Hello
I understand your problem. I’m an IT manager, and I’ve planned several
projects where tasks, although not on the critical path, needed some
form of prioritisation.
The approach I’ve usually take is to view the non-critical tasks as if
they were critical, and analyse them accordingly.
I set up a matrix for each task, usually a table with tasks listed
down the left and columns for my main analysis criteria. Unlike
critical path (i.e. dependant) criteria that concentrate on the effect
on the plan as a whole, I categorise the non-critical by softer, more
human factors (So, if you like to look at it a different way, rather
than assess impact of the tasks on a plan, I’m assessing impact on the
people.)
I try to stick to three or four factors, all ranked one to three. In
its simplest form it looks like this
I ask the people involved on the project (and it’s OK if there’s only
one or 101) to assess the following for each task
Comfort factor ( C )
Question: How happy would you be if the task didn’t happen at all
1. Very unhappy
2. Slightly unhappy
3. It wouldn’t bother me
Desirability factor ( D )
Question: How much do you need (as opposed to want) the task to happen
1. Great need
2. Slight need
3. No real need
Efficiency factor ( E )
Question: Will this task allow you to do your job better
1. Definitely
2. Probably
3. Maybe
So, your table would look like this:
TASK C D E TOTAL
Buy a car 1 3 3 9
Take a trip 2 2 2 8
Add a new room 3 2 1 6
The final column is a total of the scores multiplied together. The
lower the score, the higher the priority you should place on the task
eg in the above, adding a new room should come first, then taking a
trip, then buying a car.
I have also used this situation in more complicated cases. Where there
are a lot of tasks covering a wide range of types of activities, I
have asked the people who perform the tasks what is more important to
them - Comfort, Desirability or Efficiency. Depending on their
ranking, I have added weighting factors in the form of another table
eg, in the case where Comfort is rated higher than Desirability which
is rated higher than Efficiency, I’ve assigned them values of 3,4,5.
I’ve then recalculated the table by adding a new level of
multiplication (W)
eg in your example
TASK C D E W TOTAL
Buy a car 1 3 3 3 27
Take a trip 2 2 2 4 32
Add a new room 3 2 1 5 30
You can now see that "Buy a Car" has assumed the highest priority, due
to the fact that comfort and desirability were rated higher than
efficiency.
Of course this is all subjective, but as long as you are consistent,
and as long as everyone on the project agrees with any assumptions
made, this is a viable means of assessing non-critical tasks, and it
works in practice.
That’s the basics.
There are several things you can do to increase your understanding of
the priorities. You can
- add more questions and therefore more columns in your table
- add more possible replies to each question, and therefore a possible
higher range of values in your table
- modify the weighting factors as necessary for the plan as a whole
- Add a "Risk" weighting factor as to how risky the task is
- take into consideration the "float" for each task. ( ie Identify
the best-possible-start time you want for each task, Identify the
latest-possible-finish time Purely by identifying the "float" (the
time difference between them) for each task, you can prioritise on
putting tasks with small amounts of float first., or decide to do them
based on latest-possible-finish , leaving the possible late finishers
to the end of your task list, or you can add the Float Days as a
multiplicand in your table. (Doing this will weigh your results
towards tasks with small amounts of float, which may be something
you’d want.)
And of course, the questions themselves can change. I have also used
the following questions, on a more technical project
Comfort factor ( C )
Question: What effect would there be on your function if the task
didn’t happen at all
1. High effect
2. Medium Effect
3. Low Effect
Desirability factor ( D )
Question: How much do you need the functionality the task will provide
1. Great need
2. Slight need
3. No real need
Efficiency factor ( E )
Question: Will this task allow the system to function more efficiently
1. Definitely
2. Probably
3. Maybe
And they don’t have to be about Comfort, Desirability and Efficiency,
(although I’ve found the three names concentrate the minds of both the
questioner and the answerer) You can probably see scenarios where you
can make up your own questions.
Eg, in your own case, you might have questions like
- Will it relax me
- Will it improve my quality of life
- would it increase my standing in my community
etc
All you have to remember is to have the answer the right way round -
if they increase priority they should be valued lower ( e,g.
Definitely increasing efficiency is valued 1 ) , if they have a lower
effect on priority, they should be valued higher (e.g. no real need
for functionality is valued 3
I have used this system on large projects with task lists of over 200
tasks, and on small projects with task lists no more than five or six
items long. It works on both.
(And I’ve also found it useful to use in standard projects at an early
stage, to give a view of the flat requirements before starting any
path analysis)
Most of this is from personal usage and experience from 20 years on IT
and Systems projects, but I’ve provided some links below that cover
general task management material
A great article on Critical Path Analysis, with a good description on
the use of Float (or Slack), as they call it)
http://www-distance.syr.edu/edu5900cpa.html
Many free project planning/project management templates
Project Connections
http://www.projectconnections.com/knowhow/template_list/subjects/pmskills.html
An nice concise overview of Critical Path Analysis
http://www.credit-to-cash.com/small_business/project-planning-critical-path-2.shtml
Google Search Strategy
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22Project+Planning%22+%22non-critical+path%22 |
,
0 Comments
)