Please login or join to subscribe to this thread
Still waiting for the results of the other polls :-)
Anyone with comments here?
I don't agree but here is a site that goes with Crashing as the one that affects quality the most.
Risks of Project Crashing in Project Management (PM)
1) Various external and internal factors may lead project manager to go for crashing but it usually affects the quality of work as the time taken (besides cost) is the major issue on his mind.
But below it states that crashing could cause re-work (humm!)
Fast Tracking in Project Management
So we may 'Fast Track' the coding phase for the modules for which designing is complete before the completion of whole designing phase. This fast tracking may come with many risks associated. A rework may be required if final design doesn’t match with the module we have already coded.
Taken from: http://www.ianswer4u.com/2012/05/project-c...l#axzz47UtQoqrB
Another one also goes with Crashing as the one that affects quality the most. But I don't agree. Hope I'm not reading wrong.
The Handbook of Project Management: A Practical Guide to Effective Policies ...
Quotes @Crashing a schedule can impact performance, affecting the quality of the work done and ultimately the deliverables. @Another consequence is the need for people to work longer hours, which may not proportionately improve output.
Again, hope I'm not reading wrong...
Taking from: https://books.google.co.cr/books?id=iJtRva...quality&f=false
Actually, George, I read it otherwise. The reference to "quality" for crashing is simply mentioned because of the reduction in time. In other words, they presume that doing things in a shorter time would decrease quality. There is no argument presented for that correlation. In fact, I could make the case that if your resource increase is effected through increasing your current resources' availability to your project that it would actually help them focus properly on your project activities and, thus, increase quality.
On the other hand, there is a stern warning of rework around fast-tracking. Rework is definitely a cost of low quality.
Both might affect the quality if not executed properly and wisely.
The real question is, even when done properly and wisely, which one is most likely to impact quality?
IMO risk of quality is high in fast tracking as you will do activities simultaneously instead of sequential order.
1) Because if you have to do activities in parallel then human resources could be shared on both activities which itself is major reason for quality degrade.
2) on the other hand if different resources are going to work on two different parallel activity them communication and synchronization among them is very very very important.
3) so basically resources applied to different activities in parallel can create a conflict and inturn degrade quality.
For Crashing I think we can mitigate the risk of quality at the start itself by having dedicated resources of suitable caliber. Whereas in fast tracking working parallel even with best of the resources is a great pain.
Just a few points to clarify:
1. Fast tracking does not mean parallel activities - it means there is a degree of overlap. Maybe semantic but important since the overlap could only be for short time in comparison to the overall duration of the activities.
2. Fast tracking does not mean the same resources are used on both activities
3. Even if we have significant overlap and the same resources are used - this does not mean we will automatically see bad quality since these activities could require part time resources and people can be working on more than one activity or even a project
4. Every project I have ever worked on have activities that in parallel - some are related others are not.
Finally - I do not believe there is any evidence or scientific assessment that Fast Tracking or Crashing will impact quality in a proper environment. The key is this: is quality a critical success factor for the project? Or - if quality is important than a proper project management plan will consider all factors in normal mode - or fast track mode - or crashed mode.
In an in-mature environment - even with a relaxed schedule quality will suffer.
It is really - interesting to see - sad in a way - to often find discussions trying to find one reason - one fault - one tool - one skill to help us manage projects. Projects are about methods - set of processes - using many tools and techniques - requiring various variable skills by a different set of people to deliver projects. Let us move away from the concept that the PM is the HERO and is the only person on the team and that does everything from strategic planning to cleaning the office.
I agree Mounir with you, however my opinion was just to take stand if I have to on either side.
I also agree with you that there is no such survey/analysis done that can prove either of the technique causes quality issues. But based on my experience I wrote my comment. I have seen resources being shared for different activities (with project having different business constraints) in parallel.
Hope you understand my point. :-)
Please login or join to reply