Re: Leveling by ID vs. "Standard"

Steve,

I spent considerable time typing an answer,
but a bug or weakness in theNewsgroup interface
tossed out all my typing when it made me log-in
again.

But here is shorter version.

There are seven musicians who want to audition.
There are two judges who will conduct the auditions.
There are four audition rooms available.

The musicians are named One, Two, ..., Seven.

The judges are Bob and Larry.

The rooms are Piano Room, Organ Room,
Guitar Room, and Percussion Room.

I will (this time) delete the descriptions of the
auditions, why they need which rooms, etc.

But, knowing this info, I choose to input tasks
that described the auditions I want to conduct.
I enter the musicians, judges, and rooms as
the resources. Each task lists the resources
required for that interview.

Because of the limitations of MS Project, I
must choose tasks as Fixed Units, with the
Effort Driven option turned OFF.

Because I want auditions NOT to be
interrupted, I choose NO SPLITS in various
checkboes here and there.

Because I want the musicians with more
than one audition to have their auditions
back-to-back, the ONLY links I enter are
for that purpose.

Because I want to have some mental
connection to the leveling process, I choose
ID-Only leveling. Therefore, I enter the
tasks with the idea I may need to change
their order later to determine the order in
which they are leveled. Also, I choose to
have the Task Entry *** Sort on ID.

Because I want the auditions to occur on
Mon-Jan-2-2007, I set ALL TASKS with the
constraint to occur no sooner than that date.
I know MSP will treat them as ASAP except
for that.

When I enter the tasks, there is resource
over-allocation initially (Auto-Level=OFF).
When I do a LEVEL NOW, I see an alomst
perfect schedule, except Larry has an
ackward schedule. I move the auditions
for musician "Four" to the top of the Task
List and level again.

The result is perfect.

Here is the Task ***:
====================================
Name Dura Pred Resource Initials
Four.A 15m Four,Bob,Larry,Organ
Four.B 15m 1 Four,Organ,Five,Larry
One.A 60m One,Bob,Piano
Two.A 30m Two,Bob,Piano
Two.B 45m 4 Two,Larry,Piano
Three.A 20m Three,Larry,Drums
Six.A 30m Six,Larry,Drums
Seven.A 30m Seven,Larry,Guitar
====================================

Here is the Resource ***:
==========================
Name Initials Max Type
==========================
One One 1 Work
Two Two 1 Work
Three Three 1 Work
Four Four 1 Work
Five Five 1 Work
Six Six 1 Work
Seven Seven 1 Work
Bob Bob 1 Work
Larry Larry 1 Work
Piano Room Piano 1 Work
Guitar Room Guitar 1 Work
Organ Room Organ 1 Work
Percussion Room Drums 1 Work

Because I never had the time to find an
"Assignment ***," I export the assignments
to Excel. AFter a few moments of massaging
these data, I get the following lists:

Bob's Appointments
===============================
Four 9:00 AM 9:15 AM Organ Room
One 9:15 AM 10:15 AM Piano Room
Two 10:15 AM 10:45 AM Piano Room

Larry's Appointments
===============================
Four 9:00 AM 9:15 AM Organ Room
Four 9:15 AM 9:30 AM Organ Room
Three 9:30 AM 9:50 AM Percussion Room
Six 9:50 AM 10:20 AM Percussion Room
(break) 10:20 AM 10:45 AM N/A
Two 10:45 AM 11:30 AM Piano Room
Seven 11:30 AM 12:00 PM Guitar Room

Room Reservations
===================================
Organ Room 9:00 AM 9:30 AM
Percussion Room 9:30 AM 10:20 AM
Piano Room 9:15 AM 11:30 AM
Guitar Room 11:30 AM 12:00 PM

Musicians Appointments for Auditions
=================================
One 9:15 AM 10:15 AM Piano Room
Two 10:15 AM 10:45 AM Piano Room
10:45 AM 11:30 AM Piano Room
Three 9:30 AM 9:50 AM Percussion Room
Four 9:00 AM 9:15 AM Organ Room
9:15 AM 9:30 AM Organ Room
Five 9:15 AM 9:30 AM Organ Room
Six 9:50 AM 10:20 AM Percussion Room
Seven 11:30 AM 12:00 PM Guitar Room

This truly simple example shows that MS Project does
not always have to be a big complicated deal.

1. I did not have links for most tasks.
2. I did not have to think about Critical Paths.
3. I did not want to use Standard Leveling.
4. What MS Project was doing was no mystery.
5. I got useful results interactively in a few minutes.
6. Using Project was faster than doing this by hand.
7. I got lists (after Excel) to hand out to everyone.
8. I verified my assumption that I needed no more
judges or auditions rooms.

=======

Now, my REAL project that's been the object of
some 60-80 posts this last week is just as simple,
conceptually, as the example here. The only
differences are that I have many, many links
among the approx 550 tasks and milestones.
And, my resources are over-allocated by some
1500% (16:1) before leveling.

When a simple model like this one is extended
to so many linked tasks and so much leveling
to do, then one feature of this model causes
MSP to have a cow: multiple resources per
task -- resources that MUST be synchronous
in performance of the task.

Since MSP seems to treat ALL RESOURCES
(of the Work Type) AS THE SAME, then
MSP has no problem letting a meeting
room conduct a meeting with no attendees.
It just takes a little longer because the
meeting room has to go through the
agenda and take minutes all by itself!

Fact is: MSP will have DATA ERRORS as well
as fail to create a viable schedule for the
project. This seems to be the case when
project tasks have dissimilar resources that
must ALL work 100% on the task together.
And this is especially clear when these
resources have different working times. MSP
will leave out some of the resources if the
others can do the extra work.

This is what I see in my project. No one
has yet to explain the secret setting that
forces resources all to work together on a
task at the same time.

How do you describe a task where one
needs a supervisor present? Or a machine
to be used?

How do you schedule a one-time meeting
of the Project Team that is linked to the
project tasks?

My stupid, naive, and hasty assumption that
MSP would easily model a simple meeting
has cost me considerable time and revenues.

Now I know: either it is difficult...
or it is impossible!

Well, there you have it.

Does anyone any ideas to help me with these
problems?

Thanks for your interest in my project.

Jim Rodgers






"Steve House" wrote:

Well, one of the issues seems to be that you have several requirements that
directly conflict with one another. On the one hand you need to have judges
and rooms always scheduled together, the room can't 'work' separately from
the judge. OTOH, you need to be able to have the judge work two rooms
simultaneously if need be. But that says the judge and room CAN work
separately since when the judge ducks over to Room 2, Room 1 continues
'working' without him. Resolving that conflict requires a judgement
decision on the part of the scheduler, something no software at the present
development of AI is capable of doing. Software can follow a rule but here
you need it to decide which rule takes priority when several rules are in
conflict.

Your example says you must get the auditions done by a given deadline
without hiring more judges or renting more rooms but it appears that your
model doesn't take into account the possibility that it simply might not be
possible to do that. Resources are always finite at is is entirely possible
for a larger deliverable to be required than it is possible for the
available resources to produce within the given timeframe - in that case,
the only options are one or a mix of 1: settle for less deliverable; 2: buy
more resources; or 3: settle for longer delivery times. Them's the options
and no amount of managment desire or objective setting will create other
alternatives. I'm a big believer that one of the key fallacies in modern
management attitudes is that 'management' is an act of will-power and all
things are possible if you just want it bad enough <grin>.

If I may be so bold to point out, remember the MS Project (like all
scheduling software) is only a glorified calculator and serves merely extend
the talents of a human scheduler. It WON'T take over and supply that
human's decision making however. Only you can optimize the resource
assignments, insuring the right operator is mated to the right machine at
the right time, etc. Software cannot do it and I'm enough of a Luddite to
believe that that we ought not even try to make it so. All Project can
really do is tell you what the likely outcome will be if you decide to try
strategy X. Project WILL help you organize the project as you ask in your
last paragraph but it won't do it for you.
--
Steve House [Project MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs




"Jim Rodgers" <JimRodgers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:B95D4943-F3D9-4646-A9F8-A53ADFEA0A2B@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Yes. I got it.

I can use this to some benefit, but it is not exactly
what I need. I need to make resource assignments
that MUST be satisfied (i.e., expended). Only if the
man and the machine (or two specific people, etc.)
are assigned TO THE SAME task... only then is there
even a possibility of synchrony among assigned
resources. And I say "even a possibility" because
Work Contours also are possible.

For example, what if I were scheduling judges to
attend talent auditions. Let's say there are some
number of audition rooms, some number of judges,
and a whole bunch of talent auditioning this week.

The one thing I can say at the start is that I need to
get the judge, the talent, and the room all in one place
at the same time in certain particular combinations.
One room has a piano and another an organ, etc. One
of the talent needs more than one audition in more
than one room. Some judges may need to work in
more than one room also.

Now my project involves getting these tasks done by
Friday afternoon, and not having to hire any additional
judges or rent any additional rooms if it can be avoided.

Supposing I have enough judges and rooms to hold
all the required auditions, how would I use MS Project
show this scenario and print out a schedule?

I cannot, however, have the schedule say it plans to
have the room work twice as long or twice as hard
because the judge has a schedule conflict and can't
be there at that time. The work is fixed per resource,
not per task. And the ALL the resources must start
and stop the task ALL AT ONCE.

You know what I am trying to get at?

I'm finding it really hard to believe MS Project can't help
organize a project with such parameters!

Even if MSP really only is for bulk (slave) labor, how
do you assign a supervisor to watch over the ditch
diggers?

There's gotta be a way.

-- Jim


"Steve House" wrote:

Remember links in Project are illustrative of the physical process logic
and
are should not be used solely to create a desired temporal logic. The
time
relationships between tasks are a consequence, not a cause, of the links.
If you flowchart the workflow of your project, the arrow connectors
between
the various process and decision boxes, etc, become your task linkages.
So
a start-to-start link does NOT mean the tasks ought to start together or
will run in parallel, etc. A SS link means that there is some reason
that
the successor task can't start until the predecessor has started. The
successor may or may not start then, the link merely describes the
earliest
that it can possibly start, not WHEN it will start.
--
Steve House [Project MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs


"Jim Rodgers" <JimRodgers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:A04A8C14-016B-49AF-A5CF-04328014EF90@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Wait a minute...
I said...

"Next I tried using parallel tasks [with a Start/Start Link]."

Then I said...

"As I recall, when I tried that....."

Whenever I say "As I recall..." I know it's BS.
;-{
That should've worked according to the Help.
I'll try that again and let you know.

-- Jim




.

Loading