All Tasks vs. Summary?

R

Ron A.

Hello,

I need some advice on how to create my plan.

I haven't found a way to attach a task checklist to the
individual tasks on my plan. My options are to list all of
the work packages as sub-tasks to a summary task or to
create a summary task and use the Note feature to document
the checklist items.

Does anyone have any thoughts on what the best approach
is? I hate the idea of using the plan as a checklist, but
I'm stuck for alternatives.

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Ron A.
 
J

John

Ron,
What do you mean by "task checklist"? If the items on the checklist are
tasks to be done as part of an overall plan, then you have tasks (i.e.
the checklist) under a summary. You mention work packages. In the EV
environment work packages are tasks to be accomplished as part of an
overall plan. Each work package has a name (descriptive statement of the
work to be done), a start date (fixed or as a successor to another
task), duration (estimated time the task will cover), and one or more
resources to do the task (resource name(s) with assignment allocation).

John
 
J

Jan De Messemaeker

Hello,

I love the idea of using the plan as a checklist, I do it all the time.
Every activity that produces an identifiable deliverable may constitute a
task, why not?
Project has sufficient filtering possibilities to produce overview lists
from a detailed plan.
HTH

--
Jan De Messemaeker
Microsoft Project Most Valuable Professional
Project Management Consultancy
Prom+ade BVBA
32-495-300 620
 
S

Steve House

I would disagree with the idea that links should be resource dependent.
Yes, the sequencing of tasks, in the sense of your example of painting the
inside versus the outside of the house with only one painter, is certainly
true. But that is not, IMHO, driven in the schedule by a dependency link.
Temporal relationships are a consequence of links, not a cause of their
existance. IMO, links represent what you are calling task related
dependencies only - they are a description of the process logic. The
resource related dependencies are driven by resource leveling coupled with
task priorities that describe the desired time sequence that will result
after the leveling is complete.
 
R

Ron A.

John,

It seems I've started a lively debate!

Here's my question: In my plan (project) we must vevify
that servers have all of the current software installed.
There are 25 different "checks" which must be made. Each
of those "checks" is a fairly quick task to accomplish
(probably no more than a minute or so).

What I'm trying to accomplish is assuring that these
checks are made. The tasks are not truly "dependent" in
the sense that it is not important what sequence the tasks
be done in. What is important is that the checks be done.

That was the genesis of my original question: Is it better
to use the plan as the checklist or would it be better
technique to have a summary task "Check Server Build" and
attach an Acceptance Test Plan to the task which outlines
the "checks" to be made?

Thanks for all of the teriffic input!

Regards,

Ron A.
 
S

Steve House

I'm not a big fan of micromanaging - I think that all other things being
equal, people really will want to do good work if it's expected of them and
they're given credit for having the brains to do it, so it's not my job to
structure their workday or look over their shoulder all the time. So if I
were to be doing this I'd go with one task "Complete Server Build Checklist"
for each of the servers with its duration the estimated total time it should
take to run the checks. I'd prepare a written checklist that requires the
person doing the checkout to initial each step and the completed checklist
would become a permanent part of the project documentation package, not from
a project schedule management perspective but more for a project quality
control perspective. Now, if two different people, OTOH, were going to be
doing part of the list each for each server, I'd make each server a summary
with the number of subtasks equal to the number of "groups" of checks each
person is responsible for, sort of the way aircraft checklist
responsibilities are managed and distributed between pilot and first officer
in modern airline cockpit resource management programs.
 
R

R6n A.

Steve,

Thanks for the insight. I think I subscibe to your train
of thought as well. I don't view the project plan as a
tools to micromanage.

I think I'll go with the summary task and use an ATP as a
checklist.

Thanks.

Ron A.


-----Original Message-----
I'm not a big fan of micromanaging - I think that all other things being
equal, people really will want to do good work if it's expected of them and
they're given credit for having the brains to do it, so it's not my job to
structure their workday or look over their shoulder all the time. So if I
were to be doing this I'd go with one task "Complete Server Build Checklist"
for each of the servers with its duration the estimated total time it should
take to run the checks. I'd prepare a written checklist that requires the
person doing the checkout to initial each step and the completed checklist
would become a permanent part of the project
documentation package, not from
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top