Re: [Planner Dev] Duration Calculation

[Andrew De Ponte <cyphactor socal rr com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Kurt Maute wrote:
> I wouldn't implement resource leveling this way.  What I would do is
> give priority to the tasks along the critical path, so that if there is
> a resource conflict, the resource would be given to the task that's on
> the critical path, and the one that's not would show a delayed
> completion date.

Yep, your way is a much more robust way of handling such conflicts.

> For conflicts among tasks that are either both on the critical path or
> both not on the critical path, I would give priority to the task with
> the lower WBS number, since most PMs that I know put the tasks that
> generally should go first higher in the WBS.  To allow the user to
> override this, I'd let them use the priority field.

Sounds good to me.

> To allow a team member to work on more than one task at a time, you'd
> have to manually adjust their allocation percentage as you have in this
> case, and I think that's an appropriate way to handle many conflicts,
> but very difficult to get a machine to make those decisions for you.

I agree. I can see that it would be very difficult. Beyond that it only
works if you start with an assumption that the resources can't be over
allocated, and this is an unacceptable assumption from my perspective.

- --Andrew
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEfvygVroBBszP8ekRAmgEAKCtkE/VRbD8uhTRP+tUNJfPOvlbogCgkJT7
gsYu5L/Z04P8QF6k/8ZtX1M=
=v6SJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----