S
St Dilbert
Dear community,
I'm currently working on writing up a few recommendations ("best
practices" sounding too ambitious for the deliverable) on how to use MS
Project really easy and still adhere to core earned value concepts.
Target audience is mainly first-time PMs from the business, medium
sized and medium speed projects. Really quite simple plans.
Two assumptions about how MS Project 2003 is designed:
1) to employ earned value concepts with MSP you should use "physical %
complete", set the earned value method to "physical % complete" in
default or all the activites I want to track with EV.
2) in the tracking Gantt (as in all other "Gantt-type" views) Project
will display activity-related data. I.e. duration-related, i.e. "%
complete" related. Progress lines will be "% complete" related and
there is no way to change that.
Here's my problem:
though quite simple in concept, it's hard enough to get non-hardcore
users to appreciate the basics of earned value (3 INDEPENDENT values)
and explaining the tracking Gantt view with baseline, actuals, current
schedule and progress line. Sometimes I do get this far. When I'm
getting into using analysis tables for earned value and not looking at
the tracking Gantt and why there are three different % complete I'm
loosing them again.
Here's my current idea of solving this:
On Tools/Options/Calculation UNcheck "Actual costs are always
calculated by MSP". Explain Earned Value, the tracking Gantt and show
how to set "% complete" and enter "Actual cost" separately; enjoy...
Here's my question:
this way of reducing complexity while retaining the earned value core
(passing time and spending money does not equal delivering results)
works for my target group. But what about the future when freshly
EVM-converted junior PMs start exploring the richer features of MSP? Is
there a natural breaking point where this simplification wears out and
we need to switch to using "physical % complete" as designed? Can it
really be that simple or are my assumptions wrong anyway?
Looking forward to your feedback!
I'm currently working on writing up a few recommendations ("best
practices" sounding too ambitious for the deliverable) on how to use MS
Project really easy and still adhere to core earned value concepts.
Target audience is mainly first-time PMs from the business, medium
sized and medium speed projects. Really quite simple plans.
Two assumptions about how MS Project 2003 is designed:
1) to employ earned value concepts with MSP you should use "physical %
complete", set the earned value method to "physical % complete" in
default or all the activites I want to track with EV.
2) in the tracking Gantt (as in all other "Gantt-type" views) Project
will display activity-related data. I.e. duration-related, i.e. "%
complete" related. Progress lines will be "% complete" related and
there is no way to change that.
Here's my problem:
though quite simple in concept, it's hard enough to get non-hardcore
users to appreciate the basics of earned value (3 INDEPENDENT values)
and explaining the tracking Gantt view with baseline, actuals, current
schedule and progress line. Sometimes I do get this far. When I'm
getting into using analysis tables for earned value and not looking at
the tracking Gantt and why there are three different % complete I'm
loosing them again.
Here's my current idea of solving this:
On Tools/Options/Calculation UNcheck "Actual costs are always
calculated by MSP". Explain Earned Value, the tracking Gantt and show
how to set "% complete" and enter "Actual cost" separately; enjoy...
Here's my question:
this way of reducing complexity while retaining the earned value core
(passing time and spending money does not equal delivering results)
works for my target group. But what about the future when freshly
EVM-converted junior PMs start exploring the richer features of MSP? Is
there a natural breaking point where this simplification wears out and
we need to switch to using "physical % complete" as designed? Can it
really be that simple or are my assumptions wrong anyway?
Looking forward to your feedback!