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

Use Case as a Black Box

Consider the following use case: Purchase Items Actor: Purchaser Precondition: Purchaser types at least thirty words per minute and has a web navigation efficiency rating of at least 40. Postcondition: For the average Purchaser acting at full efficiency, the number of seconds elapsed is no more than 30 + 20 * n, where n is the number of items purchased. The name of the use case represents a functional requirement. What does the product do, or enable the user to do? Purchase items. What are we to make of the preconditions and postconditions? What relationship do they have to the requirements for the product? Answer: the preconditions and postconditions are the nonfunctional requirements attached to the functional requirement . Another way of expressing the nonfunctional requirement would be as an attribute and associated constraint: Usability: For a Purchaser who types at least thirty words per minute and has a web navigation efficiency rating of at least 40, it shall take no

Henry Ford's "Faster Horse" Quote

You may have heard the ( apocryphal ) Henry Ford quote: If I'd asked customers what they wanted, they would have said "a faster horse". Over at the On Product Management blog , Saeed gives his take on this infamous quote. He "hates" it, and gives some compelling reasons. Saeed is spot on in his explanations. Personally, I think the quote is great, but it's a matter of interpretation. The valid point of the quote is not that it's a bad idea to facilitate a conversation with your market to better understand it. The valid points are: You must ask the right questions to get valuable answers. You must interpret the answers thoughtfully - often outside their direct meaning - to glean reliable information. Asking questions is not always the best way to "listen" to your market. (E.g., sometimes pure observational studies are more reliable.) Nonetheless, I find the quote is helpful to combat "armchair product management" in the