situations. Recommendation Thus said, it is highly recommended that project managers must not confine themselves to what they know but instead move on to another plane of learning (or skills) that would give them better vantage points in managing projects. This could mean that they would have to integrate non-conventional methods and tools in achieving the goals and objectives of their projects. It further implies that a more comprehensive and scientific method should be applied in managing projects to ensure their infallible success despite the associated uncertainties. References Brenner, Rick. 2004. Scheduling as Risk Management. Point Lookout. Volume 4 Issue 16. Accessed on May 11, 2009 from http://www.chacocanyon.com/pointlookout/040421.shtml Chapman, James. 1997. Project Scheduling Estimating. Accessed on May 11, 2009 from http://www.hyperthot.com/pm_sked.htm Ismael, A., Rashid, K., & Hilo, W. 2009. Literature Review on Resource Constrained Critical Path Method Techniques. European Journal of Scientific Research. 222-236. Accessed on May 11, 2009 from http://www.eurojournals.com/ejsr_29_2_09.pdf Project Management Institute. 2000. A Guide to Project Management Body of Knowledge, 2000 Edition, Newton Square, PA. Read More