When doing a simulation on you schedule, do you use the full schedule or a reduce version of the schedule. I have seen different argument about one and the other.
Why would you choose to use one over the other? Saving Changes...
Sort By:
Sergio Luis ConteHelping to create solutions for everyone| Worldwide based OrganizationsBuenos Aires, Argentina
To be honest, I make simulation if I can use a software simulation tool. Sometimes when I do not have a software I make some work on MS Project trying to adjust duration based on some variables I created to do that (most of them tied to risk). Usually because I use Barry Bohem´s Cone of Uncertainty this helps me to avoid simulation. Returning to the point, I use the whole schedule because if I use the critical path only when I run the simulation the critical pah could change.
...
1 reply by Vincent Guerard
Jan 09, 2017 3:44 PM
Vincent Guerard
...
Thanks Sergio,
Barry Bohem Cone is a excellent base at the start of the project. You are right during simulation the critical path can change. That is one thing I teach in my courses on risk, the critical path can change from month to month update also.
Do you make a general ponderation of risk for your project or by some group of activities or individually?
Saving Changes...
AKSHAY JAINPlanning Group Leader| YOKOGAWA, BahrainGwalior, Mp, India
It depends both detailed schedule and summary schedule are used for simulation. When High level or WBS level component are mostly in serial fashion and activities also mostly in serial fashion and form a critical path, project schedule can be simulated by shorter version where you can very logically demonstrate impact on schedule with respect to completed activities. But if in your schedule activities form parallel relations and float values are small then a meaningful simulation can be done with detailed schedule since there may be frequent changes in critical paths with delay in one or more activities.
...
1 reply by Vincent Guerard
Jan 09, 2017 3:48 PM
Vincent Guerard
...
Thanks for you answer Akshay,
I understand that on a linear schedule the high level is use.
and for more complex schedules that have multiple path the full schedule is use in the simulation.
Do you put the same ponderation on all activities or by group or individually?
To be honest, I make simulation if I can use a software simulation tool. Sometimes when I do not have a software I make some work on MS Project trying to adjust duration based on some variables I created to do that (most of them tied to risk). Usually because I use Barry Bohem´s Cone of Uncertainty this helps me to avoid simulation. Returning to the point, I use the whole schedule because if I use the critical path only when I run the simulation the critical pah could change.
Thanks Sergio,
Barry Bohem Cone is a excellent base at the start of the project. You are right during simulation the critical path can change. That is one thing I teach in my courses on risk, the critical path can change from month to month update also.
Do you make a general ponderation of risk for your project or by some group of activities or individually?
...
1 reply by Sergio Luis Conte
Jan 09, 2017 4:19 PM
Sergio Luis Conte
...
A great and tricy question (hehehehe). To be honest, most of the time I use group of activities. It depends on the phase of the project planning I am. At the very begining, I made a general ponderation on the whole project duration and summary tasks. When we have better information I always push to individual activities ponderation mainly if those belongs to the critical path. But in my experience that is not easy and really I found that it is enough with summary tasks ponderation.
It depends both detailed schedule and summary schedule are used for simulation. When High level or WBS level component are mostly in serial fashion and activities also mostly in serial fashion and form a critical path, project schedule can be simulated by shorter version where you can very logically demonstrate impact on schedule with respect to completed activities. But if in your schedule activities form parallel relations and float values are small then a meaningful simulation can be done with detailed schedule since there may be frequent changes in critical paths with delay in one or more activities.
Thanks for you answer Akshay,
I understand that on a linear schedule the high level is use.
and for more complex schedules that have multiple path the full schedule is use in the simulation.
Do you put the same ponderation on all activities or by group or individually? Saving Changes...
Sergio Luis ConteHelping to create solutions for everyone| Worldwide based OrganizationsBuenos Aires, Argentina
Jan 09, 2017 3:44 PM
Replying to Vincent Guerard
...
Thanks Sergio,
Barry Bohem Cone is a excellent base at the start of the project. You are right during simulation the critical path can change. That is one thing I teach in my courses on risk, the critical path can change from month to month update also.
Do you make a general ponderation of risk for your project or by some group of activities or individually?
A great and tricy question (hehehehe). To be honest, most of the time I use group of activities. It depends on the phase of the project planning I am. At the very begining, I made a general ponderation on the whole project duration and summary tasks. When we have better information I always push to individual activities ponderation mainly if those belongs to the critical path. But in my experience that is not easy and really I found that it is enough with summary tasks ponderation. Saving Changes...
Carlos TessoreDr.| RManagementMontevideo, Montevideo, Uruguay
Barry Bohem Cone???
...
2 replies by Sergio Luis Conte and Vincent Guerard
