I'm not a big believer in using dependency links to achieve that. Use
resource leveling and task priorities instead. Task dependency links really
mean that the successor task is somehow dependent on the deliverable
produced by the predecessor, not the resource that's making the deliverable.
Dependency links by and large model requirements imposed by process logic
and physical laws - we have to build the walls before we install the roof
not because of resource requirements but because gravity doesn't allow us to
first build the roof in midair and then later stuff the walls in under it or
the process logic inherent in making bowling pins means we have to shape
them before we can paint them. You may have Joe on tasks A and B and he's
overbooked because they occur at the ssame time. A FS link between them
could make B come after A and relieve the overbooking, sure enough. But if
it turned out that you could substitute someone else instead of Joe on Task
B they really could occur at once - links close that option off to you and
putting Joe on A and Fred on B would still have them running in sequence
because of the link instead of in parallel as they otherwise might. With
Joe on both, when you level B will move out until it's clear of A, just like
a FS liunk would position it. But putting Fred on B instead of Joe would
result in Bs moving back again to its original position because Joe's
allocation is no longer an issue that needs consideration.
--
Steve House [Project MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit
http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
huntkat said:
Brilliant! Thanks. So, if I set up new tasks as dependant on the existing
ones being completed, this should stop this from happening. Great,
appreciate
your help.
Steve House said:
Overallocations are an instantaneous peak value. If Joe is booked 100%
on 3
1-hour tasks that happen to overlap in time, during the period of overlap
he's booked 300%. For an overallocation of 1600% to occur, all you need
is
for a resource to be booked to 16 simultaneous tasks. Note that the
total
hours aren't the issue - tasks that overlap by even one minute will cause
an
overallocation for that minute and it's entirely possible that someone
who
works an 8 hour day, has a maximum availability of 100%, and is only
assigned to 2 1-hour duration tasks on a certain day to still be
overallocated if those tasks happen to occur at the same time.
HTH
--
Steve House [Project MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit
http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
I use Microsoft Project 2002 with Windows XP.
I have added primarily recurring tasks into the tasks and this, I
believe,
is causing each team member to be overallocated. They are
overallocated
up
to 1600% when according to the tasks, hours worked are 8.5 hours. I
set
up
the calendar as 8 hours for each member but cannot work out how the
overallocation is occurring. The recurring tasks when I look at the
resource
usage view details the tasks as 8 hours even though they appear on the
gant
chart as 1 hour etc.
I have virtually no experience with MS Project, nevertheless I need to
resolve this issue. Please help me
