Re: Resource overutilization

On Mon, 2003-04-21 at 17:15, Sasan Iman wrote:
> I don't think assigning to less than  100% would solve the problem. If I
> have to manually identify the overlapped time, then I can schedule it
> manually as well. The goal is to remove the necessity to manually
> identify the overlapped time (region of over-utilization) and also
> remove the need to rework the schedule because of changes in earlier
> parts. Even if I did manually assign less than 100%, then when schedule
> changes, I still need to go back and modify the percentages again. Not
> very convenient.

Maybe I don't fully understand you, but it seems to me that if you're
identifying tasks that can be overlapped, you're essentially reducing
the % allocations of resources on those tasks, but it sounds like you
want to do it in a more flexible/automated way so you don't have to
manage the allocations on individual tasks yourself.  Is that correct?

The most common approach to resource leveling involves the use of the
'minimum slack' rule.  Under this rule, tasks along the critical path
are given priority in terms of resource allocations.  Tasks with
successively more slack are examined to see which can be moved or
extended to meet the objectives within the given constraints.  

Using this method, you don't need to assign a priority to each task
manually, since that amount of slack does that for you.

The project manager can exercise control over the leveling by manually
allocating people at less than 100%, or by bringing in/reassigning
resources to different tasks.

Sasan, your proposed method might work just as well, its just not one of
the more common ways of doing it.
-- 
Kurt Maute <[email protected]>