Resource Allocation.

[CDR]

I have several tasks all available to start at the same time, all requiring
the same resource. They are summary tasks, with sub tasks below. Once I
start subtask1, I want to continue using the resource until I have finished
the last subtask for the summary.

If I assign the resource at the summary level, I am told that the resource
is overallocated, and that the overallocation cannot be resolved. I can skip
the allocation of that resource, or just stop leveling. Why won't the
resource be allocated to one of the tasks, and then allocated to the other
task when the first task is complete?

 

[Jim Aksel]

Although Project allows resources on summary tasks, it is extremely rare that
would be a good idea. Assign resources only to tasks. The same general rule
applies for predecessors and successors.

If you have Groups of summary tasks A, B, C with subordintes A1, A2... B1,
B2... you assign "Bob" to all the tasks and let leveling figure it out. You
can assign task priorities if you want A1...An to be complete before you
start B1.

In general, though, most people just set a predecessor on B1 as An (FS) so
the last task in A has to be complete before B1 starts. The reason is
resource availability. Although the predecssor is not strictily required, it
is the cheap solution to resource leveling.

Just stay away from assigning to the summary tasks -- that might be double
dipping.
--
If this post was helpful, please consider rating it.

Jim
It''s software; it''s not allowed to win.

Visit http://project.mvps.org/ for FAQs and more information
about Microsoft Project

 

[CDR]

When I assigned the resource at the "subtask" level, the allocation would
jump between the summary tasks (A1 then B1 then C1, then A2, B2, C2). Once I
start a summary task I want to complete all the subtasks under it. If A1 is
selected first to get the resource, then I want A2, A3, ... A"n", then B1 or
C1 or .... I didn't want to use priorities because I want Microsoft project
to figure out which summary task should be completed next.

Right now, the project is in the planning stages, and its pretty simple to
determine which part goes next. Once our program is underway, with
dcifferent engineers working on different tasks, different components
shippping in at different time, things get more complicated. If I defined
priorities now I am pretty much pre-determining the order in which the
summary tasks will be going.

Thanks for the prompt response. Any more suggestions?

 

[Jim Aksel]

I see what you are saying. This can be corrected by changing the Resolving
Overallocations.

Tools/Resource Leveling... In the Resolving Overallocations area, change
the Leveling Order drop down from Standard to "ID Only"
It will now level from top to bottom in task ID order and provide the anser
you want.

However, this makes the file structurually dependent. If you have summaries
A, B, C it is going to level them in that order. All of A will finish, then
B, then C. Fortunately you can drag the summary tasks around to change their
order if needed.
--
If this post was helpful, please consider rating it.

Jim
It''s software; it''s not allowed to win.

Visit http://project.mvps.org/ for FAQs and more information
about Microsoft Project

 

[Dave]

I see what you are saying. This can be corrected by changing the Resolving
Overallocations.

Tools/Resource Leveling... In the Resolving Overallocations area, change
the Leveling Order drop down from Standard to "ID Only"
It will now level from top to bottom in task ID order and provide the anser
you want.

However, this makes the file structurually dependent. If you have summaries
A, B, C it is going to level them in that order. All of A will finish, then
B, then C. Fortunately you can drag the summary tasks around to change their
order if needed.

A more flexible way of achieving this is to make the priority column
visible. Then you can enter the priority of each task and tell Project
how important the ordering of them is as it couldn't otherwise know this.

Dave

 

[CDR]

--
CDR

A more flexible way of achieving this is to make the priority column
visible. Then you can enter the priority of each task and tell Project
how important the ordering of them is as it couldn't otherwise know this.

Dave

Whether I use priorities or ID numbers to determine a task's order in using
the resource, either way I am the one determining the order of processing
when there is a competition for use of a resource. I want MS Project to
determine the order based on the criticality of the set of tasks I am trying
to schedule.

 

[crook]

--
CDR


Whether I use priorities or ID numbers to determine a task's order in using
the resource, either way I am the one determining the order of processing
when there is a competition for use of a resource. I want MS Project to
determine the order based on the criticality of the set of tasks I am trying
to schedule. - Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Hi CDR,

Assigning priority values to the tasks is exactly how MS Project will
know the criticality of tasks you are attempting to schedule.
Otherwise, how could the application know which tasks are critical?
It cannot know what you know unless it is told.

I like Jim's tagline, "It''s software; it''s not allowed to win."
IMO, it is also very, very stupid. It cannot think on its own (though
some programmers are trying to change that). Mostly, it does
*exactly* what it is told to do ... very, very quickly.

MS Project is incapable of building a schedule for you. But it will
help you manage your schedule.

HTH,
Crook

 

[Dave]

Whether I use priorities or ID numbers to determine a task's order in
using
the resource, either way I am the one determining the order of
processing
when there is a competition for use of a resource. I want MS Project
to
determine the order based on the criticality of the set of tasks I am
trying
to schedule.

Not sure what you mean by criticality. If by criticality, you mean the
importance of the task then you have to tell the application that somehow.

If you mean the degree by which it contributes to the critical path,
then I suppose you could devise some algorithm based on the amount of
slack it has or something.

 

[CDR]

I know that microsoft project is not capable of building a schedule. I have
built the schedule by defining tasks for approx 50 components, each having
design, analysis outside vendor procurement, and in house assembly. They
each feed into the final assembly at different times.

I have defined all the tasks, with unique task durations, relationships,
etc. As the project progresses and I am statusing the activities, I expect
microsoft project to determine which of the tasks that are competing for a
resource is the most critical and allocate the resource accordingly. I can
attempt to arrange the tasks in the order I think they should be worked at
the beginning of the project, but as time passes, the optimum processing
order will most probably change, based on current project (and component)
status. Isn't this part of the reason I am using a scheduling tool - so that
once I define network logic I do not have to recalculate each components
slack? CDR

 

[Jan De Messemaeker]

Hi,

Project does reschedule taking into account resources AND criticality, only
one thing it doesn't do (quote from your text) "allocate the resource".
Sorry, It doesn't. When you allocate the appropriate resoruce, it will
reschedule the plan putting the most critical TASKS first. It doesn't know
"criticality of resources". So indeed, when the optimum processing order
changes, it will detect that and propose a new order more fit to the
criticality but it will NOT change the resources allocated to the tasks,
only the "processing sequence".

Can I be of more help in this? Don't hesitate.

 

[Jan De Messemaeker]

Project's "Standard" priority is mainly based on the criticality of the task
(i.e. Total Slack)