MS Project should natively support creating and tracking the WBS

[Eric van Gemeren]

The WBS is one of the most important and often overlooked tools in
project management. For large, complex project it is the key to
sucessfully managing scope and tracking progress. So, why is it so
difficult to create and manage a WBS in MS Project?

With Project 2002 the COM add-in worked great ... it allowed you to
export the tasks into a Visio file which produced an org chart-like tree
structure. In Project 2003, this functionality got buried into a single
button on the "analysis" toolbar. With deep regret, this functionality seems
to have been completely left out of the Beta 2 versions of both Project Pro
and Visio Pro just released
last week.

Why?

If MS Project wants to increase its appeal to professional project managers,
it needs to re-think how it supports the WBS as a key management tool


----------------
This post is a suggestion for Microsoft, and Microsoft responds to the
suggestions with the most votes. To vote for this suggestion, click the "I
Agree" button in the message pane. If you do not see the button, follow this
link to open the suggestion in the Microsoft Web-based Newsreader and then
click "I Agree" in the message pane.

http://www.microsoft.com/office/com...aa56-c45fabfebcb9&dg=microsoft.public.project

 

[davegb]

The WBS is one of the most important and often overlooked tools in
project management. For large, complex project it is the key to
sucessfully managing scope and tracking progress. So, why is it so
difficult to create and manage a WBS in MS Project?

I guess I'm missing something. It seems that you believe that a WBS has
to be in Org Chart format to be useful. I find the outline format in
the table, next to the Gantt, works just fine. There are some
advantages to having it in Org Chart format, but nothing I'm aware of
that's terribly important. I'd certainly stress the importance of the
Network Diagram, which practically no one uses these days, over the Org
Chart version of the WBS.

With Project 2002 the COM add-in worked great ... it allowed you to
export the tasks into a Visio file which produced an org chart-like tree
structure. In Project 2003, this functionality got buried into a single
button on the "analysis" toolbar. With deep regret, this functionality seems
to have been completely left out of the Beta 2 versions of both Project Pro
and Visio Pro just released
last week.

Haven't seen the new version yet. But since it's in there, I'm not sure
what the problem is.

Why?

If MS Project wants to increase its appeal to professional project managers,
it needs to re-think how it supports the WBS as a key management tool

What are you suggesting? A bigger button? What is it that you need to
use WBS effectively that isn't there?

 

[Eric van Gemeren]

As a professional project manager working with teams of more than 100 people
and budgets more than $1B USD, I could not establish and maintain control
over my project without this simple tool.

For large projects involving a distributed team (especially those that are
not experienced in project management), the WBS when expressed in org
chart-like format is an exceptionally useful tool for communicating project
scope, structure, and progress. Furthermore, in this format it is much
easier to track meta-data that is not relevant in a Gantt chart - things like
change history, last update, risk identification, documentation, etc.

The WBS is the single-most important element of project management. It
serves as the single document for capturing and tracking project scope
(including changes), and serves as the coordinating point for document
management, risk management, action item tracking, and progress reporting.
Given its role, every best-in-class project management tool set and
methodology (primavera, Planisware OPX-2, Kepner Tregoe, PMI, etc.) start
with the definition and maintenance of the WBS. Therefore, relegating the
WBS to the left-hand column of a Gantt chart is simply insufficient.

To get an idea of what I am talking about, go check out WBS Chart Pro
(http://www.criticaltools.com/wbsmain.htm).

Now, with respect to the functionality in Project 2003 - have you actually
tried this? It is a one-way export that provides very limited functionality
in terms of what can be displayed on the chart, and it is very hard to work
with.

WIth respect to Project 2007 - THIS FUNCTIONALITY IS GONE ALTOGETHER. It is
not a metter of making the "button bigger" ... you simply can not do it at
all (unless you can tell me that this functionality has been moved somewhere
else that I have not yet discovered).

FOr more information - do not check out software websites ... go check out
the professional project management organizations. I personnaly suggest the
Project Management Institue (www.PMI.org). See what they have to say about
the WBS.

 

[davegb]

As a professional project manager working with teams of more than 100 people
and budgets more than $1B USD, I could not establish and maintain control
over my project without this simple tool.

For large projects involving a distributed team (especially those that are
not experienced in project management), the WBS when expressed in org
chart-like format is an exceptionally useful tool for communicating project
scope, structure, and progress. Furthermore, in this format it is much
easier to track meta-data that is not relevant in a Gantt chart - things like
change history, last update, risk identification, documentation, etc.

The WBS is the single-most important element of project management. It
serves as the single document for capturing and tracking project scope
(including changes), and serves as the coordinating point for document
management, risk management, action item tracking, and progress reporting.
Given its role, every best-in-class project management tool set and
methodology (primavera, Planisware OPX-2, Kepner Tregoe, PMI, etc.) start
with the definition and maintenance of the WBS. Therefore, relegating the
WBS to the left-hand column of a Gantt chart is simply insufficient.

I absolutely agree with you if you bundle scope, risk management,
document management, tracking, and all reporting as part of the WBS.
I've never considered everything in the project as part of the WBS. In
your parlance, it certainly is just about everything.
If you consider MS Project best-in-class, then I'd guess you'd be
dissappointed.

To get an idea of what I am talking about, go check out WBS Chart Pro
(http://www.criticaltools.com/wbsmain.htm).

I'm very familar with Critical Tools, have reccommended them to many
clients over the years and helped to install and implement them many
times.

Now, with respect to the functionality in Project 2003 - have you actually
tried this? It is a one-way export that provides very limited functionality
in terms of what can be displayed on the chart, and it is very hard to work
with.

WIth respect to Project 2007 - THIS FUNCTIONALITY IS GONE ALTOGETHER. It is
not a metter of making the "button bigger" ... you simply can not do it at
all (unless you can tell me that this functionality has been moved somewhere
else that I have not yet discovered).

FOr more information - do not check out software websites ... go check out
the professional project management organizations. I personnaly suggest the
Project Management Institue (www.PMI.org). See what they have to say about
the WBS.

I'm also quite familar with PMI and the PIMBOK.

We just have different terminology. I consider the WBS to be the Work
Breakdown Structure. You consider it to be the Work Breakdown
Structure, Risk Management Plan, Tracking Tool, WBS Dictionary, Scope,
Change Management and about a dozen other things I know by different
names. Just not sure why you didn't include schedule in all that!

Have a nice day.

 

[robgr]

I emphatically agree with Eric on this issue. The problem is that most
project managers confuse the WBS and the schedule with the belief that the
WBS is the schedule, or that it is the left side of a Gantt chart. As the
PMBOK correctly shows, the WBS is not a Time Mgmt tool. The WBS is a scope
management tool because its primary purpose is to completely identify the
project scope in addition to serving as input into just about every other
facet of project management including, time management (schedule),
communications, risk, and HR management to name a few.

The 100% percent rule of the WBS quite often confuses many people into
believing that the WBS will contain every single task-which is what usually
happens when using MSP as the WBS creation tool. Tasks should not necessarily
show in the WBS. Many times the most appropriate way of creating a WBS is to
create one that is deliverable-oriented containing planned outcomes rather
than planned activities. The end of a branch in the WBS is referred to as a
Work Package (a package of work or tasks). We don't necessarily need to
detail these activities in the WBS, since the owner of that Work Package will
further decompose that WBS element into activities when creating the schedule.

Another important reason for the use of the WBS has to do with the human
visual system. Eric mentioned the importance of using the WBS as a
communication tool to share with project stakeholders “scope, structure, and
progressâ€. (Just think about all of those blank stares of stakeholders
looking at a MS Project representation of the WBS—more often than not, most
people will not admit that they don’t have the first clue of what they’re
looking at)

Information visualization is the name of a rapidly expanding discipline
being propelled by the Gestalt principles of perception as well as more
recent studies into human cognitive abilities. (See works by Edward Tufte or
Colin Ware)

Take the organization chart as an example. Why is this chart such a dominant
business artifact? Why can't we look at how the organization is structured
based on rows of data? (i.e. John reports to Sally who reports to Joe who
reports to Tom) The answer lies in how we are all commonly wired to perceive
information. For projects, the best way to analyze and communicate the work
of the project is through a WBS structured similar to an org. chart. At the
very core, it is a picture of the project's scope, and I'm sure there is
limited disagreement in the power of displaying information graphically.

I would go so far as to say that a majority of project failures are rooted
in the incorrect use of the WBS. We can’t leave it to Microsoft software
developers to dictate how project management should be carried out, which is
exactly what I see happening. Since MS Project is such a common application,
it is important for project managers to voice their concern over the lack of
support for such a simple, yet vital tool for project success.

Here’s an idea that I’ll through out there for Microsoft—acquire a company
such as Critical Tools.