Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Probability=pt
Technical Success
DevelopNew
Product
Probability=1pt
Commercial Success
(with net benefit =
NPV)
LaunchNew
Product
Probability=1pc
Commercial
Failure (with net
benefit = 0)
Technical Failure
Risk class 1
Risk class 2
0.3
Probability=pt
Development
Succeeds
Research&
Product
Development
Market
Development
0.2
Probability=1pt
Development Fails
Discount rate r1
0.5
Product Demand
Medium
Product Demand
Low
Drop project
Discount rate r2
Ranking/Scoring Models
Profit abilit y/value
1) Increaseinprofitability?
2) Increaseinmarketshare?
3) Willaddknowledgetoorganizationthatcanbeleveragedbyotherprojects?
4) EstimatedNPV,ECV,etc.
Organizat ion'sStrat egy
1) Consistentwithorganization'smissionstatement?
2) Impactoncustomers?
Risk
1) Probabilityofresearchbeingsuccessful?
2) Probabilityofdevelopmentbeingsuccessful?
3) Probabilityofprocesssuccess?
4) Probabilityofcommercialsuccess?
5) Overallriskofproject
6) Adequatemarketdemand?
7) Competitorsinmarket
Organizat ionCosts
1) Isnewfacilityneeded?
2) Canusecurrentpersonnel?
3) Externalconsultantsneeded?
4) Newhiresneeded?
MiscellaneousFactors
1) Impactonenvironmentalstandards?
2) Impactonworkforcesafety?
3) Impactonquality?
4) Social/politicalimplications
Scoring Attributes
To convert various measurement scales to a (0, 1) range.
LINEAR SCALE: value of attribute i is vi xi = xiL
UL
EXPONENTIAL SCALE: value of attribute i is vi xi =1exp Lxi .
1exp LU
1.00
0.90
A ttribute Value
0.80
0.70
0.60
Linear Scale
Exponential Scale
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
1
4
Response
Ranking/Scoring Example
Ranking/ScoringExample(contd)
Attribute
Project A
Project B
Project
Score (V j)
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
4
2
yes
no
likely
unsure
4
3
1
4
0.75
0.25
0.25
0.75
0
0.5
0.75
0.5
0
0.75
0.413
0.525
0.97
0.64
0.64
0.97
0.00
0.88
0.97
0.88
0.00
0.97
0.581
0.845
Linear Scale
Project A
Project B
Exponential Scale
Project A
Project B
Zero
High
ExpectedNPV
Low
ExtentofProductChange
ExtentofProcessChange
Stage-Gate Approach
Initiation
Define
Design
Initiation
Project Review
Charter
Work Statement
Risk Assessment
Purchasing Plan
Change Mgt
Detail Design
Schedule & Budget
Contingency Plan
Product &
Performance Reviews
Improve
Installation Plan
Facility Prep
Training Plan
Implementation
Control
Production close-out
Lessons learned
Post-project audit
Source:PACCARInformationTechnologyDivision
Renton,WA
Y e a r (t)
2
Project A
($40)
$10
$20
$20
Project B
Budget
Limit (B t )
($65)
($25)
$50
$50
$120
$20
$40
$55
Project scheduling
u
u
u
u
Summary statement
Work breakdown structure
Organization plan
risk management
Subcontracting and bidding process
Time and schedule
Project budget
Resource allocation
Equipment and material purchases
Project Planning
n
Summary Statement
u
u
u
u
u
Organization Plan
u
u
u
u
u
u
Design of a WBS
The usual mistake PMs make is to lay out too many tasks;
subdividing the major achievements into smaller and
smaller subtasks until the work breakdown structure
(WBS) is a to do list of one-hour chores. Its easy to get
caught up in the idea that a project plan should detail
everything everybody is going to do on the project. This
springs from the screwy logic that a project managers job
is to walk around with a checklist of 17,432 items and tick
each item off as people complete them.
The Hampton Group (1996)
Two-Level WBS
WBS level 1
WBS level 2
1.1Event
Planning
1.CharityAuction
1.2Item
Procurement
1.3Marketing
1.4.Corporate
Sponsorships
Three-Level WBS
1.CharityAuction
WBS level 1
WBS level 2
1.1Event
Planning
1.1.1HireAuctioneer
WBS level 3
1.2Item
Procurement
1.3Marketing
1.4Corporate
Sponsorships
1.2.1Silent
auctionitems
1.3.1Individual
ticketsales
1.2.2Liveauction
items
1.3.2Advertising
1.1.2.Rentspace
1.1.3Arrangefor
decorations
1.2.3Raffleitems
1.1.4Printcatalog
Beta Distribution
Probabilitydensity
function
Completiontimeoftaskj
Time
OptimisticTimetoj
Expectedduration=
MostLikelyTime=tm
PessimisticTimetpj
Beta Distribution
For each task j, we must make three estimates:
toj most optimistic time
tpj toj 2
2
Varianceoftaskj=j =
36
min
25
25
12
44
7
1
2
27
30
13
59
44
15
6
54
13
hours
31
19
26
30
25
24
32
32
13
42
22
32
32
27
26
21
min
52
15
27
27
21
28
58
1
43
45
57
15
31
15
11
52
Top
Management
Project Manager
Subcontractors
Project Team
Regulating
Organizations
Functional
Managers
To the client
Communicate in timely and accurate manner
Provide information and control on changes/modifications
Maintain quality standards
To the subcontractors
Provide information on overall project status
Project Team
What is a project team?
A group of people committed to achieve a
common set of goals for which they hold
themselves mutually accountable
Diverse backgrounds/skills
Able to work together effectively/develop synergy
Usually small number of people
Have sense of accountability as a unit
Idesignuserinterfacestopleaseanaudienceofone.
Iwritethemforme.IfImhappy,Iknowsomecool
peoplewilllikeit.Designinguserinterfacesby
committeedoesnotworkverywell;theyneedtobe
coherent.Asforschedule,Imnotinterestedin
schedules;didanyonecarewhenWarandPeacecame
out?
Developer,MicrosoftCorporation
AsreportedbyMacCormackandHerman,HBRCase9600097:
MicrosoftOffice2000
Intra-team Communication
M = Number of project team members
L = Number of links between pairs of team members
If M =2, then L = 1
If M =3, then L = 3
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
N(N1)
L=NumberofIntrateamLinks= N =
2
2
29
27
25
23
21
19
17
15
13
11
0
1
400
Importance of Communication
On the occasion of a migration from the east, men discovered a
plain in the land of Shinar, and said to one another, Come, let
us build ourselves a city with a tower whose top shall reach the
heavens. The Lord said, Come, let us go down, and there
make such a babble of their language that they will not
understand one anothers speech. Thus, the Lord dispersed
them from there all over the earth, so that they had to stop
building the city.
Genesis 11: 1-8
Group Harmony
Group Decision Making Effectiveness
Extent of Individuals Contributions to Group
Individual Attributes
*Brown, K., T.D. Klastorin, & J. Valluzzi. Project Management
Performance: A Comparison of Team Characteristics, IEEE Transactions on
Engineering Management, Vol 37, No. 2 (May, 1990), pp. 117-125.
Group Harmony
5.60
5.40
5.20
5.00
4.80
4.60
4.40
4.20
4.00
1
Week
High Performance (low cost) Teams
6.00
5.80
5.60
5.40
5.20
5.00
4.80
4.60
4.40
4.20
4.00
1
Week
High Performance (low cost) Teams
6.00
5.50
5.00
4.50
4.00
3.50
3.00
1
Week
High Performance (low cost) Teams