Ban These Planninng Abominations.

Dear Planners, Common problem I face is; When I divide the activities to a level where I can follow by only FS rel. It will be impossible to decide the order of a detailed activities which are formed from a more general activity. For example: -Piping W.(X area)(35 Days)----(SS)Piping W.(Y area)(35 days) divided into -Hydrotest p(x1)--FS--Hydr. p.(x2)--FS--Hyd....... "" --FS--Hydrotest p.(y1)... nobody including superintendant could say the sequence because the hydotest packs we assume could be totally different because of uncomplete desing and certification works. If I divide the work up to one foreman job on a area-and isometric(system-line it can continue). The same problem occurs. The sequence will be decided on site when the engineering and certification works nearly finalized. It doesnot matter how much experience you have you cannot give that precision. When you input actuals you will see that your plan is so much different from the plan and in order to keep the end dates logical. you will need to modify relationships of the dynamic schedule whick is another discussion(there is a topic about it). I can give so many examples in equipment foundation, electrical works and pipeline jobs as this. What I am used to do for the latest schedules I prepared after the ones I sucked. I am using many spreadsheet that data flowing coming from site where there are the details of activities to LVL5 even LVL6 in some discipline. Then you can stack up in order to have the progress and the forecast in a good way before importing to the scheduling programme. Just some opinions from a refresh who willing to improve. regards,

Hey, Mike.

Actually, getting totally outplayed is, alas, not a "for once" experience for Windies in the past 14 years. The "for once" is that, after the skipper had as usual set the trend by gifting his wicket in both innings, there were some batsmen in the lower order who showed some backbone, and hung on till the setting sun could save them!

But this series has truly been the most hopeful sign for Windies in many years -- mainly due to the fast bowling of Edwards and Taylor, which we really haven’t had since Curtly and Courtney retired. Now on to Kensington. I just wish wisdom would prevail by bringing the two Trini kids Simmons and Barath in to open, moving Gayle to #4 or 5, and replacing Powell and Benn with someone who can take wickets!
(Sorry, I live in Boston, where I really don’t get much chance to talk cricket.)

As to the CPM comments, we really are in violent agreement, except that I know the changes you want to see (FS relationships only, in a sufficiently decomposed schedule) ain’t never going to happen, much as I’d like to see it. Our different perspectives, I suspect, come from the fact that you work almost exclusively in THE most mature PM environment, i.e., European construction. Alas, most US businesses are far, far behind! I get to see how American projects in software, pharma, DoD, aerospace, auto manufacturing, etc. are doing schedules. Most of them couldn’t, as the saying goes (almost), find a critical path with both hands and a mirror.

I pray that I’ll see at least a small percentage of SS relationships in a schedule, because at least then I know that someone made an attempt, however cursory, to optimize. And maybe this pharma or hospital software project will therefore get done a few weeks earlier and save the life of a friend or family member!

(Note: I am omitting from criticism nuke and refinery plant maintenance, which do a decent scheduling job in the US.)

Adios, and fingers crossed for a fair pitch at Kensington (as long as Alec Stewart isn’t there to score a century in each innings!)

Hi Stephen

Thanks for the cricket chat - in fact I am a Rugby fan and I only mentioned cricket to wind you up a bit.

I have worked in most continents and with a lot of Americans - starting with the new US Cairo Embassy back in 1989.

As far as I can see the planning abominations are worldwide - especially endemic in the UK.

I am developing a working - interactive - practice guide to show planners how easy it is to do it right 1st time.

The 1st section should be ready for review in a month or two.

Watch this space.

Best regards

Mike Testro

Great, Mike. Looking forward to seeing it! (Dare I hope that it will include DRAG analysis and optimization?)

Mike,

Be sure to give a copy to PP. I will be playing your devils advocate.

and big chance it will not pass my standard or other planning and scheduling standard.

I base this opinion in my observation from your post that you seems not to know how to prepare PERT/CPM in cross section paper the size of an A1 or A2 and do manual computation of floats, forward pass / backward pass.

You may not heard the word dummy activity in PERT/CPM. Why it is introduced in the networks.

Take note that the software that comes out from todays planning and scheduling activities were develop having in mind PERT/CPM fundmentals.

So I think what you may be trying to propose is a new concept in PERT/CPM, planning and scheduling.

It must pass the review of PP peers.

Cheers,
Happy Planning and Scheduling

Hi Charleston

I didn’t understand any of what you said.

Except that Powerproject started completely afresh with their software.

You can generate a pert chart if you wish but why bother.

What I am producing is a real time demonstration of practical planning for builders who do not know how to get the best out of the software.

As I keep saying I am not a planner - I am a builder who can do the software.

Best regards

Mike Testro

Charleston wrote:

"...to know how to prepare PERT/CPM in cross section paper the size of an A1 or A2 and do manual computation of floats, forward pass / backward pass."

What... no DRAG? Or True Cost? Or DRED optimization analysis?

I’d also just like to call all PPers attention to what happens this Thursday. The event of the year, the Barbados Test between West Indies and England, which shows all evidence of being a fascinating contest, will begin. And yes, the grounds at Kensington Oval are guaranteed to be pluperfectly ready for a fair contest! How can I be so sure? Because I happen to know that Barbados has, per capita, the highest percentage of citizens with graduate degrees in project management of any country in the world!
That should be worth something, right?

Fraternally in project management,

Steve Devaux

Mike,

I think I might know what’s bugging Charlie. I believe he may be worried that the expertise/skill required for planning will be diluted by the entry of unqualified people into the planning field. It’s possible that he could see your real time demonstration of practical planning as something which could facilitate this. Personally I can’t see any disadvantage, if you can produce a tool which will enable people, irrespective of whether they are builders or graduates, to do the job better, where’s the problem?

However, I’m sure that Charlie really does care about this quite passionately, but this can lead him to forget certain realities. For example he seems to believe that you have to submit it to Planning Planet, that he will be playing Devil’s Advocate and that if it doesn’t pass his standard then it doesn’t get used. He also seems to believe that your demonstration must pass a review of Planning Planet peers. I don’t know where he gets these ideas from, but I don’t think it’s going to matter how carefully you explain things, once Charlie gets a bee in his bonnet it’s virtually impossible to shift.

I must admit that I am intrigued by the possibilities your demonstration offers, and like Steve, I’m looking forward to seeing it when you’re ready to show us.

Chris Oggham