Skip to main content

Flaws in CPM

In my last entry, I wrote about critical path analysis. Fundamental to the concept is the analysis and documentation of dependencies among the tasks required to complete a project. The concept is important to executives and product teams, because it forms the basis for scheduling the development and release of the product.

The key flaw with using critical path method for scheduling is that planners (e.g. project managers) misuse it. Let's see what Wikipedia says about it:

"Originally, the critical path method considered only logical dependencies among terminal elements."
The problem arises when planners try to convert a critical path diagram (CPD) directly into a schedule by superimposing a timeline on the diagram. This kind of CPD may yield a best-case schedule, but projects of substance almost never progress accordingly.

First, you can't anticipate with any level of certainty the effort and time required to complete tasks. For example, how long will it take the user interface programmers to finish the UI for a software product? You can only make an educated guess.

Second, you can't easily and accurately model the collaboration among different members of the team. An effective product development effort requires a great deal of interaction among the product manager, developers, testers, and even marcom and sales. Tasks and roles tend to blend together much more than a CPD can convey.

Third, you can't anticipate the requirements discoveries that will take place. It might be that prospective customers say, "Oh yeah, I forgot to tell you about this other problem I have." Or it might be that a competitor releases a product that renders your product obsolete unless you significantly enhance it. These requirements discoveries will, in turn, render your CPD obsolete.

Fourth, you can't predict the logistical and architectural challenges that will arise. You may find a critical bug in the software tools you're using to develop the product. Or a subcontractor may suddenly go out of business.

Fifth, you can't predict the integration problems that will occur. You eventually have to integrate the deliverables resulting from the disparate tasks. It is difficult to anticipate how long it will take to integrate these pieces.

Understanding the anticipated dependencies using critical path analysis can be useful for identifying what went wrong. However, a CPD on a timeline does not allow for nimble adjustments. Nimble adjustments require an agile approach to scheduling.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Spreadsheets Suck for Prioritizing

The Goal As a company executive, you want confidence that your product team (which includes all the people, from all departments, responsible for product success) has a sound basis for deciding which items are on the product roadmap. You also want confidence the team is prioritizing the items in a smart way. What Should We Prioritize? The items the team prioritizes could be features, user stories, epics, market problems, themes, or experiments. Melissa Perri  makes an excellent case for a " problem roadmap ", and, in general, I recommend focusing on the latter types of items. However, the topic of what types of items you should prioritize - and in what situations - is interesting and important but beyond the scope of this blog entry. A Sad but Familiar Story If there is significant controversy about priorities, then almost inevitably, a product manager or other member of the team decides to put together The Spreadsheet. I've done it. Some of the mos

Interaction Design: the Neglected Skill

Your product development organization has a big, gaping hole in it. (Be prepared to feel defensive as you continue reading.) One of the most important roles in product development is the role of interaction designer. An interaction designer designs how the users will interact with the product and conceptualize the tasks they perform. He decides whether, for example, the user interface will be command driven, object oriented (clicking on objects then specifying what to do with them), or wizard based. The interaction designer decides the individual steps in the use cases. Every company has one or more people that play the interaction designer role. Usually, those people have little or no expertise in interaction design. Sadly, they typically don't even realize how unqualified they are. Let's see who typically plays the role at companies. Engineer . An engineer is an expert on building what is designed. Yes, an engineer may know how to design the internal structure of the hardware

Is Customer Development Pseudoscience?

The “Science” of Lean Startup Lean startup practitioners embrace the scientific method, seeking the "truth" about what business model and strategy will lead to product success. We do so by: Formulating hypotheses Crafting and running experiments to test them Learning from the experiments Iteratively feeding our learnings back into revised hypotheses Sounds pretty scientific, at least in spirit, doesn't it? Yet this process actually neglects a key ingredient in the scientists' mode of operation. To identify what’s missing, let’s examine “customer development”. Customer Development Steve Blank is one of the pioneers of the lean startup movement. He introduced into the lean startup lexicon the term “customer development”. Customer development consists of sessions and interactions with customers to test hypotheses. For example, a product manager might interview a prospect, asking if she agrees with the product manager’s hypotheses about the problem