Quantitative Time Management
There is no "undo" button for oceans of
time.
Tom Pike
Rethink, Retool,
Results, 1999
Quantitative
Techniques in Time Management
Time management is amply described in most texts on project
management. In this chapter we will focus only on the quantitative aspects of
time management and make a couple of key assumptions to begin with:
-
The major program milestones that mark real development of
business value are identified and used to drive the project at the highest
level.
-
The program logic is found in the detail project schedules.
Lower level schedules are in network form, preferably the "precedence
diagramming method (PDM)" and tie together the various deliverables of the work
breakdown structure (WBS).
Major Program
Milestones
The first assumption is essential, more so even than the
second, because the program milestones tie business value to one of the most
essential elements of quality: timeliness.
It is almost without exception that the left side (or business side) of the
project balance sheet expresses the business sponsor's timeliness needs. In
fact, although it is usual to think of the "four-angle" of scope, quality,
schedule, and resources as being somewhat equal partners, very often timeliness
is far more important than project cost. The project cost is often small
compared to overall life cycle costs, but the returns to the project may well be
compromised if timeliness is not achieved.
The Program
Logic
The second assumption speaks to the PDM diagram, sometimes
also referred to as a PERT (Program Evaluation Review Technique) chart, although
a PDM diagram and a PERT chart are actually somewhat different. However, suffice
it to say at this point that these diagrams establish the detail "logic" of the
project. By logic we mean the most appropriate linkage between task and
deliverables on the WBS. We do not actually have a schedule at the point that a
network diagram is in place; we merely have the logic of the schedule. We have
the dependencies among tasks, we know which task should come first, we know the
durations and efforts of each task, and from the durations and dependencies we
know the overall length of the project. When all of this knowledge is laid on a
calendar, with actual dates, then we have a schedule.
Presumably if the project team has scheduled optimally, the
project schedule (network laid against calendar) will align with the milestones
identified as valuable to the business. If only it were true in all cases! In
point of fact, a schedule developed "bottom up" from the WBS task and
deliverables almost always comes out too lengthy, usually missing the later
milestones. There are many reasons why a too lengthy schedule occurs, but the
chief reasons are:
-
The project team members can think of a myriad of tasks that
should be done that are beyond the knowledge or experience of the project
sponsor. In fact, the project sponsor has not thought of such tasks because the
sponsor is thinking in terms of what is required by the business and not what is
required to execute the project.
-
Each person estimating their task may not be using expected
value and there may be excess pessimism accumulated in the
schedule.
The difference between the network schedule and the program
milestones represents risk. Such schedule risk in quantitative terms is the
subject of this chapter and one of the main management tasks of the project
manager. Addressing the risk in time between the requirements of the business
and the needs of the project will occupy the balance of this
chapter.