D
dee
Is there a way to hide lag time in Gantt chart so that people don't see a
cushion has been added?
cushion has been added?
W
Wiley
I don’t know of a way to hide lag time from those smart savvy enough to
locate it. It is a component that drives the plan after all. However, there
are a couple of subtle tricks.
1. You can hide the linkage lines on the Gant chart (right click in the
Gantt chart, then Layout).
2. Reduce the Size% on the Timescale (right click in the timescale at the
top of the Gantt). The combination of 1 and 2 don’t hid lag, but make one
study the chart harder in order to identify it.
3. Don’t make your tasks successions linear. Rather than Plan, Design,
Build, Test, Implement as a sequence of tasks, you could try a functional
grouping (Documentation, Infrastructure, Project Overhead, etc.) Many of
these groupings are going on simultaneously, which makes it harder for the
casual observer to follow. To many, including the PM, this makes the work
plan much more complicated to administer - particularly for large plans. It
is not a highly favored choice.
I have used all of these in the past. The success of any of these
approaches depends on the Pm, project personnel, and management tolerances.
I am sure there are other methods as well.
Finally, you could borrow from the Critical Chain school of thought. Don’t
call it lag or try to hide it. Make it a task called Buffer. Then make sure
that all resources know the use of the buffer issacred, and they must ask
permission to use it (with appropriate justification of course).
HTH
locate it. It is a component that drives the plan after all. However, there
are a couple of subtle tricks.
1. You can hide the linkage lines on the Gant chart (right click in the
Gantt chart, then Layout).
2. Reduce the Size% on the Timescale (right click in the timescale at the
top of the Gantt). The combination of 1 and 2 don’t hid lag, but make one
study the chart harder in order to identify it.
3. Don’t make your tasks successions linear. Rather than Plan, Design,
Build, Test, Implement as a sequence of tasks, you could try a functional
grouping (Documentation, Infrastructure, Project Overhead, etc.) Many of
these groupings are going on simultaneously, which makes it harder for the
casual observer to follow. To many, including the PM, this makes the work
plan much more complicated to administer - particularly for large plans. It
is not a highly favored choice.
I have used all of these in the past. The success of any of these
approaches depends on the Pm, project personnel, and management tolerances.
I am sure there are other methods as well.
Finally, you could borrow from the Critical Chain school of thought. Don’t
call it lag or try to hide it. Make it a task called Buffer. Then make sure
that all resources know the use of the buffer issacred, and they must ask
permission to use it (with appropriate justification of course).
HTH
D
dee
Hi and thanks for your response. I think that probably a buffer task is
best. I had thought of that, but not of making it "sacred" and enforcing a
request system.
I will try the other methods as well to see which one works best. Thanks
again!
best. I had thought of that, but not of making it "sacred" and enforcing a
request system.
I will try the other methods as well to see which one works best. Thanks
again!
J
Jim Aksel
I don't think the "Buffer" task hides your lag times, it actually accentuates
them. On Wiley's post, I 100% disagree with Method 3 since that just doesn't
play in my world at all.
To appropriately hide a task buffer you could simply increase the task
duration keeping the amount of work fixed. That way, the Gantt chart shows
the nice solid bars with no gaps. If management says "But your resources are
only allocated 80%" then you argue that the resources would never really
spend more time than that anyway .... examples: I go to staff meetings, write
answers to this post, chat about another project plan for 15 minutes ...
If you want to get very subtle about it, in additon to the extended task
duration, then also use a resource contour. Say you have a task that is 32
hours (4 days). So, set the duration to 5 days, then manually adjust the
resource countour to reflect 8-8-8-8-0 or similar while keeping duration
constant. Now you show 100% utilization (a sin in my opinion), and get nice
Gantt bars with no gaps. Sneaky.
them. On Wiley's post, I 100% disagree with Method 3 since that just doesn't
play in my world at all.
To appropriately hide a task buffer you could simply increase the task
duration keeping the amount of work fixed. That way, the Gantt chart shows
the nice solid bars with no gaps. If management says "But your resources are
only allocated 80%" then you argue that the resources would never really
spend more time than that anyway .... examples: I go to staff meetings, write
answers to this post, chat about another project plan for 15 minutes ...
If you want to get very subtle about it, in additon to the extended task
duration, then also use a resource contour. Say you have a task that is 32
hours (4 days). So, set the duration to 5 days, then manually adjust the
resource countour to reflect 8-8-8-8-0 or similar while keeping duration
constant. Now you show 100% utilization (a sin in my opinion), and get nice
Gantt bars with no gaps. Sneaky.
D
dee
Thanks for your input and advice. Sneaky, but great idea! 
Will definitely try!
Will definitely try!
D
dee
If I understand it correctly, you go to, say Resource Usage, and manually
change the number of hours per day?
When I put a 0, it shows the ..... in Gantt view, but if I put, say, 1
minute, it's OK.
Is that what you meant?
change the number of hours per day?
When I put a 0, it shows the ..... in Gantt view, but if I put, say, 1
minute, it's OK.
Is that what you meant?
S
Steve House
I'm not a fan of either using a buffer or of using lags to achieve the same
result All either one does is give an exaggerated estimate of the time
required and the only practical reason to do that is to avoid the
embarrassment of having to admit to the boss that a task is taking longer
than estimated. Concentrate instead on making the estimating process as
accurate as you can and go in with the understanding from the start that
some actuals will be more and others will be less than the estimates called
for. You've heard the adage "Work expands to fill the time allotted to it."
Well, it's definitely true. If you habitually add a 2 day buffer to a task
estimated at say 10 days, and so the plan calls for 12 days, odds are it
will take pretty close to 12 days. If you'd forgot about adding the buffer
and published the plan calling for the 10 days you'd really estimated, you'd
probably have gotten closer to 10.
result All either one does is give an exaggerated estimate of the time
required and the only practical reason to do that is to avoid the
embarrassment of having to admit to the boss that a task is taking longer
than estimated. Concentrate instead on making the estimating process as
accurate as you can and go in with the understanding from the start that
some actuals will be more and others will be less than the estimates called
for. You've heard the adage "Work expands to fill the time allotted to it."
Well, it's definitely true. If you habitually add a 2 day buffer to a task
estimated at say 10 days, and so the plan calls for 12 days, odds are it
will take pretty close to 12 days. If you'd forgot about adding the buffer
and published the plan calling for the 10 days you'd really estimated, you'd
probably have gotten closer to 10.