Discussion:
Late Dates incorrect after indenting under Summary Task
(too old to reply)
Sean
2005-02-18 14:35:16 UTC
Permalink
Many of you know there is a "bug" in MS Project that affects the late dates
and backward pass.

If you indent a group of tasks under the summary task the late dates for
that group are changed by the summary task. A weird problem that only
surfaces when calculating total slack and the backward pass.

I've heard of some people using MSO/MFO anchors at the end of thier network
to solve this. Does anybody else have a solution. My company (a rather
large one) has submitted this to Microsoft and they acknowledge that it is a
bug, but aren't planning on fixing it anytime soon.

Please advise.

Sean
JackD
2005-02-18 19:17:11 UTC
Permalink
It is not entirely clear what you are talking about or what sort of advice
you are looking for.

Total slack is calculated whenever the schedule is recalculated (for those
who have calculation set to automatic - like me) a recalc occurs every time
a change is made to a schedule duration or link so to say it only occurs
when this happens is to assert that it occurs constantly.

There are some issues with linking to summary tasks, but I don't know that
I'd characterize them as a bug. Perhaps if you can give a more concrete idea
of what you are trying to say and some steps to reproduce it someone here
can help.

What is your problem specifically?
--
-Jack ... For project information and macro examples visit
http://masamiki.com/project

.
Post by Sean
Many of you know there is a "bug" in MS Project that affects the late dates
and backward pass.
If you indent a group of tasks under the summary task the late dates for
that group are changed by the summary task. A weird problem that only
surfaces when calculating total slack and the backward pass.
I've heard of some people using MSO/MFO anchors at the end of thier network
to solve this. Does anybody else have a solution. My company (a rather
large one) has submitted this to Microsoft and they acknowledge that it is a
bug, but aren't planning on fixing it anytime soon.
Please advise.
Sean
Steve House [MVP]
2005-02-19 13:24:57 UTC
Permalink
I'm not aware of any "bug" like you're describing. The total slack time of
a task is the amount of time it could be delayed without delaying the
project finish, in a nutshell. Imagine Summary Task A with subtasks A1
(3d), A2 (4d), & A3 (5d). The subtasks are not linked so they occur in
parallel, all starting the same day. Summary task A links to Summary X FS
and Summary X in turn links FS to the Finish milestone. What are the late
dates of A1, A2, & A3? Summary A's finish is determined by A3 so the late
date of A3 and Summary A are the same. Only if Summary A is delayed past
that point will Summary X be delayed, hence that is also the latest date it
can finish without delaying the project's finish. The late finishes of A1
and A2 are also that same date as A3 (which is also the late finish of
Summary A), since they could slip by 2 or 1 day respectively before they
delay the finish of Summary A. I think that is what you're describing in
your posting but where's the bug in that? That is exactly the way late
starts and late finishes are supposed to be calculated and that's the way
project does calculate them. And this is even with linking between the
summary tasks, which is often considered a bad idea. The alternative
linking would have A1, A2, and A3 all as predecessors to X1 and no links
directly in or out of the summary tasks themselves but the results are
exactly the same.

If I'm missing something here, please give us some concrete example that
demonstrates what you consider to be this bug - what Project gives you and
what you think it should be giving you instead (and why you feel Project is
wrong and your way is right). I'm really curious.
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Sean
Many of you know there is a "bug" in MS Project that affects the late dates
and backward pass.
If you indent a group of tasks under the summary task the late dates for
that group are changed by the summary task. A weird problem that only
surfaces when calculating total slack and the backward pass.
I've heard of some people using MSO/MFO anchors at the end of thier network
to solve this. Does anybody else have a solution. My company (a rather
large one) has submitted this to Microsoft and they acknowledge that it is a
bug, but aren't planning on fixing it anytime soon.
Please advise.
Sean
Sean
2005-02-23 15:59:08 UTC
Permalink
Let me explain better.

Create a project with the following info. The summary task is not Linked.
Don't indent it under the summary until you've added all the tasks. All
relationships are FS. Use a 5 day duration for all tasks. Insert the late
start field into your table.

Now, indent all the tasks under the sumary task. Watch the late dates
change. They shouldn't becuase there is no link or relationship to the
summary line. Microsoft has acknowledged the problem but has made no promise
to fix it. I've heard of some work around's but not found one that is 100%

Thanks
Sean

ID NAME PRED
1 summary
2 Start Milestone #1
3 Activity #1 2
4 Activity #2 3
5 Activity #3 4
6 Finish Milestone #1 5,10
7 Start Milestone #2
8 Activity #4 7
9 Activity #5 8
10 Activity #6 9
11 Start Milestone # 3
12 Activity #7 11
13 Activity #8 12
14 Activity #9 13
15 Finish Milestone #2 14
Post by Steve House [MVP]
I'm not aware of any "bug" like you're describing. The total slack time of
a task is the amount of time it could be delayed without delaying the
project finish, in a nutshell. Imagine Summary Task A with subtasks A1
(3d), A2 (4d), & A3 (5d). The subtasks are not linked so they occur in
parallel, all starting the same day. Summary task A links to Summary X FS
and Summary X in turn links FS to the Finish milestone. What are the late
dates of A1, A2, & A3? Summary A's finish is determined by A3 so the late
date of A3 and Summary A are the same. Only if Summary A is delayed past
that point will Summary X be delayed, hence that is also the latest date it
can finish without delaying the project's finish. The late finishes of A1
and A2 are also that same date as A3 (which is also the late finish of
Summary A), since they could slip by 2 or 1 day respectively before they
delay the finish of Summary A. I think that is what you're describing in
your posting but where's the bug in that? That is exactly the way late
starts and late finishes are supposed to be calculated and that's the way
project does calculate them. And this is even with linking between the
summary tasks, which is often considered a bad idea. The alternative
linking would have A1, A2, and A3 all as predecessors to X1 and no links
directly in or out of the summary tasks themselves but the results are
exactly the same.
If I'm missing something here, please give us some concrete example that
demonstrates what you consider to be this bug - what Project gives you and
what you think it should be giving you instead (and why you feel Project is
wrong and your way is right). I'm really curious.
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Sean
Many of you know there is a "bug" in MS Project that affects the late dates
and backward pass.
If you indent a group of tasks under the summary task the late dates for
that group are changed by the summary task. A weird problem that only
surfaces when calculating total slack and the backward pass.
I've heard of some people using MSO/MFO anchors at the end of thier network
to solve this. Does anybody else have a solution. My company (a rather
large one) has submitted this to Microsoft and they acknowledge that it is a
bug, but aren't planning on fixing it anytime soon.
Please advise.
Sean
JackD
2005-02-23 18:33:44 UTC
Permalink
Um.... It works fine for me. There is no change. I can't reproduce your
problem.
Which version of project are you using?
Are all tasks set to be start as soon as possible?
--
-Jack ... For project information and macro examples visit
http://masamiki.com/project

.
Post by Sean
Let me explain better.
Create a project with the following info. The summary task is not Linked.
Don't indent it under the summary until you've added all the tasks. All
relationships are FS. Use a 5 day duration for all tasks. Insert the late
start field into your table.
Now, indent all the tasks under the sumary task. Watch the late dates
change. They shouldn't becuase there is no link or relationship to the
summary line. Microsoft has acknowledged the problem but has made no promise
to fix it. I've heard of some work around's but not found one that is 100%
Thanks
Sean
ID NAME PRED
1 summary
2 Start Milestone #1
3 Activity #1 2
4 Activity #2 3
5 Activity #3 4
6 Finish Milestone #1 5,10
7 Start Milestone #2
8 Activity #4 7
9 Activity #5 8
10 Activity #6 9
11 Start Milestone # 3
12 Activity #7 11
13 Activity #8 12
14 Activity #9 13
15 Finish Milestone #2 14
Post by Steve House [MVP]
I'm not aware of any "bug" like you're describing. The total slack time of
a task is the amount of time it could be delayed without delaying the
project finish, in a nutshell. Imagine Summary Task A with subtasks A1
(3d), A2 (4d), & A3 (5d). The subtasks are not linked so they occur in
parallel, all starting the same day. Summary task A links to Summary X FS
and Summary X in turn links FS to the Finish milestone. What are the late
dates of A1, A2, & A3? Summary A's finish is determined by A3 so the late
date of A3 and Summary A are the same. Only if Summary A is delayed past
that point will Summary X be delayed, hence that is also the latest date it
can finish without delaying the project's finish. The late finishes of A1
and A2 are also that same date as A3 (which is also the late finish of
Summary A), since they could slip by 2 or 1 day respectively before they
delay the finish of Summary A. I think that is what you're describing in
your posting but where's the bug in that? That is exactly the way late
starts and late finishes are supposed to be calculated and that's the way
project does calculate them. And this is even with linking between the
summary tasks, which is often considered a bad idea. The alternative
linking would have A1, A2, and A3 all as predecessors to X1 and no links
directly in or out of the summary tasks themselves but the results are
exactly the same.
If I'm missing something here, please give us some concrete example that
demonstrates what you consider to be this bug - what Project gives you and
what you think it should be giving you instead (and why you feel Project is
wrong and your way is right). I'm really curious.
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Sean
Many of you know there is a "bug" in MS Project that affects the late dates
and backward pass.
If you indent a group of tasks under the summary task the late dates for
that group are changed by the summary task. A weird problem that only
surfaces when calculating total slack and the backward pass.
I've heard of some people using MSO/MFO anchors at the end of thier network
to solve this. Does anybody else have a solution. My company (a rather
large one) has submitted this to Microsoft and they acknowledge that
it is
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
a
bug, but aren't planning on fixing it anytime soon.
Please advise.
Sean
Steve House [MVP]
2005-02-23 18:51:24 UTC
Permalink
Task 11, labeled "Start Milestone #", do you mean its predecessor is task #3
or do you mean its name is Start Milestone #3?
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Sean
Let me explain better.
Create a project with the following info. The summary task is not Linked.
Don't indent it under the summary until you've added all the tasks. All
relationships are FS. Use a 5 day duration for all tasks. Insert the late
start field into your table.
Now, indent all the tasks under the sumary task. Watch the late dates
change. They shouldn't becuase there is no link or relationship to the
summary line. Microsoft has acknowledged the problem but has made no promise
to fix it. I've heard of some work around's but not found one that is 100%
Thanks
Sean
ID NAME PRED
1 summary
2 Start Milestone #1
3 Activity #1 2
4 Activity #2 3
5 Activity #3 4
6 Finish Milestone #1 5,10
7 Start Milestone #2
8 Activity #4 7
9 Activity #5 8
10 Activity #6 9
11 Start Milestone # 3
12 Activity #7 11
13 Activity #8 12
14 Activity #9 13
15 Finish Milestone #2 14
Post by Steve House [MVP]
I'm not aware of any "bug" like you're describing. The total slack time of
a task is the amount of time it could be delayed without delaying the
project finish, in a nutshell. Imagine Summary Task A with subtasks A1
(3d), A2 (4d), & A3 (5d). The subtasks are not linked so they occur in
parallel, all starting the same day. Summary task A links to Summary X FS
and Summary X in turn links FS to the Finish milestone. What are the late
dates of A1, A2, & A3? Summary A's finish is determined by A3 so the late
date of A3 and Summary A are the same. Only if Summary A is delayed past
that point will Summary X be delayed, hence that is also the latest date it
can finish without delaying the project's finish. The late finishes of A1
and A2 are also that same date as A3 (which is also the late finish of
Summary A), since they could slip by 2 or 1 day respectively before they
delay the finish of Summary A. I think that is what you're describing in
your posting but where's the bug in that? That is exactly the way late
starts and late finishes are supposed to be calculated and that's the way
project does calculate them. And this is even with linking between the
summary tasks, which is often considered a bad idea. The alternative
linking would have A1, A2, and A3 all as predecessors to X1 and no links
directly in or out of the summary tasks themselves but the results are
exactly the same.
If I'm missing something here, please give us some concrete example that
demonstrates what you consider to be this bug - what Project gives you and
what you think it should be giving you instead (and why you feel Project is
wrong and your way is right). I'm really curious.
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Sean
Many of you know there is a "bug" in MS Project that affects the late dates
and backward pass.
If you indent a group of tasks under the summary task the late dates for
that group are changed by the summary task. A weird problem that only
surfaces when calculating total slack and the backward pass.
I've heard of some people using MSO/MFO anchors at the end of thier network
to solve this. Does anybody else have a solution. My company (a rather
large one) has submitted this to Microsoft and they acknowledge that it
is
a
bug, but aren't planning on fixing it anytime soon.
Please advise.
Sean
Steve House [MVP]
2005-02-23 19:01:46 UTC
Permalink
Using Project 2003 Pro with all service packs up to date. I just asked
about task 11's predecessor, but then I tried it both ways - no predecessor
for task 11 or Activity 3 FS to Task 11. Either way I get no change in the
late start dates for any of the tasks whether they're indented under the
summary or not. I followed your directions to the letter, re-check your
message quoted below to make sure there's no typo that lead me someplace
other than where you intended.

There are no other tasks in the project. When you say indent under the
summary, you are NOT indenting task 1 labeled "summary" but are indenting
tasks 2 though 15, right?
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Sean
Let me explain better.
Create a project with the following info. The summary task is not Linked.
Don't indent it under the summary until you've added all the tasks. All
relationships are FS. Use a 5 day duration for all tasks. Insert the late
start field into your table.
Now, indent all the tasks under the sumary task. Watch the late dates
change. They shouldn't becuase there is no link or relationship to the
summary line. Microsoft has acknowledged the problem but has made no promise
to fix it. I've heard of some work around's but not found one that is 100%
Thanks
Sean
ID NAME PRED
1 summary
2 Start Milestone #1
3 Activity #1 2
4 Activity #2 3
5 Activity #3 4
6 Finish Milestone #1 5,10
7 Start Milestone #2
8 Activity #4 7
9 Activity #5 8
10 Activity #6 9
11 Start Milestone # 3
12 Activity #7 11
13 Activity #8 12
14 Activity #9 13
15 Finish Milestone #2 14
Post by Steve House [MVP]
I'm not aware of any "bug" like you're describing. The total slack time of
a task is the amount of time it could be delayed without delaying the
project finish, in a nutshell. Imagine Summary Task A with subtasks A1
(3d), A2 (4d), & A3 (5d). The subtasks are not linked so they occur in
parallel, all starting the same day. Summary task A links to Summary X FS
and Summary X in turn links FS to the Finish milestone. What are the late
dates of A1, A2, & A3? Summary A's finish is determined by A3 so the late
date of A3 and Summary A are the same. Only if Summary A is delayed past
that point will Summary X be delayed, hence that is also the latest date it
can finish without delaying the project's finish. The late finishes of A1
and A2 are also that same date as A3 (which is also the late finish of
Summary A), since they could slip by 2 or 1 day respectively before they
delay the finish of Summary A. I think that is what you're describing in
your posting but where's the bug in that? That is exactly the way late
starts and late finishes are supposed to be calculated and that's the way
project does calculate them. And this is even with linking between the
summary tasks, which is often considered a bad idea. The alternative
linking would have A1, A2, and A3 all as predecessors to X1 and no links
directly in or out of the summary tasks themselves but the results are
exactly the same.
If I'm missing something here, please give us some concrete example that
demonstrates what you consider to be this bug - what Project gives you and
what you think it should be giving you instead (and why you feel Project is
wrong and your way is right). I'm really curious.
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Sean
Many of you know there is a "bug" in MS Project that affects the late dates
and backward pass.
If you indent a group of tasks under the summary task the late dates for
that group are changed by the summary task. A weird problem that only
surfaces when calculating total slack and the backward pass.
I've heard of some people using MSO/MFO anchors at the end of thier network
to solve this. Does anybody else have a solution. My company (a rather
large one) has submitted this to Microsoft and they acknowledge that it
is
a
bug, but aren't planning on fixing it anytime soon.
Please advise.
Sean
Sean
2005-02-28 22:45:02 UTC
Permalink
Okay, Sorry for the confusion. Forgot the critical part of constraints.
Make a quick network with the project start date of 2/28/05.

Name Dur Pred Constraint Type Constraint date
Summary 1 day? ASAP NA
Start Milestone One 0 days SNET 3/10/2005
Task One 5 days 2 ASAP NA
Task Two 5 days 3 ASAP NA
Task Three 5 days 4 ASAP NA
Task Four 5 days 5 ASAP NA
Finish Milestone 0 days 6 FNLT 5/19/2005

Insert the late start field. After you've entered in the network highlight
and indent everything under the summary task. The late start will change.
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Using Project 2003 Pro with all service packs up to date. I just asked
about task 11's predecessor, but then I tried it both ways - no predecessor
for task 11 or Activity 3 FS to Task 11. Either way I get no change in the
late start dates for any of the tasks whether they're indented under the
summary or not. I followed your directions to the letter, re-check your
message quoted below to make sure there's no typo that lead me someplace
other than where you intended.
There are no other tasks in the project. When you say indent under the
summary, you are NOT indenting task 1 labeled "summary" but are indenting
tasks 2 though 15, right?
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Sean
Let me explain better.
Create a project with the following info. The summary task is not Linked.
Don't indent it under the summary until you've added all the tasks. All
relationships are FS. Use a 5 day duration for all tasks. Insert the late
start field into your table.
Now, indent all the tasks under the sumary task. Watch the late dates
change. They shouldn't becuase there is no link or relationship to the
summary line. Microsoft has acknowledged the problem but has made no promise
to fix it. I've heard of some work around's but not found one that is 100%
Thanks
Sean
ID NAME PRED
1 summary
2 Start Milestone #1
3 Activity #1 2
4 Activity #2 3
5 Activity #3 4
6 Finish Milestone #1 5,10
7 Start Milestone #2
8 Activity #4 7
9 Activity #5 8
10 Activity #6 9
11 Start Milestone # 3
12 Activity #7 11
13 Activity #8 12
14 Activity #9 13
15 Finish Milestone #2 14
Post by Steve House [MVP]
I'm not aware of any "bug" like you're describing. The total slack time of
a task is the amount of time it could be delayed without delaying the
project finish, in a nutshell. Imagine Summary Task A with subtasks A1
(3d), A2 (4d), & A3 (5d). The subtasks are not linked so they occur in
parallel, all starting the same day. Summary task A links to Summary X FS
and Summary X in turn links FS to the Finish milestone. What are the late
dates of A1, A2, & A3? Summary A's finish is determined by A3 so the late
date of A3 and Summary A are the same. Only if Summary A is delayed past
that point will Summary X be delayed, hence that is also the latest date it
can finish without delaying the project's finish. The late finishes of A1
and A2 are also that same date as A3 (which is also the late finish of
Summary A), since they could slip by 2 or 1 day respectively before they
delay the finish of Summary A. I think that is what you're describing in
your posting but where's the bug in that? That is exactly the way late
starts and late finishes are supposed to be calculated and that's the way
project does calculate them. And this is even with linking between the
summary tasks, which is often considered a bad idea. The alternative
linking would have A1, A2, and A3 all as predecessors to X1 and no links
directly in or out of the summary tasks themselves but the results are
exactly the same.
If I'm missing something here, please give us some concrete example that
demonstrates what you consider to be this bug - what Project gives you and
what you think it should be giving you instead (and why you feel Project is
wrong and your way is right). I'm really curious.
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Sean
Many of you know there is a "bug" in MS Project that affects the late dates
and backward pass.
If you indent a group of tasks under the summary task the late dates for
that group are changed by the summary task. A weird problem that only
surfaces when calculating total slack and the backward pass.
I've heard of some people using MSO/MFO anchors at the end of thier network
to solve this. Does anybody else have a solution. My company (a rather
large one) has submitted this to Microsoft and they acknowledge that it
is
a
bug, but aren't planning on fixing it anytime soon.
Please advise.
Sean
JackD
2005-03-01 00:06:55 UTC
Permalink
Hm.
Another reason to avoid constraints.
Of course the workaround is to put the task with the finish constraint
outside the summary task. Is that what Microsoft advised you to do?
--
-Jack ... For project information and macro examples visit
http://masamiki.com/project

.
Post by Sean
Okay, Sorry for the confusion. Forgot the critical part of constraints.
Make a quick network with the project start date of 2/28/05.
Name Dur Pred Constraint Type Constraint date
Summary 1 day? ASAP NA
Start Milestone One 0 days SNET 3/10/2005
Task One 5 days 2 ASAP NA
Task Two 5 days 3 ASAP NA
Task Three 5 days 4 ASAP NA
Task Four 5 days 5 ASAP NA
Finish Milestone 0 days 6 FNLT 5/19/2005
Insert the late start field. After you've entered in the network highlight
and indent everything under the summary task. The late start will change.
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Using Project 2003 Pro with all service packs up to date. I just asked
about task 11's predecessor, but then I tried it both ways - no predecessor
for task 11 or Activity 3 FS to Task 11. Either way I get no change in the
late start dates for any of the tasks whether they're indented under the
summary or not. I followed your directions to the letter, re-check your
message quoted below to make sure there's no typo that lead me someplace
other than where you intended.
There are no other tasks in the project. When you say indent under the
summary, you are NOT indenting task 1 labeled "summary" but are indenting
tasks 2 though 15, right?
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Sean
Let me explain better.
Create a project with the following info. The summary task is not Linked.
Don't indent it under the summary until you've added all the tasks.
All
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
relationships are FS. Use a 5 day duration for all tasks. Insert the late
start field into your table.
Now, indent all the tasks under the sumary task. Watch the late dates
change. They shouldn't becuase there is no link or relationship to the
summary line. Microsoft has acknowledged the problem but has made no promise
to fix it. I've heard of some work around's but not found one that is 100%
Thanks
Sean
ID NAME PRED
1 summary
2 Start Milestone #1
3 Activity #1 2
4 Activity #2 3
5 Activity #3 4
6 Finish Milestone #1 5,10
7 Start Milestone #2
8 Activity #4 7
9 Activity #5 8
10 Activity #6 9
11 Start Milestone # 3
12 Activity #7 11
13 Activity #8 12
14 Activity #9 13
15 Finish Milestone #2 14
Post by Steve House [MVP]
I'm not aware of any "bug" like you're describing. The total slack
time
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
of
a task is the amount of time it could be delayed without delaying the
project finish, in a nutshell. Imagine Summary Task A with subtasks A1
(3d), A2 (4d), & A3 (5d). The subtasks are not linked so they occur in
parallel, all starting the same day. Summary task A links to Summary
X
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
FS
and Summary X in turn links FS to the Finish milestone. What are the late
dates of A1, A2, & A3? Summary A's finish is determined by A3 so the late
date of A3 and Summary A are the same. Only if Summary A is delayed past
that point will Summary X be delayed, hence that is also the latest
date
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
it
can finish without delaying the project's finish. The late finishes
of
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
A1
and A2 are also that same date as A3 (which is also the late finish of
Summary A), since they could slip by 2 or 1 day respectively before they
delay the finish of Summary A. I think that is what you're describing in
your posting but where's the bug in that? That is exactly the way late
starts and late finishes are supposed to be calculated and that's the way
project does calculate them. And this is even with linking between the
summary tasks, which is often considered a bad idea. The alternative
linking would have A1, A2, and A3 all as predecessors to X1 and no links
directly in or out of the summary tasks themselves but the results are
exactly the same.
If I'm missing something here, please give us some concrete example that
demonstrates what you consider to be this bug - what Project gives
you
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
and
what you think it should be giving you instead (and why you feel
Project
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
is
wrong and your way is right). I'm really curious.
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Sean
Many of you know there is a "bug" in MS Project that affects the
late
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
dates
and backward pass.
If you indent a group of tasks under the summary task the late
dates
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
for
that group are changed by the summary task. A weird problem that only
surfaces when calculating total slack and the backward pass.
I've heard of some people using MSO/MFO anchors at the end of thier network
to solve this. Does anybody else have a solution. My company (a rather
large one) has submitted this to Microsoft and they acknowledge that it
is
a
bug, but aren't planning on fixing it anytime soon.
Please advise.
Sean
Sean
2005-03-01 14:21:05 UTC
Permalink
Microsoft hasn't given any recommendations, they are exploring the fix to
thier "undesirable feature." If you don't use outlining it calcs correctly.
The other fix I've seen is to put a "ghost" node with a MSO after the end of
the last milestone and link it to the last FNLT. However, you have to do
this for each path through your network. On a 10,000 line file you now have
100 extra "ghost" milestones.

Don't mean for you to spend a lot of time on this, was just curious of
others encountered it and possibly had a workaround.

Thanks
Post by JackD
Hm.
Another reason to avoid constraints.
Of course the workaround is to put the task with the finish constraint
outside the summary task. Is that what Microsoft advised you to do?
--
-Jack ... For project information and macro examples visit
http://masamiki.com/project
..
Post by Sean
Okay, Sorry for the confusion. Forgot the critical part of constraints.
Make a quick network with the project start date of 2/28/05.
Name Dur Pred Constraint Type Constraint date
Summary 1 day? ASAP NA
Start Milestone One 0 days SNET 3/10/2005
Task One 5 days 2 ASAP NA
Task Two 5 days 3 ASAP NA
Task Three 5 days 4 ASAP NA
Task Four 5 days 5 ASAP NA
Finish Milestone 0 days 6 FNLT 5/19/2005
Insert the late start field. After you've entered in the network
highlight
Post by Sean
and indent everything under the summary task. The late start will change.
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Using Project 2003 Pro with all service packs up to date. I just asked
about task 11's predecessor, but then I tried it both ways - no
predecessor
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
for task 11 or Activity 3 FS to Task 11. Either way I get no change in
the
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
late start dates for any of the tasks whether they're indented under the
summary or not. I followed your directions to the letter, re-check your
message quoted below to make sure there's no typo that lead me someplace
other than where you intended.
There are no other tasks in the project. When you say indent under the
summary, you are NOT indenting task 1 labeled "summary" but are
indenting
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
tasks 2 though 15, right?
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Sean
Let me explain better.
Create a project with the following info. The summary task is not
Linked.
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Don't indent it under the summary until you've added all the tasks.
All
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
relationships are FS. Use a 5 day duration for all tasks. Insert the
late
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
start field into your table.
Now, indent all the tasks under the sumary task. Watch the late dates
change. They shouldn't becuase there is no link or relationship to
the
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
summary line. Microsoft has acknowledged the problem but has made no promise
to fix it. I've heard of some work around's but not found one that is 100%
Thanks
Sean
ID NAME PRED
1 summary
2 Start Milestone #1
3 Activity #1 2
4 Activity #2 3
5 Activity #3 4
6 Finish Milestone #1 5,10
7 Start Milestone #2
8 Activity #4 7
9 Activity #5 8
10 Activity #6 9
11 Start Milestone # 3
12 Activity #7 11
13 Activity #8 12
14 Activity #9 13
15 Finish Milestone #2 14
Post by Steve House [MVP]
I'm not aware of any "bug" like you're describing. The total slack
time
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
of
a task is the amount of time it could be delayed without delaying the
project finish, in a nutshell. Imagine Summary Task A with subtasks
A1
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
(3d), A2 (4d), & A3 (5d). The subtasks are not linked so they occur
in
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
parallel, all starting the same day. Summary task A links to Summary
X
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
FS
and Summary X in turn links FS to the Finish milestone. What are the late
dates of A1, A2, & A3? Summary A's finish is determined by A3 so the late
date of A3 and Summary A are the same. Only if Summary A is delayed
past
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
that point will Summary X be delayed, hence that is also the latest
date
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
it
can finish without delaying the project's finish. The late finishes
of
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
A1
and A2 are also that same date as A3 (which is also the late finish
of
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Summary A), since they could slip by 2 or 1 day respectively before
they
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
delay the finish of Summary A. I think that is what you're
describing in
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
your posting but where's the bug in that? That is exactly the way
late
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
starts and late finishes are supposed to be calculated and that's the
way
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
project does calculate them. And this is even with linking between
the
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
summary tasks, which is often considered a bad idea. The alternative
linking would have A1, A2, and A3 all as predecessors to X1 and no
links
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
directly in or out of the summary tasks themselves but the results
are
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
exactly the same.
If I'm missing something here, please give us some concrete example
that
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
demonstrates what you consider to be this bug - what Project gives
you
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
and
what you think it should be giving you instead (and why you feel
Project
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
is
wrong and your way is right). I'm really curious.
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Sean
Many of you know there is a "bug" in MS Project that affects the
late
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
dates
and backward pass.
If you indent a group of tasks under the summary task the late
dates
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
for
that group are changed by the summary task. A weird problem that
only
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
surfaces when calculating total slack and the backward pass.
I've heard of some people using MSO/MFO anchors at the end of thier
network
to solve this. Does anybody else have a solution. My company (a rather
large one) has submitted this to Microsoft and they acknowledge
that it
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
is
a
bug, but aren't planning on fixing it anytime soon.
Please advise.
Sean
JackD
2005-03-01 17:06:36 UTC
Permalink
It only occurs when you have a FNLT constraint so simply avoid using them. I
can't recall ever having to use one except when doing some analysis and even
then if you move it outside the summary it isn't a problem.
--
-Jack ... For project information and macro examples visit
http://masamiki.com/project

.
Post by Sean
Microsoft hasn't given any recommendations, they are exploring the fix to
thier "undesirable feature." If you don't use outlining it calcs correctly.
The other fix I've seen is to put a "ghost" node with a MSO after the end of
the last milestone and link it to the last FNLT. However, you have to do
this for each path through your network. On a 10,000 line file you now have
100 extra "ghost" milestones.
Don't mean for you to spend a lot of time on this, was just curious of
others encountered it and possibly had a workaround.
Thanks
Post by JackD
Hm.
Another reason to avoid constraints.
Of course the workaround is to put the task with the finish constraint
outside the summary task. Is that what Microsoft advised you to do?
--
-Jack ... For project information and macro examples visit
http://masamiki.com/project
..
Post by Sean
Okay, Sorry for the confusion. Forgot the critical part of constraints.
Make a quick network with the project start date of 2/28/05.
Name Dur Pred Constraint Type Constraint date
Summary 1 day? ASAP NA
Start Milestone One 0 days SNET 3/10/2005
Task One 5 days 2 ASAP NA
Task Two 5 days 3 ASAP NA
Task Three 5 days 4 ASAP NA
Task Four 5 days 5 ASAP NA
Finish Milestone 0 days 6 FNLT 5/19/2005
Insert the late start field. After you've entered in the network
highlight
Post by Sean
and indent everything under the summary task. The late start will change.
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Using Project 2003 Pro with all service packs up to date. I just asked
about task 11's predecessor, but then I tried it both ways - no
predecessor
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
for task 11 or Activity 3 FS to Task 11. Either way I get no change in
the
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
late start dates for any of the tasks whether they're indented under the
summary or not. I followed your directions to the letter, re-check your
message quoted below to make sure there's no typo that lead me someplace
other than where you intended.
There are no other tasks in the project. When you say indent under the
summary, you are NOT indenting task 1 labeled "summary" but are
indenting
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
tasks 2 though 15, right?
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Sean
Let me explain better.
Create a project with the following info. The summary task is not
Linked.
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Don't indent it under the summary until you've added all the tasks.
All
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
relationships are FS. Use a 5 day duration for all tasks. Insert the
late
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
start field into your table.
Now, indent all the tasks under the sumary task. Watch the late dates
change. They shouldn't becuase there is no link or relationship to
the
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
summary line. Microsoft has acknowledged the problem but has made
no
Post by Sean
Post by JackD
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
promise
to fix it. I've heard of some work around's but not found one
that is
Post by Sean
Post by JackD
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
100%
Thanks
Sean
ID NAME PRED
1 summary
2 Start Milestone #1
3 Activity #1 2
4 Activity #2 3
5 Activity #3 4
6 Finish Milestone #1 5,10
7 Start Milestone #2
8 Activity #4 7
9 Activity #5 8
10 Activity #6 9
11 Start Milestone # 3
12 Activity #7 11
13 Activity #8 12
14 Activity #9 13
15 Finish Milestone #2 14
Post by Steve House [MVP]
I'm not aware of any "bug" like you're describing. The total slack
time
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
of
a task is the amount of time it could be delayed without delaying the
project finish, in a nutshell. Imagine Summary Task A with subtasks
A1
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
(3d), A2 (4d), & A3 (5d). The subtasks are not linked so they occur
in
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
parallel, all starting the same day. Summary task A links to Summary
X
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
FS
and Summary X in turn links FS to the Finish milestone. What are
the
Post by Sean
Post by JackD
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
late
dates of A1, A2, & A3? Summary A's finish is determined by A3 so
the
Post by Sean
Post by JackD
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
late
date of A3 and Summary A are the same. Only if Summary A is delayed
past
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
that point will Summary X be delayed, hence that is also the latest
date
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
it
can finish without delaying the project's finish. The late finishes
of
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
A1
and A2 are also that same date as A3 (which is also the late finish
of
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Summary A), since they could slip by 2 or 1 day respectively before
they
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
delay the finish of Summary A. I think that is what you're
describing in
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
your posting but where's the bug in that? That is exactly the way
late
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
starts and late finishes are supposed to be calculated and that's the
way
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
project does calculate them. And this is even with linking between
the
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
summary tasks, which is often considered a bad idea. The alternative
linking would have A1, A2, and A3 all as predecessors to X1 and no
links
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
directly in or out of the summary tasks themselves but the results
are
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
exactly the same.
If I'm missing something here, please give us some concrete example
that
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
demonstrates what you consider to be this bug - what Project gives
you
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
and
what you think it should be giving you instead (and why you feel
Project
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
is
wrong and your way is right). I'm really curious.
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Sean
Many of you know there is a "bug" in MS Project that affects the
late
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
dates
and backward pass.
If you indent a group of tasks under the summary task the late
dates
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
for
that group are changed by the summary task. A weird problem that
only
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
surfaces when calculating total slack and the backward pass.
I've heard of some people using MSO/MFO anchors at the end of thier
network
to solve this. Does anybody else have a solution. My company
(a
Post by Sean
Post by JackD
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
rather
large one) has submitted this to Microsoft and they acknowledge
that it
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Post by Sean
is
a
bug, but aren't planning on fixing it anytime soon.
Please advise.
Sean
Steve House [MVP]
2005-03-01 14:09:42 UTC
Permalink
You problem is in the (IMHO incorrect) use of the FNLT constraint on the
Finish milestone to indicate your deadline. First of all, using a
constraint to indicate your deadline says that Project will never schedule
that task to end later than the date you've entered, even if that date is
impossible to meet. When you work the schedule you *will* be late. Usiong
a deadline entry instead, OTOH, marks the plan where that task needs to hit
but it does NOT disable Project's ability to show you where it currently
will actually end up. If the schedule as planned results in your missing
the required finish date, the deadline shows you that fact directly AND
shows you how bad you've blown it. The constraint will show you finishing
on your deadline whether you're actually going to do that or not and to see
you've got a problem you have to add columns to monitor the slack time.

As an aside, I can see many examples where a SNET constraint might be a
valid model of reality - a supplier might not be able to deliver required
parts for the subject task before a certain date, for example - but I've
wracked my mind over and over and I have yet to come up with a real world
example where a FNLT constraint, as opposed to a Finish Deadline, would be
the appropriate setting. The FNLT constraint says, in effect - "If this
task hasn't already happened by xx/xx/xx date, it absolutely, positively,
WILL happen on that date regardless of anything you do" (note "will" and not
"should" - constraints imply established facts while deadlines imply
requirements) and I just can't think of anything in the real world that
behaves that way.

More to the point, when you indent the tasks, including the finish
milestone, under the summary, the deadline then really is when the summary
needs to finish. The deadline date is an attribute of the summary task
itself and is not directly associated with a specific task within it. In
your example, if you put the deadline or FNLT constraint of 5/19 to the
summary task and not the finish milestone and then work out by hand the Late
Finish dates of the subtasks once you've indented them, you'll find
Project's calculated dates will be correct.
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Sean
Okay, Sorry for the confusion. Forgot the critical part of constraints.
Make a quick network with the project start date of 2/28/05.
Name Dur Pred Constraint Type Constraint date
Summary 1 day? ASAP NA
Start Milestone One 0 days SNET 3/10/2005
Task One 5 days 2 ASAP NA
Task Two 5 days 3 ASAP NA
Task Three 5 days 4 ASAP NA
Task Four 5 days 5 ASAP NA
Finish Milestone 0 days 6 FNLT 5/19/2005
Insert the late start field. After you've entered in the network highlight
and indent everything under the summary task. The late start will change.
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Using Project 2003 Pro with all service packs up to date. I just asked
about task 11's predecessor, but then I tried it both ways - no predecessor
for task 11 or Activity 3 FS to Task 11. Either way I get no change in the
late start dates for any of the tasks whether they're indented under the
summary or not. I followed your directions to the letter, re-check your
message quoted below to make sure there's no typo that lead me someplace
other than where you intended.
There are no other tasks in the project. When you say indent under the
summary, you are NOT indenting task 1 labeled "summary" but are indenting
tasks 2 though 15, right?
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Sean
Let me explain better.
Create a project with the following info. The summary task is not Linked.
Don't indent it under the summary until you've added all the tasks.
All
relationships are FS. Use a 5 day duration for all tasks. Insert the late
start field into your table.
Now, indent all the tasks under the sumary task. Watch the late dates
change. They shouldn't becuase there is no link or relationship to the
summary line. Microsoft has acknowledged the problem but has made no promise
to fix it. I've heard of some work around's but not found one that is 100%
Thanks
Sean
ID NAME PRED
1 summary
2 Start Milestone #1
3 Activity #1 2
4 Activity #2 3
5 Activity #3 4
6 Finish Milestone #1 5,10
7 Start Milestone #2
8 Activity #4 7
9 Activity #5 8
10 Activity #6 9
11 Start Milestone # 3
12 Activity #7 11
13 Activity #8 12
14 Activity #9 13
15 Finish Milestone #2 14
Post by Steve House [MVP]
I'm not aware of any "bug" like you're describing. The total slack
time
of
a task is the amount of time it could be delayed without delaying the
project finish, in a nutshell. Imagine Summary Task A with subtasks A1
(3d), A2 (4d), & A3 (5d). The subtasks are not linked so they occur in
parallel, all starting the same day. Summary task A links to Summary
X
FS
and Summary X in turn links FS to the Finish milestone. What are the late
dates of A1, A2, & A3? Summary A's finish is determined by A3 so the late
date of A3 and Summary A are the same. Only if Summary A is delayed past
that point will Summary X be delayed, hence that is also the latest
date
it
can finish without delaying the project's finish. The late finishes
of
A1
and A2 are also that same date as A3 (which is also the late finish of
Summary A), since they could slip by 2 or 1 day respectively before they
delay the finish of Summary A. I think that is what you're describing in
your posting but where's the bug in that? That is exactly the way late
starts and late finishes are supposed to be calculated and that's the way
project does calculate them. And this is even with linking between the
summary tasks, which is often considered a bad idea. The alternative
linking would have A1, A2, and A3 all as predecessors to X1 and no links
directly in or out of the summary tasks themselves but the results are
exactly the same.
If I'm missing something here, please give us some concrete example that
demonstrates what you consider to be this bug - what Project gives you and
what you think it should be giving you instead (and why you feel
Project
is
wrong and your way is right). I'm really curious.
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Sean
Many of you know there is a "bug" in MS Project that affects the
late
dates
and backward pass.
If you indent a group of tasks under the summary task the late dates for
that group are changed by the summary task. A weird problem that only
surfaces when calculating total slack and the backward pass.
I've heard of some people using MSO/MFO anchors at the end of thier network
to solve this. Does anybody else have a solution. My company (a rather
large one) has submitted this to Microsoft and they acknowledge that it
is
a
bug, but aren't planning on fixing it anytime soon.
Please advise.
Sean
Tom G.
2005-03-08 21:32:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve House [MVP]
The FNLT constraint says, in effect - "If this
task hasn't already happened by xx/xx/xx date, it absolutely,
positively, WILL happen on that date regardless of anything you do"
(note "will" and not "should" - constraints imply established facts
while deadlines imply requirements) and I just can't think of
anything in the real world that behaves that way.
Suppose you have scheduled a conference on xx/xx/xx date and all the
planning up to it has to happen by that date. Would that qualify? Or do
you constrain it in a different way?
--
Tom G.
Send replies to tom |att| geldner /dott/ com
Jan De Messemaeker
2005-03-09 07:48:38 UTC
Permalink
--
Jan De Messemaeker
Microsoft Project Most Valuable Professional
http://users.online.be/prom-ade/
+32-495-300 620
Post by Tom G.
Post by Steve House [MVP]
The FNLT constraint says, in effect - "If this
task hasn't already happened by xx/xx/xx date, it absolutely,
positively, WILL happen on that date regardless of anything you do"
(note "will" and not "should" - constraints imply established facts
while deadlines imply requirements) and I just can't think of
anything in the real world that behaves that way.
Suppose you have scheduled a conference on xx/xx/xx date and all the
planning up to it has to happen by that date. Would that qualify? Or do
you constrain it in a different way?
--
Tom G.
Send replies to tom |att| geldner /dott/ com
Jan De Messemaeker
2005-03-09 07:49:43 UTC
Permalink
Hi Tom,

You schedule the conference as Must Start On and link the other tasks FS to
it.
HTH

--
Jan De Messemaeker
Microsoft Project Most Valuable Professional
http://users.online.be/prom-ade/
+32-495-300 620
Post by Tom G.
Post by Steve House [MVP]
The FNLT constraint says, in effect - "If this
task hasn't already happened by xx/xx/xx date, it absolutely,
positively, WILL happen on that date regardless of anything you do"
(note "will" and not "should" - constraints imply established facts
while deadlines imply requirements) and I just can't think of
anything in the real world that behaves that way.
Suppose you have scheduled a conference on xx/xx/xx date and all the
planning up to it has to happen by that date. Would that qualify? Or do
you constrain it in a different way?
--
Tom G.
Send replies to tom |att| geldner /dott/ com
Steve House [MVP]
2005-03-09 11:55:55 UTC
Permalink
That would not qualify for a constraint IMHO. It is a deadline, the time by
which you needto have the work done and the entire reason for building a
project plan is to figure out just what you have to do in order to make it
so. You leave the task unconstrained and let Project place it where it
calculates it will fall. If that's ahead of the deadline, great! If it's
not, and it often won't, you have to change some of the tasks leading up to
it so that it falls where you need it to when Project recalculates the plan.
A constraint simply declares when it will happen by "royal fiat." But real
life isn't like that and simply stating "This will happen March 15th" does
not set up the conditions that will make it actually possible. If it's
calculated to be late, you have to actually change something in the critical
path leading to that date - perhaps call in overtime on a predecessor task -
that will change the conditions driving the task's dates, you can't just
wave a magic wand and send out a memo <grin>.
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Tom G.
Post by Steve House [MVP]
The FNLT constraint says, in effect - "If this
task hasn't already happened by xx/xx/xx date, it absolutely,
positively, WILL happen on that date regardless of anything you do"
(note "will" and not "should" - constraints imply established facts
while deadlines imply requirements) and I just can't think of
anything in the real world that behaves that way.
Suppose you have scheduled a conference on xx/xx/xx date and all the
planning up to it has to happen by that date. Would that qualify? Or do
you constrain it in a different way?
--
Tom G.
Send replies to tom |att| geldner /dott/ com
Tom G.
2005-03-09 16:07:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve House [MVP]
But real
life isn't like that and simply stating "This will happen March 15th"
does not set up the conditions that will make it actually possible.
SAY WHAT?? Let's assume we're planning a trade show, golf tournament or
heck, the SuperBowl. Those activities are put on calendars sometimes years
in advance. One does NOT reschedule them 1/2 way through the project. It
is a fixed event. I think I like Jan's answer better.
--
Tom G.
Send replies to tom |att| geldner /dott/ com
Steve House [MVP]
2005-03-10 02:44:15 UTC
Permalink
You are correct that you can't reschedule them and I never said that you
could. Don't confuse the model of reality in the project schedule from the
external objective reality of the project's requirements itself. What I said
was that the reason to do the plan was to figure out what you need to do,
how you have to organize all the preparation tasks, in order to successfully
hit that "must have by" date. Your golf tourney is scheduled for 15 Sep.
But for the tournement to happen on time a lot of preparatory things have to
also happen. If they happen on time, the tourney will too. But if they
happen late, you won't be ready to rock and roll on the required date no
matter how badly you want to be and you're going to be very very embarrased.

The reason for building the model in scheduling software is to give you a
tool to do "what if" types of planning. So I outline all the tasks the have
to come before the tourney, link them in the logic that they'll have to
follow, and assign resources that we have at our disposal. We do that and
after scheduling all the tasks that must be done before the tournment we
find that Project calculates they won't be done until 15 October. What that
is telling us is IF we assign the work according to the plan we've outlined,
we'll be late, we won't be ready for the tournement on time. My option is
not to simply use a constraint to create the ILLUSION that everything is
fine. My real option is to change the way the work is planned until we come
up with a work schedule that really and truly has us finishing all the
preparatory activities before the required date. When we modify the
schedule, Project will recalculate the finish date and tell us if our new
strategy makes things better or worse.

IMHO, too many managers think scheduling is an act of will power - if I
declare the tournement will happen on the 15th of September, that act of
determination is sufficient to make it so. I disagree. A project is
completed when a deliverable is attained, something that occurs at the end
of a long chain of physical processes. We control the date we achieve the
deliverable by controlling the performance of the component activities along
that chain. If I need to drive 500 miles and the fastest my car can go is
50 mph, it will take me 10 hours - period. My desire to get there sooner is
irrelevant, I'm limited by the physical process. If I need to be there in 5
hours, I have to find a faster mode of transport, I can't just make my
clunker go faster through an act of will power. Likewise if I have to be
ready for a tournement in 6 months and I have 12 months worth of work to do
to prepare for it, the only strategy that will work is to shorten the
preparatory tasks by adding resources or something of that nature that will
have a real physical impact on the performance of the work. I can't say
"we'll finish by xx date" as a simple policy declaration- I have to do
something proactive to make it so. Project's job is to tell me what the
outcome will be IF we do the work according to a certain trial schedule. If
it doesn't achieve the desired objective, the only thing that will fix it is
to change the schedule and see if that improves the outcome or not.
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Tom G.
Post by Steve House [MVP]
But real
life isn't like that and simply stating "This will happen March 15th"
does not set up the conditions that will make it actually possible.
SAY WHAT?? Let's assume we're planning a trade show, golf tournament or
heck, the SuperBowl. Those activities are put on calendars sometimes years
in advance. One does NOT reschedule them 1/2 way through the project. It
is a fixed event. I think I like Jan's answer better.
--
Tom G.
Send replies to tom |att| geldner /dott/ com
Tom G.
2005-03-14 22:04:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Your golf tourney is scheduled for 15 Sep.
But for the tournement to happen on time a lot of preparatory things
have to also happen. If they happen on time, the tourney will too.
But if they happen late, you won't be ready to rock and roll on the
required date no matter how badly you want to be and you're going to
be very very embarrased.
I disagree. When you plan a real world event, you may have 100 things
you'd really like to get done by the event date. But frequently things
don't work out so you simply eliminate them.

I agree with your arguments if it comes to designing an introducing a
product (which I've done), managing a construction project or any number
of other activities. I've done full software and hardware development
schedules using MS Project and the old CA SuperProject. It's a very useful
exercise especially in terms of, as you say, trying to figure out if a
schedule is realistic.

BUT, there are still real world applications for developing a project that
has a fixed date. For example, it's pretty standard to issue a press
release 60 days before X, 30 days before X, 15 days and so on. Those are
tied to the fixed event date. Also, this kind of planning is generally not
resource constrained.

Anyway, I'd like to know how to do that better using Project as a tool.
But, maybe there are other planning tools that are more appropriate?
--
Tom G.
Send replies to tom |att| geldner /dott/ com
Steve House [MVP]
2005-03-16 17:26:34 UTC
Permalink
What I suggest is that Project is ideal as a "what if" planning tool so you
CAN hit your required dates AND get all the preparatory items done on time.
If you let it, it can show you what effect changing something in the plan
will have on the final completion date. Some changes will make it go later.
Other changes will bring it forward. You set up the plan so it shows all
the things that need to happen and the way they relate to each other and
then proceed to examine and adjust it by rearranging the relationships,
reassigning resources, perhaps hiring a temp or outsourcing something or
even deleting something that is "nice to have" but not essential, all the
things you can tweak and twiddle with that affect the sequencing and
durations of the tasks in your plan, until the calculated finish date
becomes equal to or earlier than the required finish date. Now you have a
plan that you can work to that with some level of confidence that if you
work accoding the the schedule you've devised you're going to be successful.
All too many project plans amount to little more than educated guesswork and
wishfull thinking. A tool like MSP takes it from that into something more
precise that can actually predict real outcomes with a reasonable level of
confidence.

You don't tell Project the schedule you think you'd like to work or even the
schedule you think you'll be able to work - you tell it what you need to do,
what the assets are you have to do it with, any requirements that the
physical process itself dictates must occur in terms of task sequencing, and
the deadlines you need to do it by, and then Project tells YOU the schedule
you'll need to work to achieve those results.

I think we get hung up on what "fixed date" means. Certainly the date on
which an even must occur in the real world might be fixed. A contract might
require something be delivered on a certain date and it's non-negotiable.
But a "fixed date" in Project really means, IMHO, something quite different.
In Project, "fixed" means that the scheduling calculation engine won't move
it in the model of the plan (even it really should be moved because the
schedule is impossible to meet). But the model is not the reality. The
idea is to use the model to figure out what you must do to hit the reality
that you must. You don't do that by creating a picture that shows the
finish sitting on the goal regardless of what comes before it, which is what
a fixed date in Project does. I want to use the plan to answer the question
"What would the effect be of moving Tom from this task to that one during
the second week of March. Would doing that make the finish come earlier or
later? It looks like we might not be finished by the required deadline ...
would calling in overtime on Task XX during the second week it May give us
some breathing room in the schedule?" In order for us to make decisions
based on those answers, we must be able to see what effect each alternative
strategy has ... and if we fix the finish with a constraint project will
never show us those results.
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Tom G.
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Your golf tourney is scheduled for 15 Sep.
But for the tournement to happen on time a lot of preparatory things
have to also happen. If they happen on time, the tourney will too.
But if they happen late, you won't be ready to rock and roll on the
required date no matter how badly you want to be and you're going to
be very very embarrased.
I disagree. When you plan a real world event, you may have 100 things
you'd really like to get done by the event date. But frequently things
don't work out so you simply eliminate them.
I agree with your arguments if it comes to designing an introducing a
product (which I've done), managing a construction project or any number
of other activities. I've done full software and hardware development
schedules using MS Project and the old CA SuperProject. It's a very useful
exercise especially in terms of, as you say, trying to figure out if a
schedule is realistic.
BUT, there are still real world applications for developing a project that
has a fixed date. For example, it's pretty standard to issue a press
release 60 days before X, 30 days before X, 15 days and so on. Those are
tied to the fixed event date. Also, this kind of planning is generally not
resource constrained.
Anyway, I'd like to know how to do that better using Project as a tool.
But, maybe there are other planning tools that are more appropriate?
--
Tom G.
Send replies to tom |att| geldner /dott/ com
Mike Glen
2005-03-16 19:55:19 UTC
Permalink
Hi Steve, you're preaching the essence of what I preached to my courses over
the years before I retired. As you say, Project tells you what you can do
with the resources you apply. If the outcome is unacceptable, you adjust
the inputs until it does.

Mike Glen
Project MVP
Post by Steve House [MVP]
What I suggest is that Project is ideal as a "what if" planning tool
so you CAN hit your required dates AND get all the preparatory items
done on time. If you let it, it can show you what effect changing
something in the plan will have on the final completion date. Some
changes will make it go later. Other changes will bring it forward. You
set up the plan so it shows all the things that need to happen
and the way they relate to each other and then proceed to examine and
adjust it by rearranging the relationships, reassigning resources,
perhaps hiring a temp or outsourcing something or even deleting
something that is "nice to have" but not essential, all the things
you can tweak and twiddle with that affect the sequencing and
durations of the tasks in your plan, until the calculated finish date
becomes equal to or earlier than the required finish date. Now you
have a plan that you can work to that with some level of confidence
that if you work accoding the the schedule you've devised you're
going to be successful. All too many project plans amount to little
more than educated guesswork and wishfull thinking. A tool like MSP
takes it from that into something more precise that can actually
predict real outcomes with a reasonable level of confidence.
You don't tell Project the schedule you think you'd like to work or
even the schedule you think you'll be able to work - you tell it what
you need to do, what the assets are you have to do it with, any
requirements that the physical process itself dictates must occur in
terms of task sequencing, and the deadlines you need to do it by, and
then Project tells YOU the schedule you'll need to work to achieve
those results.
Steve House [MVP]
2005-03-17 12:00:39 UTC
Permalink
Exactly - and the use of constraints such as MFO or MFNLT forces Project to
report a picture that looks like everything is peachy even if it really
isn't. Very skilled, experienced, and careful workers like Jan understand
just what needs to be done in terms of examining slack time etc in order to
use constraints during planning without creating a self-generated illusion
of success but it requires extreme caution to use constraints in that way
safely. Deadlines give identical slack time calculations without the
drawback of creating Gantt charts that display an illusion of success even
in the face of failure.'
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Mike Glen
Hi Steve, you're preaching the essence of what I preached to my courses
over the years before I retired. As you say, Project tells you what you
can do with the resources you apply. If the outcome is unacceptable, you
adjust the inputs until it does.
Mike Glen
Project MVP
Post by Steve House [MVP]
What I suggest is that Project is ideal as a "what if" planning tool
so you CAN hit your required dates AND get all the preparatory items
done on time. If you let it, it can show you what effect changing
something in the plan will have on the final completion date. Some
changes will make it go later. Other changes will bring it forward. You
set up the plan so it shows all the things that need to happen
and the way they relate to each other and then proceed to examine and
adjust it by rearranging the relationships, reassigning resources,
perhaps hiring a temp or outsourcing something or even deleting
something that is "nice to have" but not essential, all the things
you can tweak and twiddle with that affect the sequencing and
durations of the tasks in your plan, until the calculated finish date
becomes equal to or earlier than the required finish date. Now you
have a plan that you can work to that with some level of confidence
that if you work accoding the the schedule you've devised you're
going to be successful. All too many project plans amount to little
more than educated guesswork and wishfull thinking. A tool like MSP
takes it from that into something more precise that can actually
predict real outcomes with a reasonable level of confidence.
You don't tell Project the schedule you think you'd like to work or
even the schedule you think you'll be able to work - you tell it what
you need to do, what the assets are you have to do it with, any
requirements that the physical process itself dictates must occur in
terms of task sequencing, and the deadlines you need to do it by, and
then Project tells YOU the schedule you'll need to work to achieve
those results.
Tom G.
2005-03-23 01:55:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve House [MVP]
What I suggest is that Project is ideal as a "what if" planning tool
so you CAN hit your required dates AND get all the preparatory items
done on time. If you let it, it can show you what effect changing
something in the plan will have on the final completion date. Some
changes will make it go later. Other changes will bring it forward.
I think you are completely missing my point. I understand what Project
does and how a project should be constructed to see if it's possible.
Now what I'm telling you is that I want to use it as a tool to do
backwards planning from a fixed date. You've said a lot about philosophy
and why I shouldn't but nothing about how I might be able to.

Here's the deal. If I plan a media event, it WILL take place on a fixed
date. I am not constrained by resources. There are certain tasks that
can float around. There are others that MUST happen (like issuing press
releases on fixed schedules) simply because that's how they are most
effective (like day-of, 3 days prior, 1 week prior, 2 weeks prior,
etc.).

I'm not talking about using Project as a what-if tool. I'd like to use
it as more of a graphical, timeline, master checklist, who-does-what
tool. Lots of activities happen FROM the end date. The end date doesn't
depend on or change based on what happens prior. The end (event) date
will not be missed.

Now if Project can't or doesn't work in this fashion, all someone has to
do is say -- WRONG TOOL. And point me in the direction of something that
will.

Back in my old product management days, I constructed lots of projects
using SuperProject and MS Project that were entirely based on time
estimates, feedback, actual completions, resource constraints, etc. The
end date was never a work back from date. Now I'm trying to do something
very different. If it can't be done, just say so.
--
Tom G.
Send replies to tom |att| geldner /dott/ com
Steve House [MVP]
2005-03-23 12:18:20 UTC
Permalink
Project certainly can schedule backwards from a fixed date. But you DON'T
do that by setting a MFO or MFNLT constraint on the finish milestone. In
the Project Information screen, enter the date you must be complete by and
select "schedule from completion date" in the pulldown and you have it. The
problem with that approach is that it schedules all tasks as late as
possible, thus every task in the plan is critical and the risk soars through
the roof. If any task in the plan gets delayed, you won't be ready when the
date for that event rolls around. I'm not trying to be difficult or evade
answering your question - I just have a hard time believing that there can
exist an event that has a fixed date on which it must occur AND also that
all of the tasks leading up to it are optional and the event will be able to
take place on that date regardless of whether you do all the preparatory
tasks on time or not. What if your golf tournment that is scheduled for
Labour Day weekend requires hotel accomodations for the celebrities and
VIPs - your contract with them requires they have accomodations provided.
The only hotel on town requires that the rooms be reserved and paid no later
than 01 August - if not, the hotel will refuse them rooms because someone
else is also planning a big event in town that same weekend and wants those
rooms too and the hotel will give them to whoever pays by 01 Aug. Doesn't
that mean the tournement can't happen unless you get the booking task done
on time since if you don't there'll be no accomodations for your guests?
Suppose you don't get the golf course reserved on time and a construction
crew moves in and starts replacing the greens the very weekend your
tournement is to occur? Are you saying the tournament will still be able to
happen as scheduled even if you DON'T get the rooms or courses booked on
time, or the tee-off schedule created and published or any of the thousand
other things that have to happen to have a successful tournement? Or will
you end up the day of the tournement standing in a crowd of angry
participants with egg on your face?

The simple desire or even the need to have something happen on a certain
date is not sufficient in and of itself to make it so. You have to do all
the groundwork on time or your big event won't happen, pure and simple, or
if ir does, it won't have the quality levels you require. The "what-if"
approach I'm trying to suggest is the best way I know of to insure
everything leading up to the event happens as it must in order to brong your
event in successfully. You can identify the bottlenecks and problem areas
BEFORE they occur, when there's still time to actually do something to head
them off.
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Tom G.
Post by Steve House [MVP]
What I suggest is that Project is ideal as a "what if" planning tool
so you CAN hit your required dates AND get all the preparatory items
done on time. If you let it, it can show you what effect changing
something in the plan will have on the final completion date. Some
changes will make it go later. Other changes will bring it forward.
I think you are completely missing my point. I understand what Project
does and how a project should be constructed to see if it's possible.
Now what I'm telling you is that I want to use it as a tool to do
backwards planning from a fixed date. You've said a lot about philosophy
and why I shouldn't but nothing about how I might be able to.
Here's the deal. If I plan a media event, it WILL take place on a fixed
date. I am not constrained by resources. There are certain tasks that
can float around. There are others that MUST happen (like issuing press
releases on fixed schedules) simply because that's how they are most
effective (like day-of, 3 days prior, 1 week prior, 2 weeks prior,
etc.).
I'm not talking about using Project as a what-if tool. I'd like to use
it as more of a graphical, timeline, master checklist, who-does-what
tool. Lots of activities happen FROM the end date. The end date doesn't
depend on or change based on what happens prior. The end (event) date
will not be missed.
Now if Project can't or doesn't work in this fashion, all someone has to
do is say -- WRONG TOOL. And point me in the direction of something that
will.
Back in my old product management days, I constructed lots of projects
using SuperProject and MS Project that were entirely based on time
estimates, feedback, actual completions, resource constraints, etc. The
end date was never a work back from date. Now I'm trying to do something
very different. If it can't be done, just say so.
--
Tom G.
Send replies to tom |att| geldner /dott/ com
Tom G.
2005-03-23 15:53:46 UTC
Permalink
milestone. In the Project Information screen, enter the date you
must be complete by and select "schedule from completion date" in the
pulldown and you have it. The problem with that approach is that it
schedules all tasks as late as possible, thus every task in the plan
is critical and the risk soars through the roof. If any task in the
plan gets delayed, you won't be ready when the date for that event
rolls around.
I tried that but what happened was those tasks that had to occur 3 days,
1 week, 2 weeks, 3 weeks before had weird things happen to them.
I'm not trying to be difficult or evade answering your
question - I just have a hard time believing that there can exist an
event that has a fixed date on which it must occur AND also that all
of the tasks leading up to it are optional and the event will be able
to take place on that date regardless of whether you do all the
preparatory tasks on time or not.
Using your methodology, how would you schedule these activities:

Event - must occur on 4th of July. Let's say it's your annual fireworks
show or something.

Press releases - must go out "day of", 3 days before, 1 week before, 2
weeks before. (Takes 4 hours to write, 2 hours to release) - these
activities cannot happen early.

Event notices - must be mailed no later than 45 days before event and no
earlier than 60 days prior. Takes 4 days to design, 5 days to print, 3
days to mail. Design can happen early. Printing can't since it's tied to
the mailing.
--
Tom G.
Send replies to tom |att| geldner /dott/ com
Steve House [MVP]
2005-03-24 03:06:51 UTC
Permalink
In your example, if these are the only tasks in the project, then that would
be a possible exception to the "never schedule backwards" rule. But I
suspect that if we were to do this for real, there would be a lot of other
tasks that need to be done leading up to the fireworks display - secure
site, hire poyrotechnician, clear music rights, order pyrotechnics, install
sound system, etc etc. and they have to happen in order for the fireworks
show to happen. At any rate, for your outlined tasks, the first thing I
come up with is:

Schedule from project finish, 04 July 05. Durations as in your message.

1 Event Notices 15 Apr - 02 May
1.1 Design
1.2 Print, 1.1FS
1.3 Mail, 1.2FS, SNET 07/04/05, (04 July - ~60 duration days )
2 Press 1 20 Jun
2.1 Write
2.2 Release, 2.1FS
3 Press 2 27Jun
3.1 Write
3.2 Release, 3.1FS
4 Press 3 29Jun
4.1 Write
4.2 Release, 4.1FS
5 Press 4 04 July
5.1 Write
5.2 Release, 5.1FS
6 Fireworks Show (milestone) 04 July 8pm, 1.3FS45D, 2.2FS2W, 3.2FS1W,
4.2FS3D, 5.2FS4H

Numbers following task names indicate predecessors and lag times if any.
All tasks have an ALAP constraint as is the default when scheduling from
finish backwards with the exception of task 1.3 which is SNET. All dates
other than the July 4th finish date and the SNET date of the mailing task
were calculated by Project. File in email to you so you can review it.
--
Steve House [MVP]
MS Project Trainer & Consultant
Visit http://www.mvps.org/project/faqs.htm for the FAQs
Post by Tom G.
milestone. In the Project Information screen, enter the date you
must be complete by and select "schedule from completion date" in the
pulldown and you have it. The problem with that approach is that it
schedules all tasks as late as possible, thus every task in the plan
is critical and the risk soars through the roof. If any task in the
plan gets delayed, you won't be ready when the date for that event
rolls around.
I tried that but what happened was those tasks that had to occur 3 days,
1 week, 2 weeks, 3 weeks before had weird things happen to them.
I'm not trying to be difficult or evade answering your
question - I just have a hard time believing that there can exist an
event that has a fixed date on which it must occur AND also that all
of the tasks leading up to it are optional and the event will be able
to take place on that date regardless of whether you do all the
preparatory tasks on time or not.
Event - must occur on 4th of July. Let's say it's your annual fireworks
show or something.
Press releases - must go out "day of", 3 days before, 1 week before, 2
weeks before. (Takes 4 hours to write, 2 hours to release) - these
activities cannot happen early.
Event notices - must be mailed no later than 45 days before event and no
earlier than 60 days prior. Takes 4 days to design, 5 days to print, 3
days to mail. Design can happen early. Printing can't since it's tied to
the mailing.
--
Tom G.
Send replies to tom |att| geldner /dott/ com
Steve House [MVP]
2005-03-25 12:12:56 UTC
Permalink
Had a few minutes to look at the fireworks project again and I think I've
come up with an even better way of organizing the plan. This schedule
eliminates the need for lag times and if one of the "writing" tasks starts
late or takes longer than expected, posting the actuals for the release
updates the time for the release task but does not try to push back the
fireworks or make that summary start earlier when it can't.

Schedule from project start, current date. Durations as in your message.

1 Event Notices, Deadline 20 May
1.1 Design. ALAP
1.2 Print, ALAP, 1.1FS
1.3 Mail, ALAP, 1.2FS
2 Press 1, Deadline 20 June 10am
2.1 Write, ALAP
2.2 Release, ALAP, 2.1FS
3 Press 2, Deadline 27 June 10am
3.1 Write, ALAP,
3.2 Release, ALAP, 3.1FS
4 Press 3, Deadline 30 June 10am
4.1 Write, ALAP,
4.2 Release, ALAP, 4.1FS
5 Press 4, Deadline 04 July 10am
5.1 Write, ALAP
5.2 Release, ALAP, 5.1FS
6 Fireworks Show (milestone), SNET 04 July 6pm, Deadline 04 July 8pm,
1.3FS, 2.2FS, 3.2FS, 4.2FS, 5.2FS

Numbers following task names indicate predecessors. All summary tasks are
ASAP, all performance tasks are ALAP. File in email to you so you can
review it.
Post by Tom G.
milestone. In the Project Information screen, enter the date you
must be complete by and select "schedule from completion date" in the
pulldown and you have it. The problem with that approach is that it
schedules all tasks as late as possible, thus every task in the plan
is critical and the risk soars through the roof. If any task in the
plan gets delayed, you won't be ready when the date for that event
rolls around.
I tried that but what happened was those tasks that had to occur 3 days,
1 week, 2 weeks, 3 weeks before had weird things happen to them.
I'm not trying to be difficult or evade answering your
question - I just have a hard time believing that there can exist an
event that has a fixed date on which it must occur AND also that all
of the tasks leading up to it are optional and the event will be able
to take place on that date regardless of whether you do all the
preparatory tasks on time or not.
Event - must occur on 4th of July. Let's say it's your annual fireworks
show or something.
Press releases - must go out "day of", 3 days before, 1 week before, 2
weeks before. (Takes 4 hours to write, 2 hours to release) - these
activities cannot happen early.
Event notices - must be mailed no later than 45 days before event and no
earlier than 60 days prior. Takes 4 days to design, 5 days to print, 3
days to mail. Design can happen early. Printing can't since it's tied to
the mailing.
--
Tom G.
Send replies to tom |att| geldner /dott/ com
Tom G.
2005-03-29 17:18:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve House [MVP]
Had a few minutes to look at the fireworks project again and I think
Thanks Steve,

I just got back from vacation so I will take a close look at what you did.
--
Tom
Loading...