I can't help you with a 'recognized' rule of thumb. The one I use is to expect PM to equal 10 to 15% of the work hours spent by the other members of the project. Sort of follows from the organization of the US Army, that uses 8 to 10 members of a squad commanded by a single non-comissioned officer. When you have more than 10 people to command you become less effective. Saving Changes...
Agree with Norman. When projects increase it is often said a full time project manager will do however if proejcts increase the overhead increases. PM allocation should in thos case go up to 20 or in some cases 25%. dependent on the complexity and the size of the project.
Another thiing to keep in mind is where you want to allocate meeting time for the team (not discussing content but progress and status)
Will this pm time or is this absorbed in the other activities
Time that I, as PM, spend discussing progress and status is, by definition, allocated to the PM budget. The time the team members spend telling me about progress and status is not allocated to the PM account. At least that is the way I structure the costing of the projects I am responsible for. Analyzing and reporting are different than listening and deciding.
thanks for the info. My last remark with respect to time allocated to meetings was more of a general remark. Some companies appreciate time allocated to pm budget others prefer it hidden others want it as separate group of tasks. I do agree pm time in meetings is always pm budget the other part is up to the organisation to decide on. Hopes this helps
ps a spell check in this box would be great looking at my last post ;-( Saving Changes...
"There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened."