糖心logo官网

I'd like to introduce you to听Critical Chain听Project听Management (CCPM). And if you think this is simply an alternative to critical path and earned-value, you might be听interested听to learn that it is much more than that... Let me illustrate with an example of a cross-country drive.

Say I need to catch听the听Dover-Calais ferry at 22:00 later today. Google tells me the journey is 273 miles, and will take me 4h48.

I听could听break this down to a simple sequential project:

• Drive home to M6 = 18 minutes
• J18 - M6 Toll = 40 minutes
• M6 Toll = 20 minutes
• ...

Adding up to 4h48 minutes.

In practice I would take Google's 4h48, I would add a couple of stops, say 40 minutes, and I would add a buffer for听the听whole journey (M25 at about 18.00...mmmmm.. let鈥檚 add 2 hours. I know that about 250 miles is on motorways, at a legal limit of 70mph, so Google听hasn't听included much for bad traffic and accidents). So my project planned duration is 7h28m. I鈥檒l round it up and leave by 14:30.

But what would we do if this was a project?

Each of the sequential tasks听would听be done by a听different听manager - or in my field of capex projects, a different company. Most project managers manage progress with task deadlines and milestones, and insist on听getting reliable commitments for each task. 听In my road journey analogy, this means a highly reliable time for each leg of the journey.

But that is not what I have听included听in the first plan. Each stage of the journey is based on a听reasonable average, and I have added contingency time to cover the whole project. How many of us do this in our day jobs? 听Most project managers don't want an average task time in their plan, they want a听commitment听that an individual is held accountable听for.

So if I plan again, but this time using highly reliable times for each leg, I might get:

• Drive home to M6 = 30 minutes
• J18 - M6 Toll = 70 minutes
• M6 Toll = 27 minutes
• ...

... Adding up to 7h30m.

Then I might add some time for stops (40m)听and a smaller project-level contingency (40m), meaning I might听plan my journey to last 8h50, and I need to leave home at 13:10. In total I have 50 per cent more safety (3h22 v 2h02), with most of it built into task commitments.

Now you might think that this longer duration is OK. What harm does a bit of extra听safety听do?

Well for one thing, on my kind of听project (capex and construction), it has added significantly to听the听cost. All听the听task听suppliers听have听given me a highly-reliable commitment, and I have tied them up with a fixed-price contract with damages for lateness. Meaning if one supplier听doesn't听need the听safety听they built in, they profit. They are not听going听to pass the unused time or money back to the project - and they听shouldn't听be expected to, that is simply听part听and parcel of fixed-price contracting. Holding people to task-level commitments is obviously silly in my driving story. Imagine if on stage 1 it only took me 16 minutes, and I then park up for 14 minutes so that I hit my听30 minute 鈥渃ommitment鈥澨�- remember some project managers seem to hate听early听finishes as much as late ones!

The other thing is that when I have a lot of safety, I am much more relaxed about time. I might take a detour to find a nice high street coffee shop rather than the same-old same-old motorway service station. I might call in on a tourist spot near my route. I might drive at 60 mph and听emit听less CO2. We can all relate to the "student syndrome", where we听have听plenty听of time to do an assignment鈥�but still end up burning the midnight oil and often end up late. The same can happen on projects where we听have听too much safety. On a project though, rather than slowing down and taking in the scenery, most of us take on other work. "Sure I can fit that in, I have plenty of time to complete my project task". Then we find ourselves inefficiently switching听from one task to听the听other. We are overloaded, and everything takes longer!

So what are the project management learnings from this cross-country drive?

• There is no point in trying to听predict听with certainty how individual听tasks听(the stages of my journey) will turn out.
• Task听estimates听are only useful in setting a reliable project completion date and budget. They are not firm commitments.
• Shared, project-wide contingency buffers are much more effective than including contingency in each task.
• Task milestones, based on highly-reliable commitments, add to the project time and cost, without adding value. They don鈥檛 make the project any more reliable.
• Task managers should complete as quickly as possible 鈥� known as 鈥淔ocus & Finish鈥�.
• Project managers should remove听the听obstacles to rapid task completion, and 鈥減roject flow鈥�.
• You need to choose the right performance measures on your project. 听Measure听the wrong thing (like task managers听hitting听their commitments) and you will get a project taking longer and costing more than it needs to, and you wont notice early signs of real problems.

In short we need just a good-enough plan, and great, agile and real-time execution.

And yes, there is a formal methodology that incorporates these learnings. It is not yet very听common but听companies听that have used it have made significant improvements in their projects - making them more reliable, whilst costing听much听less and taking less time. Mazda said it reduced their project duration by about 50 per cent, allowing their R&D team to complete over 35 per cent more projects than they used to. And a division of Siemens in the USA used this method to halve the time to design new wind turbines - from two years to one year.

The method is Critical Chain听Project听Management (CCPM).听And if you think this is simply an alternative to critical path and earned-value, you might be听interested听to learn that it is much more than that. Typical results from听companies听using CCPM include:

• 35% faster than before
• 25% increase in project throughput
• 90%+ due date performance

Ian recently presented a webinar for APM on CCPM, and what else is needed to be听able听to use it on听construction听and capital projects, where听contracts听can often get in the way. 听
You can see the webinar recording, and the Q&A here.

听