Linking Multiple Tasks to Milestone

[dee]

I normally link sub-tasks within a summary to each other, and use a milestone
as the first and last tasks, so that I can link the last milestone within a
summary to the first milestone in the next phase (groups of tasks within a
summary).

I think this is correct and seems to work well.

However, in looking at various Project templates, including those furnished
by Microsoft, I have noticed that often the way they work is with an ending
milestone within each phase (no beginning milestone), linking each and every
task within a phase to the ending milestone within it (even though tasks
within the phase are linked). The ending milestone then simply links to the
first task in the next phase.

Is there any reason to have so many links to the ending milestone?
Shouldn't the tasks be linked together and the last task in a phase be lnked
to the ending milestone? Is it necessary/recommended that each phase have a
beginning milestone?

Thanks so much for any advice!

 

[Jack Dahlgren]

Dee,

In the case you describe, the links are indeed redundant and can be deleted.
However, there are many cases where the tasks under a summary task do not
have real dependencies between each other. I think that in creating a
template, they decided to keep the redundant dependencies believing that
some people will delete some of the task to task dependencies. In this case
the task to milestone dependencies would already be there and the schedule
will still be well-formed without additional work.

There is no harm in redundant dependencies from a mechanical point of view,
but I find that they clutter things up so personally I avoid them. Both
approaches have advantages so it is impossible to make a blanket
recommendation.

-Jack Dahlgren

 

[dee]

Your answer makes perfect sense. Thank you so much - I really like things
clarified in order to truly understand them!

Thanks again.
--
Thanks!

Dee

Dee,

In the case you describe, the links are indeed redundant and can be deleted.
However, there are many cases where the tasks under a summary task do not
have real dependencies between each other. I think that in creating a
template, they decided to keep the redundant dependencies believing that
some people will delete some of the task to task dependencies. In this case
the task to milestone dependencies would already be there and the schedule
will still be well-formed without additional work.

There is no harm in redundant dependencies from a mechanical point of view,
but I find that they clutter things up so personally I avoid them. Both
approaches have advantages so it is impossible to make a blanket
recommendation.

-Jack Dahlgren

 

[dee]

Hi Trevor,

Thanks for your response. Is there one or another that is recommended, or
neither?! I have also read about just one milestone at the beginning of the
project and one at the end to pick up any tasksk that aren't linked.

Or does it totally depend on your project plan?

Thanks!

 

[Mike Glen]

Hi Trevor,

To add another view - it depends on what sort of reporting you need! I'm
generally in favour of milestones where they add clarity to your project
shape. Remember you can filter on milestones and thus get a useful potted
plan. Too many milestones clutter the picture, too few don't convey the
complications. I would initially stray towards too many as they can very
simple be deleted later if necessary.

Mike Glen
MS Project MVP
See http://tinyurl.com/2xbhc for Project Tutorials