Post by thread:[OT]: Project management techniques/software

Hello List, The question I have is about project management, and I realize that most people here are engineers; however, I'm sure that most of you worked on a project involving a team of people, and I would appreciate any insights you can provide. The question is, how do you manage multiple projects of different duration? Suppose that you run a small business, and you have long-term projects (3-6 months), short-term projects (1-6 weeks), and day-to-day "business" stuff. Now, since you have a small business you are responsible for managing all three (can't outsource them to other managers). The problem is, how do you know what you should be doing at any given moment? You can't be doing just the long-term projects, and neglect the day-to-day activities, because you will run out of money. On the other hand, if you take care of all the day-to-day tasks, the long-term projects will never get done. Ideally, there needs to be a balance between the three. Another related question is, have you used project management software that can keep track of several projects at a time? IMHO, MS Project et al are more suitable for large, single projects, and are not good at simultaneously keeping track of several projects of different duration and scope. It seems to me that any project or individual task can be described in terms of duration, flexibility, importance, and urgency. Duration is self-explanatory. Flexibility means that the project can be rescheduled if needed. A Christmas party is an example of a non-flexible project because you can only do it on December 25. MASTERs conference is another such example -- you either attend it on July 26-29, or skip it altogether. Importance describes how severe the consequences will be if the project is not done by a certain date, or at all. Urgency is easy to understand, but somewhat difficult to define. I want to differentiate it from importance, however: sometimes, answering a phone call may be more urgent than working on an important project that has a long duration. The ideal project management software would take some or all of these inputs, plus task dependencies, and produce a Gantt chart (or similar). Then, once in a while, you would be able to update some of the variables, and produce a new chart. What I don't like about the software that I've used so far is the fact that it forces you to prioritize and schedule the tasks yourself, instead of doing the scheduling for you. Since the process is purely analytical, I don't see why it can't be done by the computer (perhaps I'm missing something obvious). Thank you in advance for your responses, and sorry for the long post. Best regards, Vitaliy

Hi Vitaliy. I am a "Software Engineer" (I know it is a bad term....). Anyways, I deal with financial systems (databases and stuff. PIC's for me are a hobby). Anyways, I find I have a few tricks when dealing with multiple projects of different priorities and deadlines, and while it may not apply to your work style, it does to mine. Additionally, it is one of those areas where some cross-pollination may help. I use a bug/requirement-tracking system. I use a product called ClearQuest at work, but at home I use Mantis ( http://www.mantisbt.org/ ). You can add custom fields to mantis, and it works out OK. Although these types of systems are geared toward software projects, they can be applied easily to other types of project management. The benefit of the work system is that other people can essentially manage my time as the priorities change in my "workflow". I have adapted the work practices to at home as well, and for the most part it works there too. All you have to get used to is being able to see at a glance what needs doing, and then to prioritize it as you go. The most significant part of getting it all done is knowing what actually needs doing (and when). If I don;t track things in a system like this then I forget what needs to happen, and I over-invest my time in the interesting projects rather than the important ones. I am practiced enough to be able to periodically be able to look at clearquest, and plan my activities at a glance. Obviously, you can not put all the minutia of your day in a tracking system, but, managing the larger items makes doing the smaller things easy. For me it is a big deal to get a feel for items that need to be tracked individually, and those that are trivial. Additionally, I get to work at 7am before the rabble, and get a few hours of good "big ticket" items done then. Obviously, this is like my father-in-law telling me to keep a diary. It works well for him, but for me it just ain't happening. Different strokes and all. Rolf Vitaliy wrote: {Quote hidden}> Hello List, > > [snip] > > Thank you in advance for your responses, and sorry for the long post. > > Best regards, > > Vitaliy > >

At 05:16 PM 5/16/2006 -0700, you wrote: >Hello List, > >The question I have is about project management, and I realize that most >people here are engineers; however, I'm sure that most of you worked on a >project involving a team of people, and I would appreciate any insights you >can provide. For techniques, I've found the Harvard Business School Project Management Manual useful. It's only about 40 pages and about 10 years old, but has a number of simple, effective approaches such as the Post-It™ note task ownership technique that can work well with large to smaller (say 10 people) teams. HBS Publication: 9-697-034 Once you get much smaller than that, it's more like time management. Context switch time becomes very important, blocking of time to improve efficiency, and that sort of thing. There are plenty of fat books that cover project management, many of them from the professional manager's pov, rather than from the typical techie pov where all work not actually producing a design or cranking out code is considered wasted. ;-) As far as letting a program juggle priorities, I doubt it's possible, if your days are anything like mine. Best regards, Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" spam_OUTspeffTakeThisOuTinterlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com ->>Test equipment, parts OLED displys http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZspeff

Vitaliy wrote: > Hello List, > > The question I have is about project management, and I realize that most > people here are engineers; however, I'm sure that most of you worked on a > project involving a team of people, and I would appreciate any insights you > can provide. > > The question is, how do you manage multiple projects of different duration? > Suppose that you run a small business, and you have long-term projects (3-6 > months), short-term projects (1-6 weeks), and day-to-day "business" stuff. > Now, since you have a small business you are responsible for managing all > three (can't outsource them to other managers). > > The problem is, how do you know what you should be doing at any given > moment? You can't be doing just the long-term projects, and neglect the > day-to-day activities, because you will run out of money. On the other hand, > if you take care of all the day-to-day tasks, the long-term projects will > never get done. Ideally, there needs to be a balance between the three. > You have to juggle all the responsibilities. On long-term contracts, make sure you get paid some partially, at a milestone here and there. In fact, I would advise against taking ANY contract in which you don't get paid until the end; an exception is a contract with the Government; in that case, you KNOW you'll get paid in six months but the invoice is easy to borrow money against. I did a contract with the US FDA and it took 8 months to get paid. But they liked the feeders and bought several more at a high price. Every responsible client knows that you have to juggle, and most will assist you. But there are a few tricks: (1) do the schematic design as accurately but fast as possible. While they are mulling it over, you can squeeze in a few small jobs; (2) PCB layout is similar; the client will normally have to review your PCB layout and will INEVITABLY make some changes. Again, you have time to do small jobs while they are tinkering with the layout; (3) firmware design- I do my best work at night, then can delegate some responsibility during the day to others. I.E. work when you are most efficient. > Another related question is, have you used project management software that > can keep track of several projects at a time? IMHO, MS Project et al are > more suitable for large, single projects, and are not good at simultaneously > keeping track of several projects of different duration and scope. > I liked BusyBee (sp?) but haven't been very busy lately. Its easy to use and very understandable. > It seems to me that any project or individual task can be described in terms > of duration, flexibility, importance, and urgency. > Yes, it can. > Duration is self-explanatory. > > Flexibility means that the project can be rescheduled if needed. A > Christmas party is an example of a non-flexible project because you can only > do it on December 25. MASTERs conference is another such example -- you > either attend it on July 26-29, or skip it altogether. > Of course, your clients don't REALLY care a whit about Christmas or Master's Conference, unless they can see a direct help for them. > Importance describes how severe the consequences will be if the project > is not done by a certain date, or at all. > Its better to complete on time, but its EVEN BETTER to do it right. If you have some code you believe might be squirrelly, you need to let him KNOW that your confidence is not high on that part and he might delegate somebody to help you test it. There was an old saying at TI- "There's plenty of time to do it over, after finding that there was not enough time to do it right". > Urgency is easy to understand, but somewhat difficult to define. I want > to differentiate it from importance, however: sometimes, answering a phone > call may be more urgent than working on an important project that has a long > duration. > Always answer the phone. But if it is from a telemarketer, be sure to sue them for wasting your time. > The ideal project management software would take some or all of these > inputs, plus task dependencies, and produce a Gantt chart (or similar). > Then, once in a while, you would be able to update some of the variables, > and produce a new chart. What I don't like about the software that I've used > so far is the fact that it forces you to prioritize and schedule the tasks > yourself, instead of doing the scheduling for you. Since the process is > purely analytical, I don't see why it can't be done by the computer (perhaps > I'm missing something obvious). > > Actually, such software could be written for our line of work, but there is none so specific presently. > Thank you in advance for your responses, and sorry for the long post. > > Best regards, > > Vitaliy > >

Rolf wrote: > I am a "Software Engineer" (I know it is a bad term....). I honestly don't think it is. :) [snip] > Anyways, I find I have a few tricks when dealing with multiple projects > of different priorities and deadlines, and while it may not apply to > your work style, it does to mine. Additionally, it is one of those areas > where some cross-pollination may help. I understand that different things work for different people, however there has to be some kind of common denominator. For example, I bought a planner once in hopes of being able to organize my tasks better. Unfortunately, I bought the wrong kind -- it was too small (not enough space to write in), and the page layout was more suitable for an academic environment (recording homework assignments) than for the daily activities of a manager. My friend bought an organizer that was too big (8x11 pages), it was too awkward to carry, took up too much desk space, so eventually he stopped using it. It was not until someone told me exactly what kind of planner to buy, and explained how to use it correctly, that I was able to realize its full potential. Now I can't imagine being able to work without it. In case this helps someone, I use the classic size Franklin Covey organizer with two pages per day planning system: http://shopping.franklincovey.com/shopping/catalog/productpaper.jsp?navAction=push&navCount=1&id=prod540007 I can tell you with a high degree of certainty that the Compact size, two-pages-per-day organizer with the layout shown (priorities/appointments and notes) is the common denominator for planners. Compact is too small to be useful. Monarch is too bulky to carry. {Quote hidden}> I use a bug/requirement-tracking system. I use a product called > ClearQuest at work, but at home I use Mantis ( http://www.mantisbt.org/ > ). You can add custom fields to mantis, and it works out OK. Although > these types of systems are geared toward software projects, they can be > applied easily to other types of project management. > > The benefit of the work system is that other people can essentially > manage my time as the priorities change in my "workflow". I have adapted > the work practices to at home as well, and for the most part it works > there too. We just started using a similar system at work for website development, it's called dotProject. Unfortunately, it's not exactly what I'm looking for. While it's OK for managing a single, well-defined project like a website, it doesn't work well for managing multiple projects. Things have to be done in parallel, and I need to know which task I need to be doing when. Tasks that are assigned to me individually are handled well by the planner. Unfortunately, I can't use the planner to schedule task on the team level (remember we have long/short projects of different kinds, and recurring tasks). I am not talking about the really small tasks, rather about tasks on a higher level. For example: Electronic Product X Product Specs Hire engineer Schematic Board layout Order PCBs Build Protos Test Protos Product Catalog Hire graphic designer Design layout Take product pictures Create content Export files for the print shop Find a print shop Order catalog/Supervise printshop Software Product Y Product Specs Hire programmer Write code Test code Write documentation The tasks are not necessarily in order, and the list is not complete (even though it's fictional) -- but you get the idea. Note that some tasks have variable durations (hiring is a good example), and sometimes one project depends on the other (let's say Product X cannot ship until Product Y is complete). It's impractical, and often times impossible to do them one at a time, from start to finish. You can see how it can quickly get out of control. > All you have to get used to is being able to see at a glance what needs > doing, and then to prioritize it as you go. It's not feasible to do this for each single task. Having to go through the entire list every time you're finished with a task is a waste of time. A better way is to plan ahead, in other words prioritize once and then adjust the order once in a while -- but the trick is knowing how to do it right. That's why I started this topic in the first place. :) > The most significant part of > getting it all done is knowing what actually needs doing (and when). I could not have said it better! :D > If > I don;t track things in a system like this then I forget what needs to > happen, and I over-invest my time in the interesting projects rather > than the important ones. > > I am practiced enough to be able to periodically be able to look at > clearquest, and plan my activities at a glance. I use my planner for exactly the same purpose, and the advantage is that I can take it with me anywhere (and I do). If remember something while standing in line at Subway, I can jot it down right there and then. What I'm really looking for is a program or a system (a sequence of well-defined steps) that I can use to help me schedule the projects, or better yet, schedule them for me. > Obviously, you can not put all the minutia of your day in a tracking > system, but, managing the larger items makes doing the smaller things > easy. Of course, that would not be productive. If you follow the "stones in a jar" philosophy and do the important not urgent stuff first, the rest of the stuff theoretically should take care of itself. Unfortunately, this doesn't always happen because I am unable to justify to others and to myself why I should be doing Project X while there are other more urgent things on my plate. And the small things never, ever, end. > For me it is a big deal to get a feel for items that need to be tracked > individually, and those that are trivial. Additionally, I get to work at > 7am before the rabble, and get a few hours of good "big ticket" items > done then. Most of the time I stay late and usually do the "big ticket" items when everyone is gone. > Obviously, this is like my father-in-law telling me to keep a diary. It > works well for him, but for me it just ain't happening. Different > strokes and all. Has your father-in-law explained why you should keep a diary, and how to do it properly? ;) Best regards, Vitaliy

On May 16, 2006, at 10:54 PM, Vitaliy wrote: > It was not until someone told me exactly what kind of planner to > buy, and > explained how to use it correctly, that I was able to realize its full > potential. Now I can't imagine being able to work without it. In > case this > helps someone, I use the classic size Franklin Covey organizer with > two > pages per day planning system: > > http://shopping.franklincovey.com/shopping/catalog/productpaper.jsp? > navAction=push&navCount=1&id=prod540007 > > I can tell you with a high degree of certainty that the Compact size, > two-pages-per-day organizer with the layout shown (priorities/ > appointments > and notes) is the common denominator for planners. Compact is too > small to > be useful. Monarch is too bulky to carry. A long time ago I was a "Franklin-head". The company I worked for sent me to their training course, which actually went a long way toward me learning about how I like to prioritize things and how to do it. I think anyone who hasn't taken a class in time management/ organization definitely should... even if it's not Franklin-Covey... just something. Forcing yourself to sit through a week of ideas about how to organize oneself, tends to make you think about it long enough to come up with a system that can work for you. I used the "Franklin system" for years, but as time went on it got modified for how I like to work personally. One VERY useful purpose of the Monarch sized planner was that at the time I had a LOT of paper notes and documentation that needed to go with projects. I bought one of their odd-ball paper punches for their binders and any documentation on paper that went with a particular project or emergency contact info, etc... went in the Franklin. That was EXTREMELY useful at times... copies of bills, circuit diagrams/network layouts, whatever -- it all went in there and became very portable... my "porta-brain" as I called it back then. Nowadays, my document pile is on my desk along with various file folders in the drawer, and I'm not traveling like I was back then, so I don't need it. I got sucked into using Outlook to do task/calendar management because "everyone uses it" at work... but I bought a new MacBook today and I'll probably be working on moving the "personal" side of my "life" back into the tools on the Mac now... and figuring out how to do some iCal sharing with my wife (who has had her Mac all along, but when my old Mac got too slow I opted for a PC-based laptop... never again...). But it definitely is nifty once in a while to pull those old Franklin planners off the bookshelf in the basement, and the "stuff" that all seemed so important back then comes flooding back to memory, along with all my notes and the documents, still preserved in the planner. That's something none of the electronic systems I've used could ever do... become the "historical documentation" of my time spent that year/quarter/whatever. Nate

part 1 1958 bytes content-type:text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; (decoded 7bit) Spehro wrote: > For techniques, I've found the Harvard Business School Project > Management Manual useful. It's only about 40 pages and about 10 years old, > but has a number of simple, effective approaches such as the Post-ItT note > task > ownership technique that can work well with large to smaller (say 10 > people) > teams. HBS Publication: 9-697-034 Is it possible to buy the manual? Couldn't find it on Amazon.. Can you please elaborate on the Post-IT note task ownership technique? > Once you get much smaller than that, it's more like time management. > Context switch time becomes very important, blocking of time to improve > efficiency, and that sort of thing. I'm doing that already, it definitely helps but it's not enough. It works fine for urgent things, both important and unimportant, and even for important projects that are relatively short. The important long-term projects are the ones that get the short end of the stick. > There are plenty of fat books that cover project management, many of them > from the professional manager's pov, rather than from the typical techie > pov > where all work not actually producing a design or cranking out code is > considered wasted. ;-) Nowadays, I'm more of the former than the latter. :) I've seen lots of time wasted cranking out code, which could have been avoided by spending an hour on proper planning. There's a dilbert cartoon in my planner about management books (see attachment). :) > As far as letting a program juggle priorities, I doubt it's possible, if > your days are anything like mine. I mean the big priorities (say, to within +/- 1 day). Once the big priorities are figured out, small stuff will either get situated around the big task, or get thrown out (which is acceptable given the alternative of delaying/not doing the important task). Best regards, Vitaliy part 2 9226 bytes content-type:application/octet-stream; (decode) part 3 35 bytes content-type:text/plain; charset="us-ascii" (decoded 7bit)

Bob Axtell wrote: > You have to juggle all the responsibilities. On long-term contracts, > make sure you get paid some partially, [snip] I should probably mention that unlike Embed Inc, for the most part we do in-house projects, rarely anything for an outside customer. There are only a few products that we sell, the sales are in a few thousands of units per year. {Quote hidden}> Every responsible client knows that you have to juggle, and most will > assist you. But there are a few > tricks: (1) do the schematic design as accurately but fast as possible. > While they are mulling it over, > you can squeeze in a few small jobs; (2) PCB layout is similar; the > client will normally have to review > your PCB layout and will INEVITABLY make some changes. Again, you have > time to do small jobs > while they are tinkering with the layout; (3) firmware design- I do my > best work at night, then can delegate > some responsibility during the day to others. I.E. work when you are > most efficient. This can be extrapolated to in-house projects as well, for example while I'm waiting for the PCBs to arrive, I can work on another project. You reinforced the idea that big tasks should get the time, and small tasks can fit around them. However, what I need is some kind of scheduling tool that would let me schedule a few big projects, with multiple tasks that may be interdependent. It should be able to tell me which task I should be working on today, based on the inputs I provide (duration, deadline, task relationship, importance, etc). > I liked BusyBee (sp?) but haven't been very busy lately. Its easy to use > and very understandable. What does it do, exactly? [snip] {Quote hidden}>> Importance describes how severe the consequences will be if the >> project >> is not done by a certain date, or at all. >> > Its better to complete on time, but its EVEN BETTER to do it right. If > you have some code you believe > might be squirrelly, you need to let him KNOW that your confidence is > not high on that part and he might > delegate somebody to help you test it. There was an old saying at TI- > "There's plenty of time to do it over, > after finding that there was not enough time to do it right". I agree 100%, but again I'm not talking just about deadlines, I'm talking about priorities on any given day. Should I do Project A or Project B? {Quote hidden}>> Urgency is easy to understand, but somewhat difficult to define. I >> want >> to differentiate it from importance, however: sometimes, answering a >> phone >> call may be more urgent than working on an important project that has a >> long >> duration. >> > Always answer the phone. But if it is from a telemarketer, be sure to > sue them for wasting your time. What if the deadline for an important project is tomorrow, and it's some user who bypassed the online support system calling to waste my time? :) {Quote hidden}>> The ideal project management software would take some or all of these >> inputs, plus task dependencies, and produce a Gantt chart (or similar). >> Then, once in a while, you would be able to update some of the variables, >> and produce a new chart. What I don't like about the software that I've >> used >> so far is the fact that it forces you to prioritize and schedule the >> tasks >> yourself, instead of doing the scheduling for you. Since the process is >> purely analytical, I don't see why it can't be done by the computer >> (perhaps >> I'm missing something obvious). >> > Actually, such software could be written for our line of work, but there > is none so specific presently. Perhaps if we came up with an algorithm, we would be one step closer to making such software a reality? I don't think the requirements I outlined are specific to our line of work -- a program like that could be used in other environments as well. In fact, any environment where multiple projects have to be managed simultaneously. Heck, I would settle for a procedure on a piece of paper, if it would help me quickly determine my tasks and their sequence for the week -- it sure beats using intuition (which, as we know, is right only about 50% of the time). Best regards, Vitaliy

Nathan Duehr wrote: [snip] > One VERY useful purpose of the Monarch sized planner was that at the > time I had a LOT of paper notes and documentation that needed to go > with projects. I bought one of their odd-ball paper punches for > their binders and any documentation on paper that went with a > particular project or emergency contact info, etc... went in the > Franklin. That was EXTREMELY useful at times... copies of bills, > circuit diagrams/network layouts, whatever -- it all went in there > and became very portable... my "porta-brain" as I called it back then. How did it all fit? And how did you organize it -- did you have a tab for every project? > Nowadays, my document pile is on my desk along with various file > folders in the drawer, and I'm not traveling like I was back then, so > I don't need it. I use file folders too, but I also find that it's more convenient for me to save project documents on the server. If they're not in digital form, I simply scan them into a PDF. We have a sheet-fed scanner, so it's very fast (I use b/w at 600 dpi). The added benefit is that other people can access the documents as well. > I got sucked into using Outlook to do task/calendar > management because "everyone uses it" at work... but I bought a new > MacBook today and I'll probably be working on moving the "personal" > side of my "life" back into the tools on the Mac now... and figuring > out how to do some iCal sharing with my wife (who has had her Mac all > along, but when my old Mac got too slow I opted for a PC-based > laptop... never again...). Based on my personal experience, and that of others, electronic planners are not as efficient as the "real" ones. You can't take the computer everywhere, and having to boot it up and start Outlook will take away the incentive to write down the little tasks (which you will promptly forget). > But it definitely is nifty once in a while to pull those old Franklin > planners off the bookshelf in the basement, and the "stuff" that all > seemed so important back then comes flooding back to memory, along > with all my notes and the documents, still preserved in the planner. > That's something none of the electronic systems I've used could ever > do... become the "historical documentation" of my time spent that > year/quarter/whatever. Plus, they're admissible in court and do not require batteries. :) Best regards, Vitaliy

On May 17, 2006, at 12:04 AM, Vitaliy wrote: > Nathan Duehr wrote: > [snip] >> One VERY useful purpose of the Monarch sized planner was that at the >> time I had a LOT of paper notes and documentation that needed to go >> with projects. I bought one of their odd-ball paper punches for >> their binders and any documentation on paper that went with a >> particular project or emergency contact info, etc... went in the >> Franklin. That was EXTREMELY useful at times... copies of bills, >> circuit diagrams/network layouts, whatever -- it all went in there >> and became very portable... my "porta-brain" as I called it back >> then. > > How did it all fit? And how did you organize it -- did you have a > tab for > every project? Yes and no. For long-term stuff, yes... big projects that lasted many months got their own tab. Small projects that were going to be "over with" within a month got placed at the front of the month... and I'd refer to the documents at the front of the month if needed. If I knew a whole day or set of days might be devoted to a single project, I'd move the documentation to those days, usually ahead of time if I could plan that far ahead. Stuff that just needed to be archived would be stuck in on the day it happened. If a project spanned multiple months it got "moved forward" in my once a month removal of some prior month's pages. Prior months were moved to a binder at my desk. {Quote hidden}>> Nowadays, my document pile is on my desk along with various file >> folders in the drawer, and I'm not traveling like I was back then, so >> I don't need it. > > I use file folders too, but I also find that it's more convenient > for me to > save project documents on the server. If they're not in digital > form, I > simply scan them into a PDF. We have a sheet-fed scanner, so it's > very fast > (I use b/w at 600 dpi). The added benefit is that other people can > access > the documents as well. I need to get into that habit. We have a nice sheet-feed copier/ scanner/fax at work that will e-mail the images to you over the network. Kinda nice... always forget to use it. I'm more and more not liking non-editable formats, but docs like these would be a good candidate for scanning. {Quote hidden}>> I got sucked into using Outlook to do task/calendar >> management because "everyone uses it" at work... but I bought a new >> MacBook today and I'll probably be working on moving the "personal" >> side of my "life" back into the tools on the Mac now... and figuring >> out how to do some iCal sharing with my wife (who has had her Mac all >> along, but when my old Mac got too slow I opted for a PC-based >> laptop... never again...). > > Based on my personal experience, and that of others, electronic > planners are > not as efficient as the "real" ones. You can't take the computer > everywhere, > and having to boot it up and start Outlook will take away the > incentive to > write down the little tasks (which you will promptly forget). Yeah, very true. I am hoping the new Mac (since they sleep virtually instantaneously simply by closing the lid and start up again in just a second or two) might help in this regard. My PC laptop is dog-slow coming up out of sleep mode. My Macs just "do it right". >> But it definitely is nifty once in a while to pull those old Franklin >> planners off the bookshelf in the basement, and the "stuff" that all >> seemed so important back then comes flooding back to memory, along >> with all my notes and the documents, still preserved in the planner. >> That's something none of the electronic systems I've used could ever >> do... become the "historical documentation" of my time spent that >> year/quarter/whatever. > > Plus, they're admissible in court and do not require batteries. :) Yeah, good point. I've always been good about keeping the "future court evidence" on paper in the filing cabinet, though... been there, done that... needed a doc and didn't have it. Nate

Let me throw my two cents in at the top. Each and Every Week, have one regularly scheduled, uninterrupted one hour long (no more no less) meeting between the top 2 or three players - Engineering, Production and Marketing say. DO NOT DICUSS DETAILED TECHNICAL ISSUES. Let me repeat...DO NOT DICUSS DETAILED TECHNICAL ISSUES. Discuss what your customers, consultants and other outsiders are saying. Oh, and GET UP AFTER EXACTLY ONE HOUR and LEAVE - go finish that PCB layout!!! The technical issues will solve themselves - they will either go away, blow up in your face or become "features". The stakeholders, on the other hand, have a big stake in your success and should set priorities. These can be people you owe money (seed capital, monthly bills) to so all your effort ought to be directed to a) sell them stuff; b)make them like you, c) make their companies want to buy your stuff. My $ .02 Carey Vitaliy wrote: {Quote hidden}> Bob Axtell wrote: > >> You have to juggle all the responsibilities. On long-term contracts, >> make sure you get paid some partially, >> > [snip] > > I should probably mention that unlike Embed Inc, for the most part we do > in-house projects, rarely anything for an outside customer. There are only a > few products that we sell, the sales are in a few thousands of units per > year. > > >> Every responsible client knows that you have to juggle, and most will >> assist you. But there are a few >> tricks: (1) do the schematic design as accurately but fast as possible. >> While they are mulling it over, >> you can squeeze in a few small jobs; (2) PCB layout is similar; the >> client will normally have to review >> your PCB layout and will INEVITABLY make some changes. Again, you have >> time to do small jobs >> while they are tinkering with the layout; (3) firmware design- I do my >> best work at night, then can delegate >> some responsibility during the day to others. I.E. work when you are >> most efficient. >> > > This can be extrapolated to in-house projects as well, for example while I'm > waiting for the PCBs to arrive, I can work on another project. You > reinforced the idea that big tasks should get the time, and small tasks can > fit around them. > > However, what I need is some kind of scheduling tool that would let me > schedule a few big projects, with multiple tasks that may be interdependent. > It should be able to tell me which task I should be working on today, based > on the inputs I provide (duration, deadline, task relationship, importance, > etc). > > >> I liked BusyBee (sp?) but haven't been very busy lately. Its easy to use >> and very understandable. >> > > What does it do, exactly? > > [snip] > >>> Importance describes how severe the consequences will be if the >>> project >>> is not done by a certain date, or at all. >>> >>> >> Its better to complete on time, but its EVEN BETTER to do it right. If >> you have some code you believe >> might be squirrelly, you need to let him KNOW that your confidence is >> not high on that part and he might >> delegate somebody to help you test it. There was an old saying at TI- >> "There's plenty of time to do it over, >> after finding that there was not enough time to do it right". >> > > I agree 100%, but again I'm not talking just about deadlines, I'm talking > about priorities on any given day. Should I do Project A or Project B? > > >>> Urgency is easy to understand, but somewhat difficult to define. I >>> want >>> to differentiate it from importance, however: sometimes, answering a >>> phone >>> call may be more urgent than working on an important project that has a >>> long >>> duration. >>> >>> >> Always answer the phone. But if it is from a telemarketer, be sure to >> sue them for wasting your time. >> > > What if the deadline for an important project is tomorrow, and it's some > user who bypassed the online support system calling to waste my time? :) > > >>> The ideal project management software would take some or all of these >>> inputs, plus task dependencies, and produce a Gantt chart (or similar). >>> Then, once in a while, you would be able to update some of the variables, >>> and produce a new chart. What I don't like about the software that I've >>> used >>> so far is the fact that it forces you to prioritize and schedule the >>> tasks >>> yourself, instead of doing the scheduling for you. Since the process is >>> purely analytical, I don't see why it can't be done by the computer >>> (perhaps >>> I'm missing something obvious). >>> >>> >> Actually, such software could be written for our line of work, but there >> is none so specific presently. >> > > Perhaps if we came up with an algorithm, we would be one step closer to > making such software a reality? I don't think the requirements I outlined > are specific to our line of work -- a program like that could be used in > other environments as well. In fact, any environment where multiple projects > have to be managed simultaneously. > > Heck, I would settle for a procedure on a piece of paper, if it would help > me quickly determine my tasks and their sequence for the week -- it sure > beats using intuition (which, as we know, is right only about 50% of the > time). > > Best regards, > > Vitaliy > > -- *Carey Fisher, Chief Technical Officer New Communications Solutions, LLC *.....careyfisherKILLspam@spam@ncsradio.com <careyfisherKILLspamncsradio.com> Toll Free Phone:888-883-5788 Local Phone:770-814-0683 FAX: 888-883-5788 http://www.ncsradio.com <http://www.ncsradio.com/>

>> Its better to complete on time, but its EVEN BETTER to do it right. ... > >I agree 100%, but again I'm not talking just about >deadlines, I'm talking about priorities on any given day. >Should I do Project A or Project B? The problem I see here is adjusting the relative priorities. Somehow that has to be put into the software you are attempting to use to do the time management. But what I think you are trying to solve is a problem that is probably similar to the scheduling problem that software operating systems have. Even a low priority task has its priority bumped up periodically to make it "do some work" intermittently, and you are attempting to come up with a way that does this for your tasks. >> Always answer the phone. But if it is from a telemarketer, >> be sure to sue them for wasting your time. > >What if the deadline for an important project is tomorrow, >and it's some user who bypassed the online support system >calling to waste my time? :) This sounds like the priority has reached a point where you divert your phone to a secretary, and if someone who really needs to talk to you rings she comes in to your office to get you to the phone. If things have got that important, then almost all phone calls are a waste of time. Reminds me of a couple of colleagues who had got to a point in the company where all the awkward projects got dropped on them. They found that they could redirect their respective phones to each other, and then the PABX got real confused and the calls dropped into a black hole. Unfortunately a later software upgrade to the PABX meant that only one redirection occurred, so there was no longer a black hole.

On Tue, 16 May 2006 17:16:55 -0700, Vitaliy wrote: >... > It seems to me that any project or individual task can be described in terms > of duration, flexibility, importance, and urgency. I think there are other factors that need to be taken into account: granularity, and delegatability. Some things really need to be done at one hit, with no interruptions, usually because you are carrying a whole pile of things in your mind at once, and you don't want to lose them by having to think of something else. If a task is like this, block off a time to do it, shut the door (if any) and put up a "Do Not Disturb" sign, and redirect your phone. Items like this can be moves as an entity, but once started need to be finished. Schedule these first, based on the characteristics you list above. You don't say if you can delegate any of your work to others. If so, you need to decide which things you *must* do yourself, and which can be delegated. Unfortunately this sometimes means delegating interesting stuff - which is a shame, but it has to be done if you are going to get everything finished! I find it's useful having a small pile of relatively simple, relatively short, independant jobs that you can hand out to people who run out of work, to save you having to drop everything to find them something to do, giving you time to give them something more meaty without it impacting your own schedule. I once did a time management course where they said that everything should be prioritised using importance and urgency - I think this is far too simplistic, and you find yourself adding the other characteristics to get a realistic way to schedule things. I have never found any diary / scheduling / project management software that would do the job satisfactorily without a lot of manual tweaking to get sensible answers. I think the problem is rather too complex, and too little understood by the people developing the software. (I once had quite a set-to with Lotus about Organizer, trying to get them to add a couple of features and improve some existing ones so that it could be used for group scheduling, which it was supposed to do, but they couldn't see the point, and dismissed my suggestions, making it useless for the job). Oh, and when planning ahead never schedule more than 80% of your time, unless you have only one thing to do and no way for the outside world to contact you! Cheers, Howard Winter St.Albans, England

At 10:18 PM 5/16/2006 -0700, you wrote: >Spehro wrote: >>For techniques, I've found the Harvard Business School Project >>Management Manual useful. It's only about 40 pages and about 10 years old, >>but has a number of simple, effective approaches such as the Post-ItT note >>task >>ownership technique that can work well with large to smaller (say 10 people) >>teams. HBS Publication: 9-697-034 > >Is it possible to buy the manual? Couldn't find it on Amazon.. Yes, it is. You don't have to spend $100K on an HBS MBA. ;-) http://harvardbusinessonline.hbsp.harvard.edu/relay.jhtml?name=itemdetail&id=697034 >Can you please elaborate on the Post-IT note task ownership technique? It's a way of helping to create the Work Breakdown Structure. You gather the entire team and provide each member with a pack of Post-Its. The question for each is "what is all the work required to accomplish the major deliverables". They each identify tasks and components, and write them on the Post-Its, which are then placed on the wall in various groupings. This generates active discussion and gives every team member a better understanding of the work required to meet the objectives. Then task ownership is assigned to low level tasks so that nobody has to question who is responsible for a given task. Then you work on the dependencies and so on. I think it's critical to break down the work sufficiently that it forces you to find tasks you may have overlooked which can blow your schedule out of the water. Then you can change the requirements, get more help, or whatever to keep things on track. >>Once you get much smaller than that, it's more like time management. >>Context switch time becomes very important, blocking of time to improve >>efficiency, and that sort of thing. > >I'm doing that already, it definitely helps but it's not enough. It works >fine for urgent things, both important and unimportant, and even for >important projects that are relatively short. The important long-term >projects are the ones that get the short end of the stick. The only way I've found to make that work is to devote a certain amount of time to the long term project on a regular basis. Eg. an hour a day, or three three-hour sessions a week. If you start to borrow from that time and let the urgents take over that time, you'll never reach your long-term goals. When the long term projects are completely broken down and divided into those sessions and added up to calendar time you may not be happy with the calendar time required to reach those goals, and you may want to increase the time spent on those, alter them, delegate or subcontract etc. >>There are plenty of fat books that cover project management, many of them >>from the professional manager's pov, rather than from the typical techie pov >>where all work not actually producing a design or cranking out code is >>considered wasted. ;-) > >Nowadays, I'm more of the former than the latter. :) I've seen lots of >time wasted cranking out code, which could have been avoided by spending >an hour on proper planning. I agree 100%. >Best regards, Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" .....speffKILLspam.....interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

part 1 3338 bytes content-type:text/plain; format=flowed (decoded quoted-printable) {Quote hidden}>From: "Vitaliy" <EraseMEspamspam_OUTTakeThisOuTmaksimov.org> >Reply-To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <piclistspam_OUTmit.edu> >To: "piclist" <@spam@PICLISTKILLspammit.edu> >Subject: [OT]: Project management techniques/software >Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 17:16:55 -0700 > >Hello List, > >The question I have is about project management, and I realize that most >people here are engineers; however, I'm sure that most of you worked on a >project involving a team of people, and I would appreciate any insights you >can provide. > >The question is, how do you manage multiple projects of different duration? >Suppose that you run a small business, and you have long-term projects (3-6 >months), short-term projects (1-6 weeks), and day-to-day "business" stuff. >Now, since you have a small business you are responsible for managing all >three (can't outsource them to other managers). > >The problem is, how do you know what you should be doing at any given >moment? You can't be doing just the long-term projects, and neglect the >day-to-day activities, because you will run out of money. On the other >hand, >if you take care of all the day-to-day tasks, the long-term projects will >never get done. Ideally, there needs to be a balance between the three. > >Another related question is, have you used project management software that >can keep track of several projects at a time? IMHO, MS Project et al are >more suitable for large, single projects, and are not good at >simultaneously >keeping track of several projects of different duration and scope. > >It seems to me that any project or individual task can be described in >terms >of duration, flexibility, importance, and urgency. > > Duration is self-explanatory. > > Flexibility means that the project can be rescheduled if needed. A >Christmas party is an example of a non-flexible project because you can >only >do it on December 25. MASTERs conference is another such example -- you >either attend it on July 26-29, or skip it altogether. > > Importance describes how severe the consequences will be if the >project >is not done by a certain date, or at all. > > Urgency is easy to understand, but somewhat difficult to define. I >want >to differentiate it from importance, however: sometimes, answering a phone >call may be more urgent than working on an important project that has a >long >duration. > >The ideal project management software would take some or all of these >inputs, plus task dependencies, and produce a Gantt chart (or similar). >Then, once in a while, you would be able to update some of the variables, >and produce a new chart. What I don't like about the software that I've >used >so far is the fact that it forces you to prioritize and schedule the tasks >yourself, instead of doing the scheduling for you. Since the process is >purely analytical, I don't see why it can't be done by the computer >(perhaps >I'm missing something obvious). > >Thank you in advance for your responses, and sorry for the long post. > >Best regards, > >Vitaliy > >

Vitaliy, No, you're right - it probably needs some explanation. This is based on my more than 30 years experience as design engineering, manufacturing engineering and manufacturing and executive management. After an hour, in my experience, productivity drops rapidly with people making phone calls, daydreaming, thinking about their next meeting etc. The brain can only absorb as much as the butt (rear end, tailbone, etc) can stand. Also, the longer you meet, the more you begin to think alike. "Group think" can be a creativity and productivity killer as much as anything. Above all, however, leave the meeting with a list of things to get done before the next meeting and get them done before the next meeting (unless something more important gets in the way) HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa It's like any human endeavor, you do your best to make your way through the process developing little rules here and there that help for a while then become counter-productive as the little small-minded bureacrats incorporate the loose rules into an ever-stiffening hierarchy of processes and procedures (ISO9000). Then a disaster happens and somebody *in power* says "screw the rules, use your common sense". And you say "oh yeah - forgot about that". Things instantly get better and move on well for a while until some bonehead without common sense screws up. Uh-oh - here comes ISO9000000+++++ !!!! And yeah, to get back to the main premise of this rant. I am one of two partners in a small business. The other partner and I do all the technical stuff. We have a Marketing type helping us also. When we have our weekly meetings, we get a lot of technical decisions made in the first hour. Then three hours later, the Marketing guy has tried to convince us we need 62 variations of 16 new products and our motivation is just nil. Maybe he's the wrong Marketing type - but probably not - he's no different than all the others we've worked with. By the time he's thru, I've forgotten why I attended the meeting. Hope this helps. RANT OFF (You can probably tell I'm missing some sleep getting ready to go to Dayton). Carey Vitaliy wrote: {Quote hidden}> Carey Fisher wrote: > [snip] > >> Each and Every Week, have one regularly scheduled, uninterrupted one >> hour long (no more no less) meeting between the top 2 or three players - >> Engineering, Production and Marketing say. >> >> DO NOT DICUSS DETAILED TECHNICAL ISSUES. Let me repeat...DO NOT DICUSS >> DETAILED TECHNICAL ISSUES. Discuss what your customers, consultants and >> other outsiders are saying. Oh, and GET UP AFTER EXACTLY ONE HOUR and >> LEAVE - go finish that PCB layout!!! >> > > Carey, not that I don't trust you, but could you please justify the rules? > :) > > You explained how the technical issues take care of themselves, but what > about the "get up after exactly one hour and leave"? And what if the > Engineering, Production, and Marketing are handled by just two managers > (more or less equally)? Remember we are talking about a small business... > > Best regards, > > Vitaliy > > -- *Carey Fisher, Chief Technical Officer New Communications Solutions, LLC *KILLspamcareyfisherKILLspamncsradio.com <RemoveMEcareyfisherTakeThisOuTncsradio.com> Toll Free Phone:888-883-5788 Local Phone:770-814-0683 FAX: 888-883-5788 http://www.ncsradio.com <http://www.ncsradio.com/>

we need 62 variations of 16 new products Do you go ahead and produce the 992 variations ? POD On 2006-May 17, at 6:32 PM, Carey Fisher wrote: Vitaliy, No, you're right - it probably needs some explanation. This is based on my more than 30 years experience as design engineering, manufacturing engineering and manufacturing and executive management. After an hour, in my experience, productivity drops rapidly with people making phone calls, daydreaming, thinking about their next meeting etc. The brain can only absorb as much as the butt (rear end, tailbone, etc) can stand. Also, the longer you meet, the more you begin to think alike. "Group think" can be a creativity and productivity killer as much as anything. Above all, however, leave the meeting with a list of things to get done before the next meeting and get them done before the next meeting (unless something more important gets in the way) HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa It's like any human endeavor, you do your best to make your way through the process developing little rules here and there that help for a while then become counter-productive as the little small-minded bureacrats incorporate the loose rules into an ever-stiffening hierarchy of processes and procedures (ISO9000). Then a disaster happens and somebody *in power* says "screw the rules, use your common sense". And you say "oh yeah - forgot about that". Things instantly get better and move on well for a while until some bonehead without common sense screws up. Uh-oh - here comes ISO9000000+++++ !!!! And yeah, to get back to the main premise of this rant. I am one of two partners in a small business. The other partner and I do all the technical stuff. We have a Marketing type helping us also. When we have our weekly meetings, we get a lot of technical decisions made in the first hour. Then three hours later, the Marketing guy has tried to convince us we need 62 variations of 16 new products and our motivation is just nil. Maybe he's the wrong Marketing type - but probably not - he's no different than all the others we've worked with. By the time he's thru, I've forgotten why I attended the meeting. Hope this helps. RANT OFF (You can probably tell I'm missing some sleep getting ready to go to Dayton). Carey Vitaliy wrote: {Quote hidden}> Carey Fisher wrote: > [snip] > >> Each and Every Week, have one regularly scheduled, uninterrupted one >> hour long (no more no less) meeting between the top 2 or three >> players - >> Engineering, Production and Marketing say. >> >> DO NOT DICUSS DETAILED TECHNICAL ISSUES. Let me repeat...DO NOT >> DICUSS >> DETAILED TECHNICAL ISSUES. Discuss what your customers, >> consultants and >> other outsiders are saying. Oh, and GET UP AFTER EXACTLY ONE >> HOUR and >> LEAVE - go finish that PCB layout!!! >> > > Carey, not that I don't trust you, but could you please justify the > rules? > :) > > You explained how the technical issues take care of themselves, but > what > about the "get up after exactly one hour and leave"? And what if the > Engineering, Production, and Marketing are handled by just two > managers > (more or less equally)? Remember we are talking about a small > business... > > Best regards, > > Vitaliy > > -- *Carey Fisher, Chief Technical Officer New Communications Solutions, LLC *spamBeGonecareyfisherspamBeGonencsradio.com <TakeThisOuTcareyfisherEraseMEspam_OUTncsradio.com> Toll Free Phone:888-883-5788 Local Phone:770-814-0683 FAX: 888-883-5788 http://www.ncsradio.com <http://www.ncsradio.com/>

Gus S Calabrese wrote: > we need 62 variations of 16 new products > Do you go ahead and produce the 992 variations ? > POD > No, of course not, but it sure clouds the issue of exactly where you're headed. This is where a documented but flexible product roadmap: 6mo, 1yr, 2yr, 5yr, maybe also 10 yr helps keep you grounded in reality. Then again, there are some applications where the customer can choose a wide variety of their boxes (radios) to mate with our boxes (controllers) so you have to be able to accommodate large numbers of variations in small batch sizes. It can be a semi-custom business and you have to develop effective wide range processes so you don't start from scratch with each new variation. **Electronics Manufacturing is like Sausage Making - you don't ever really want to watch!** Carey {Quote hidden}> On 2006-May 17, at 6:32 PM, Carey Fisher wrote: > > Vitaliy, > > No, you're right - it probably needs some explanation. This is based on > my more than 30 years experience as design engineering, manufacturing > engineering and manufacturing and executive management. After an hour, > in my experience, productivity drops rapidly with people making phone > calls, daydreaming, thinking about their next meeting etc. The brain > can only absorb as much as the butt (rear end, tailbone, etc) can stand. > > Also, the longer you meet, the more you begin to think alike. "Group > think" can be a creativity and productivity killer as much as anything. > > Above all, however, leave the meeting with a list of things to get done > before the next meeting and get them done before the next meeting > (unless something more important gets in the way) HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa > > It's like any human endeavor, you do your best to make your way through > the process developing little rules here and there that help for a while > then become counter-productive as the little small-minded bureacrats > incorporate the loose rules into an ever-stiffening hierarchy of > processes and procedures (ISO9000). Then a disaster happens and > somebody *in power* says "screw the rules, use your common sense". And > you say "oh yeah - forgot about that". > > Things instantly get better and move on well for a while until some > bonehead without common sense screws up. Uh-oh - here comes > ISO9000000+++++ !!!! > > And yeah, to get back to the main premise of this rant. I am one of two > partners in a small business. The other partner and I do all the > technical stuff. We have a Marketing type helping us also. When we > have our weekly meetings, we get a lot of technical decisions made in > the first hour. Then three hours later, the Marketing guy has tried to > convince us we need 62 variations of 16 new products and our motivation > is just nil. Maybe he's the wrong Marketing type - but probably not - > he's no different than all the others we've worked with. By the time > he's thru, I've forgotten why I attended the meeting. > > Hope this helps. > > RANT OFF > > (You can probably tell I'm missing some sleep getting ready to go to > Dayton). > > Carey > > Vitaliy wrote: > >> Carey Fisher wrote: >> [snip] >> >> >>> Each and Every Week, have one regularly scheduled, uninterrupted one >>> hour long (no more no less) meeting between the top 2 or three >>> players - >>> Engineering, Production and Marketing say. >>> >>> DO NOT DICUSS DETAILED TECHNICAL ISSUES. Let me repeat...DO NOT >>> DICUSS >>> DETAILED TECHNICAL ISSUES. Discuss what your customers, >>> consultants and >>> other outsiders are saying. Oh, and GET UP AFTER EXACTLY ONE >>> HOUR and >>> LEAVE - go finish that PCB layout!!! >>> >>> >> Carey, not that I don't trust you, but could you please justify the >> rules? >> :) >> >> You explained how the technical issues take care of themselves, but >> what >> about the "get up after exactly one hour and leave"? And what if the >> Engineering, Production, and Marketing are handled by just two >> managers >> (more or less equally)? Remember we are talking about a small >> business... >> >> Best regards, >> >> Vitaliy >> >> >> > > -- *Carey Fisher, Chief Technical Officer New Communications Solutions, LLC *RemoveMEcareyfisherTakeThisOuTncsradio.com <careyfisherEraseME.....ncsradio.com> Toll Free Phone:888-883-5788 Local Phone:770-814-0683 FAX: 888-883-5788 http://www.ncsradio.com <http://www.ncsradio.com/>

Howard Winter wrote: >> It seems to me that any project or individual task can be described in >> terms >> of duration, flexibility, importance, and urgency. > > I think there are other factors that need to be taken into account: > granularity, and delegatability. Some > things really need to be done at one hit, with no interruptions, usually > because you are carrying a whole pile > of things in your mind at once, and you don't want to lose them by having > to think of something else. You are absolutely right. I noticed too that even small interruptions cause me to lose focus. I remember that someone talk about a certain company [citation needed], which found that giving each of their programmers their own office (with a door) results in higher productivity. The logic was, it reduces the temptation to interrupt another programmer's thought process to ask a basic question (just because someone's too lazy to Google the answer). > If a > task is like this, block off a time to do it, shut the door (if any) and > put up a "Do Not Disturb" sign, and > redirect your phone. Items like this can be moves as an entity, but once > started need to be finished. > Schedule these first, based on the characteristics you list above. Your comments were an inspiration for this sign which I now post on my door from time to time: http://www.maksimov.org/graphics/open_in_case_of_emergency.pdf > You don't say if you can delegate any of your work to others. Yes, I can. Managing others is my primary responsibility, therefore this topic is of much interest to me. {Quote hidden}> If so, you need to decide which things you > *must* do yourself, and which can be delegated. Unfortunately this > sometimes means delegating interesting > stuff - which is a shame, but it has to be done if you are going to get > everything finished! I find it's > useful having a small pile of relatively simple, relatively short, > independant jobs that you can hand out to > people who run out of work, to save you having to drop everything to find > them something to do, giving you > time to give them something more meaty without it impacting your own > schedule. It's a great idea. I've been doing something like this already -- I have a page at the front of the planner where I write things that I can delegate to others. > I once did a time management course where they said that everything should > be prioritised using importance and > urgency - I think this is far too simplistic, and you find yourself adding > the other characteristics to get a > realistic way to schedule things. Sure, it's simplistic -- but the model does have its uses, especially to people who are new to project management. If you prioritize using only importance and urgency, you are better off than if you didn't use any system at all. {Quote hidden}> I have never found any diary / scheduling / project management software > that would do the job satisfactorily > without a lot of manual tweaking to get sensible answers. I think the > problem is rather too complex, and too > little understood by the people developing the software. (I once had > quite a set-to with Lotus about > Organizer, trying to get them to add a couple of features and improve some > existing ones so that it could be > used for group scheduling, which it was supposed to do, but they couldn't > see the point, and dismissed my > suggestions, making it useless for the job). Theoretically though, it's possible -- right? :) Well-written software, provided with sufficient data, should be able to schedule tasks without human intervention. And it seems to me that the benefit you would get from such scheduling system would be greater than the work required to input the data and to keep it up-to-date. I like your concept of granularity, now it seems so obvious that it's strange that most programs do not utilize it. There are some tasks that consist of sub-tasks which are not necessarily interdependent, but should be done "at one hit" to minimize overhead and increase productivity. > Oh, and when planning ahead never schedule more than 80% of your time, ... Good advice! > ... unless you have only one thing to do > and no way for the outside world to contact you! I wish! :D Best regards, Vitaliy

Spehro Pefhany wrote: >>Is it possible to buy the manual? Couldn't find it on Amazon.. > > Yes, it is. You don't have to spend $100K on an HBS MBA. ;-) > > http://harvardbusinessonline.hbsp.harvard.edu/relay.jhtml?name=itemdetail&id=697034 Should receive it any day now. {Quote hidden}> It's a way of helping to create the Work Breakdown Structure. You gather > the entire team and provide each member with a pack of Post-Its. > The question for each is "what is all the work required to accomplish the > major deliverables". They each identify tasks and components, and write > them > on the Post-Its, which are then placed on the wall in various groupings. > This generates active discussion and gives every team member a better > understanding > of the work required to meet the objectives. Then task ownership is > assigned > to low level tasks so that nobody has to question who is responsible for a > given > task. Then you work on the dependencies and so on. I think it's critical > to > break down the work sufficiently that it forces you to find tasks you may > have overlooked which can blow your schedule out of the water. Then you > can > change the requirements, get more help, or whatever to keep things on > track. We're doing basically the same thing, only using bulleted lists in Word. The typical project teams are small, so it works OK and it doesn't have the overhead of having to convert the information from the stickies into some electronic format. {Quote hidden}>>I'm doing that already, it definitely helps but it's not enough. It works >>fine for urgent things, both important and unimportant, and even for >>important projects that are relatively short. The important long-term >>projects are the ones that get the short end of the stick. > > The only way I've found to make that work is to devote a certain amount of > time to the long term project on a regular basis. Eg. an hour a day, or > three > three-hour sessions a week. If you start to borrow from that time and let > the > urgents take over that time, you'll never reach your long-term goals. When > the long term projects are completely broken down and divided into those > sessions and added up to calendar time you may not be happy with the > calendar time required to reach those goals, and you may want to increase > the time spent on those, alter them, delegate or subcontract etc. What do you use for scheduling (personal organizer, yearly planner, software)? How do you estimate the time needed to complete a project? We're talking about the "mythical man-month" here, the idea that you can express a project in terms of man-hours. I know that I can accomplish more during a 15-hour marathon, than if I break the project up into smaller chunks -- how do you estimate the overhead? Howard talked about granularity, I think it's a very important concept. IMHO one of the main goals of project management should be to minimize context switching. I really appreciate the comments. I feel that we're on the verge of coming up with a useful scheduling algorithm. :) Best regards, Vitaliy

Darrell Wyatt wrote: > Vitality - Thanks, I like that name! It sure makes more sense, perhaps I should sign my messages "Vitalidad" when I write to my Spanish-speaking friends. ;-) > I can't speak on whether or not the software you describe is out there, > if it is, I'm not aware of it. It would be nice,though. Amen, it would be really nice. > Personally, I break each project into milestones, and assign due dates > and inter - dependencies to each. What do you use -- MS Project? Pencil and paper? > If any of the milestones' timeline assignments are questionable, prepare a > contingency plan in advance in case the date slips. It's less emotional > than > dealing with it when it happens... How do you decide which timeline assignments are questionable? Obviously you can't have a contingency plan for everything, do you use any other factors (such as the gravity of consequences) to determine which parts of the project need a contingency plan? > Also, when dealing with the longer projects, try to allow yourself some > cushion in the later stages. Seems like a no-brainer - and it isn't > always > possible, but it sure is nice if you need it. It is also advisable to put *all* of the slack at the very end, by alotting only as much time per task as it normally takes -- with no buffers in between. Doing otherwise results in procrastination and missed deadlines. The way it was explained to me, estimate time required to complete each task based on a "best case" scenario. Have two project deadlines -- one internal, one for the customer. Internal project duration is the sum of durations of the tasks in the critical path. Customer delivery date is calculated by taking the internal project duration and adding a safety buffer. [snip] > Prioritizing can be difficult as well. Especially day-to-day. Try to > establish > priorities, and define them early. That way when the excretus hits the > rotary airflow production mechanism, you have a reference against which > consequences can be compared and anticipated. That is the fundamental question: how do you establish priorities? Priority is a dependent variable. I would love to have a procedure which takes intuition and guessing out of the equation. > Like a lot of the software I've come across in manufacturing industry, > it's > great, intuitive, and convenient....but only works with what you put into > it. I have my Palm Pilot for mobile purposes, but primarily use my > Franklin > planner, and have for many years. It's all about your personal discipline > in consistent use - irregardless of the method or "gee-whiz" factor. Consistent use depends in large part on how easy a particular tool is to use. Contemporary electronic organizers have a much higher cost-of-use than the Franklin planner. Best regards, VItaliy

>That is the fundamental question: how do you establish priorities? > >Priority is a dependent variable. I would love to have a procedure >which takes intuition and guessing out of the equation. Surely this is a case of establishing things like delivery times from your suppliers. Certainly in my job where obtaining Rad-hard chips has lead times approaching a year, but sometimes longer, establishing the circuit, and getting a BOM for it ordered is an early priority, then laying out the PCBs becomes the next priority. For someone doing manufacturing, establishing lead times for getting molds for plastic parts, lead times for 100k off parts, work flow through the manufacturing plant, all must have some data available from past products, which then factor into planning a new product. Some of these must surely fix mileposts - if this isn't done by then, the plastics guy cannot make the delivery in time - if we don't have the parts by this date, we miss an available slot at the manufacturing plant. These surely determine the critical path items, and that in turn sorts some priorities. It may be better to have the hardware catch the manufacturing plant slot, and then sit in a warehouse for 2 months while the software is finalised, than miss the manufacturing slot and wait a further six months for another slot to get the hardware. Sure it means storing and double handling to program, but it may mean the product is out 4 months earlier.

Vitaliy wrote: > Gerhard, I am after information -- not data. ;) I know. But probably you'll have to put the data /somewhere/. > If I had time to learn every piece of project management software out > there, I would not be asking for help on the PicList. Well, if you're after information, you just might ask anyway :) > Have you ever tried something new (software, technique, tool) and after a > short while decided it's not worth your time to learn it further? Often enough. > Then much later you come back to it (for whatever reason), learned it all > the way, and decided that it really was worth it? Much more rare. I just wanted to throw this list in the pool of available information. (After all, data can be information -- if you can "read" it :) Maybe somebody else can add some more helpful bits of info. >From the programs, I only know Microsoft Project in any depth. I went to some length with it (was required on some past jobs), but never could convince myself to like it. I'm still not deep enough in it that I can rule out I might like it if I go deeper, but I suspect it's not worth it. It seems to need too much time and attention to throw out anything useful. What I can get out of it, I think I should be able to get with a simpler program in a simpler way. Gerhard

Gerhard Fiedler wrote: [snip] >> Have you ever tried something new (software, technique, tool) and after a >> short while decided it's not worth your time to learn it further? > > Often enough. > >> Then much later you come back to it (for whatever reason), learned it all >> the way, and decided that it really was worth it? > > Much more rare. It doesn't happen to me very often either, most of the time I come back to something because a friend/coworker recommends it / shows me the "right" way to use it. Like anything else, I will use a program as long as what I get out of it is more than I put in. >>From the programs, I only know Microsoft Project in any depth. I went to > some length with it (was required on some past jobs), but never could > convince myself to like it. I'm still not deep enough in it that I can > rule > out I might like it if I go deeper, but I suspect it's not worth it. It > seems to need too much time and attention to throw out anything useful. > What I can get out of it, I think I should be able to get with a simpler > program in a simpler way. Unfortunately, I feel the same way, although I can't call myself a Microsoft Project expert. However, for the time being, I refuse to give up the search because I know in my gut that the way I manage projects is not the best way. Critical Chain seems to me like a very good project management methodology, I will do more research and maybe describe my experience with it later this year. :) Best regards, Vitaliy