This is a tricky decision. You have to do an investigation and find out why that portion of the scope was originally included in the project. If it is a “must have” then you might not want to remove it. But if it was a “nice to have” and the stakeholders are willing to give it up for the sake of faster delivery then it could be a good option. I would refer to the requirements traceability matrix, if there is one, to make sure I am not removing a critical portion of the scope.
...
1 reply by Rami Kaibni
Jan 22, 2016 4:17 PM
Rami Kaibni
...
Of course you have to refer to all documentation before you take any action - Have you ever done that before ?
All the time. Fast-tracking is the better and most used option. I did not understand why Ayat is talking about removing scope here. Fast-Tracking is not to reduce or eliminate some elements of scope but to do things in parallel which are otherwise planned not in parallel.
...
2 replies by Ayat Rezaeifar and Rami Kaibni
Jan 22, 2016 4:18 PM
Rami Kaibni
...
I specifically asked about this thing of reducing scope as Rita's Book mentioned it so it confused me as scope reduction was mentiones as an option to compress the schedule in Fast Tracking. Can you shed a light on this more Subail ?
Jan 22, 2016 4:19 PM
Ayat Rezaeifar
...
You are right Suhail. Fast tracking is not changing scope. But looking at Rami's question, and my experience in real life, sometime in order to do tasks parallel you might want to consider removing some of the scope specially when you have limited resources. Technically fast tracking has nothing to do with scope modification. Thanks for clarifying.
Senior Projects Manager | Field & Marten AssociatesNew Westminster, British Columbia, Canada
Jan 22, 2016 1:58 PM
Replying to Ayat Rezaeifar
...
This is a tricky decision. You have to do an investigation and find out why that portion of the scope was originally included in the project. If it is a “must have” then you might not want to remove it. But if it was a “nice to have” and the stakeholders are willing to give it up for the sake of faster delivery then it could be a good option. I would refer to the requirements traceability matrix, if there is one, to make sure I am not removing a critical portion of the scope.
Of course you have to refer to all documentation before you take any action - Have you ever done that before ?
...
1 reply by Ayat Rezaeifar
Jan 22, 2016 4:28 PM
Ayat Rezaeifar
...
I had to consider it a couple of times but I never ended up identifying any portion of the scope which could be removed.
Senior Projects Manager | Field & Marten AssociatesNew Westminster, British Columbia, Canada
Jan 22, 2016 3:56 PM
Replying to Suhail Iqbal
...
All the time. Fast-tracking is the better and most used option. I did not understand why Ayat is talking about removing scope here. Fast-Tracking is not to reduce or eliminate some elements of scope but to do things in parallel which are otherwise planned not in parallel.
I specifically asked about this thing of reducing scope as Rita's Book mentioned it so it confused me as scope reduction was mentiones as an option to compress the schedule in Fast Tracking. Can you shed a light on this more Subail ? Saving Changes...
All the time. Fast-tracking is the better and most used option. I did not understand why Ayat is talking about removing scope here. Fast-Tracking is not to reduce or eliminate some elements of scope but to do things in parallel which are otherwise planned not in parallel.
You are right Suhail. Fast tracking is not changing scope. But looking at Rami's question, and my experience in real life, sometime in order to do tasks parallel you might want to consider removing some of the scope specially when you have limited resources. Technically fast tracking has nothing to do with scope modification. Thanks for clarifying. Saving Changes...
Senior Projects Manager | Field & Marten AssociatesNew Westminster, British Columbia, Canada
Jan 22, 2016 4:28 PM
Replying to Ayat Rezaeifar
...
I had to consider it a couple of times but I never ended up identifying any portion of the scope which could be removed.
Same thing happened with me Ayat but the question is it an option or no. Saving Changes...
Prasanna ArkadiMr. Prasanna Suhas Arkadi| Volkswagen India Private LimitedPune, Maharashtra, India
Answer is NO. However for any project; the Scope statement is finalized with final list of requirements. However, there are some requirements which are must to make the project successful and others are like good to have type. Hence, we can make the ABC analysis of requirements and must complete the deliverable on/before the schedule timeline. The love to have type deliverables can be delivered with some extra time if required. I mean to say there are some operational requirements and some are aesthetic requirements.
...
1 reply by Rami Kaibni
Jan 23, 2016 2:24 PM
Rami Kaibni
...
Prasanna, Can you elaborate more on your answer as I am not sure I understood you clearly. Thanks.
Saving Changes...
PANKAJ KUMAR JOSHIGeneral Manager| Transrail Lighting LimitedNainital, Uttrakhand, India
In my opinion as per PMBOK fast tracking and scope reduction are two different things.
In practical side, scope reduction should not be used as a tool to compress the schedule. It will raise a lot of questions.
In general, scope reduction can happen when we identify some activity which is not required now due to technical or practical reasons. But it should be identified in scope planning stage.
Also another possibility is when sponsor/customer allows to reduce the scope of work for early execution .
...
1 reply by Rami Kaibni
Jan 23, 2016 2:25 PM
Rami Kaibni
...
Pankaj, I agree there are two different things but what confused me is that in Rita's Book, it gives scope reduction as an option ....
When you try to fast-track sometimes you have to come up with a creative solution which seems otherwise not possible. To make it possible, you might have to pay some cost and resultantly may slightly smoothen up the specific requirement in scope. But this is only in extreme cases where you are stretched to the limit and still more fast-tracking is required. This is the last resort after which crashing will have to be done.
...
1 reply by Rami Kaibni
Jan 23, 2016 2:27 PM
Rami Kaibni
...
Suhail, usually it is better to explore all options for Fast Tracking before we jump into Crashing right ? Can you explain to me why please.
As per my understanding:
Fast Tracking might result in rework and increased risk.
Crashing might result in increased risk and cost.
Both has disadvantages so what make Fast Tracking better than Crashing in your opinion ?
Community Champion
