Scheduling Best Practice Conundrums

Emily,

Good article, "never say never".  

Although I understood long ago what you just said, at times is it good to have some references regarding blind application of so called "Good Practice".

Perhaps because proponents of each of the "good practice" documents do not warn there is a possibility of exceptions to these rules, that the document is a guide that in occasions exceptions shall be allowed is that many of us at times had issues with stubborn reviewers that insist on literal interpretation of the rules and because there are no exceptions mentioned they in no way will accept exceptions.

To my eyes any "good practice" document that do not highlight the possibilities of exceptions is good for nothing.

Best Regards,

Rafael

Rafael: Perhaps you should write a good practise guide for reviewing/approving a schedule

-Hoist them with their own petard!

There is the risk of being killed with my own petard if I write my own, better I repply that there can be exceptions and do not even touch the petard. 

Hi Gary - Rafael

I just have to add that petard is French slang for an old fashioned grenade or "fart".

The Victorian slang for a safe breaker "Peterman" comes form the same root.

But back on topic the usual practice is to call such lists "Guidance Notes on Good Practice" and the best one so far is published by the CIOB.

Best regards

Mike Testro

Mike,

Forget about Shakespeare, Petard comes from the Spanish word "petardo" in English a firecracker. 

The following is from the PMI

• The Practice Standard for Scheduling has been developed as a complement to A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide–Third Edition) in the Knowledge Area of Project Time Management. This practice standard describes the methods related to scheduling that are generally recognized as good practice for most projects most of the time. Good practice means that there is general agreement that the correct application of these skills, tools, and techniques can enhance the chances of success over a wide range of different projects. Good practice does not mean that the knowledge described should always be applied uniformly on all projects; the project management team is responsible for determining what is appropriate for any given project.

• The problem starts when someone unilaterally decides what is appropriate, write his decision on some poorly written specs and a poor reviewer takes charge.  We call them morons with initiative and here we say there is nothing more dangerous and damaging than a moron with initiative.  

• In order to rule out the morons with initiative effect I would eliminate "the project management team is responsible for determining what is appropriate for any given project" and add something to allow for deviations/variances that shall be reasonably justified as to document why the exception was taken. 

Rafael