Recently, I conducted some research on task scheduling in distributed environments. My idea was to schedule tasks while considering the working hours of team members across different time zones. For example, consider the following tasks: 1. Create mockups of a web page (4 hours) 2. Code the web page (8 hours) 3. Deploy on hosting (2 hours) The third task obviously depends on the second, and the second depends on the first. Now, suppose we have two employees: one in Europe and another in US (8-hour time zone difference). It seems more efficient to assign the first and third tasks to one employee and the second task to the other. This way, we can take advantage of the time zone differences, finish the project in 14 hours, and avoid waiting for one member for work done by another. I simulated this approach across random project configurations and observed an average reduction of up to 6% in total project duration. However, this is purely theoretical. I'm curious if anyone has implemented a similar approach in real-world projects. If so, does it deliver the same benefits in practice?
Saving Changes...
Sort By:
Shea KileyEducator| Massachusetts Department of CorrectionMassachusetts, United States
Hello olekdandr,
In my experience working within global team collaborative projects, the scheduling is closely mirroring the research you present. Scheduling can be assigned and ridgid, but often it develops on its own between group members.
Based on subject matter expertise, I will be paired with a group member who is hours apart in location. We would switch as to who worked the odd/off hours. We would switch back and forth to give the other members an easier schedule. I find it easy to be available in the night hours at home so often I just worked a time that fit everyone's schedule. Prior to that we schedule any days off or holidays in advance and determine if the entire team will meet.
I have found some PMI training on this site that outlines the best practices in fostering a holistic team management approach. Saving Changes...
If you look into Disciplined Agile, there is a lot of good stuff in there about dispersed teams. One of the learnings is that it is better to have one location capable of handling a work item end-to-end, rather than split a work item's delivery between two locations. So rather than divide the delivery process across locations, divide scope between locations.
Hello Kiron,
I agree that in many cases, dividing scope is more efficient, as communication and collaboration inside a location are better. But depending on setup, there may not be enough employees inside one location to finish the scope of work; also, some projects require 24h support, so distributed development is the only option. Saving Changes...
Planning across shifts is important but has drawbacks. In my experience with multi-national and 3-shift operational environments, planning must consider the work distribution, however as the old saying goes, no plan survives contact with the enemy.
Delays from one shift spill over into the next where the problem has been handed off to a different set of employees who now must first understand the problems before trying to fix them. The people on 2nd shift have to troubleshoot the problems from 1st when the people originally working those problems are not available so there is a big knowledge gap. That can take significantly longer to sort out, and/or result in idle employees waiting for the product to be ready for their part of the job.
Shift change meetings can help with that, but not eliminate it. That is where all the functional and PMs get together, discuss what happened on the shift finishing their day, and how to adjust for the next. It often involves moving people around to account for the unplanned overflow between shifts, and hopefully get to the work originally planned. That work movement however means you lose the benefits of a dedicated team and move into a matrix organization scenario. Saving Changes...
Sergio Luis ConteHelping to create solutions for everyone| Worldwide based OrganizationsBuenos Aires, Argentina
In my case, after working with this type of configurations from 1998 I have to say I experienced both things stated above by Kiron and Keith. And I have to say that I experienced exactly what both stated. Today, I am working with both scenarios but it will depend on lot of things including some of them are out of my hands because are related to organizational strategy for example (costs one of the top ten reasons). Saving Changes...
Since we're in a globalized world, connected through the Internet, and having multiple collaborative applications to communicate, and share documents and codes with remote members of the team, a web development project could be done with a work team working at different time zones.
The most important thing is coordination, and also you should assign time buffers for each activity, to create flexibility. The code web page activity duration is mainly a factor that may vary a lot depending on the type of website, the features that should be included, the errors or bugs that appear unexpectedly, the time that is needed to test that all function correctly, etc. I recommend you take into account these aspects in your simulation, and if you encounter that all work efficiently, put it into practice. Saving Changes...
