Project Management: Resources, Risks, And Costs

Resource Allocation and Distribution Issues

The solution is saved in attached file ‘PartAQ1.mpp’.

1. The new length of ‘1.1 Analysis of unique framework usefulness’ is 10 days. The span of ‘1.1 Analysis of unique framework usefulness’ has changed the length of project by 20 days. Prior the project span was 314 days, which is now 294 days. This could happen on the grounds that the change in duration of critical path activities, any adjustment in span of critical path tasks will have effect on project duration(2020projectmanagement, 2017).
2. The cost to complete the overall project was $346,720. But after adding resources and reducing the duration in equal proportion the overall cost remained same because after adding 2 additional resources the duration of activity is also reduced from 30 days to 10 days.

The overall solution is saved and attached herewith as ‘PartAQ2.mpp’.

The resources over distribution issues can be settled either by including extra resources or by deferring the exercises. In any case, the issue remains where the exercises are in critical path the term can’t be expanded so the main choices remain are to include additional resources. Yet, there is likewise another choice accessible is to disperse the accessible resources inside the float accessible in the activity so the general term doesn’t gets affected yet the resources additionally gets leveled with in the accessible +ve float activities.

The solution file is saved and attached herewith as ‘PartAQ3_resources.mpp’.

To: The owner of WorkFast P/L (Mr. Chris Parsons)

to notify the highlights of the project ‘Family Friendly Financial Control System’. The highlights are as below:

1. Start date of the project is 7^thAugust 2017

The expected completion date of the project is 17^th July 2018

1. Total length of the project is 239 working days (i.e. it prohibits holidays and ends of the week)
2. The primary factors behind the span of project are a direct result of the action groupings in the critical path or the longest way of the time schedule. The span of the project can be diminished by expanding the resources of the project especially for the activities in critical path to reduce the duration of critical path that is the overall duration will automatically get reduced.
3. The estimated direct labor costs of the project are:

Resource Name	Cost
Operations	$22,800.00
Analyst	$80,000.00
Database	$58,800.00
Software Engineers	$130,200.00
Telecommunications	$21,600.00
Installation Team	$33,320.00
Total Direct Labor Costs	$346,720.00

The updated schedule is attached herewith as file ‘PartAQ3_resources.mpp’.

The staff shall report to me & I shall report to the owner (Mr. Chris Parsons) of Helpful Solutions P/L. All the project management activities need to be performed by me and my team but the overall control on the budget and cost of the project is not under me; rather it is with the client. The purchase of any hardware need to be organized but can’t purchase. It has to be purchased by the client as per the scope of the contract.  So it is neither functional (as no other functional manager is there) and nor projectized (as the overall control of the project is not available with me) (Fremouw, 2017), it is a ‘Matrix Organization’.

Because in Matrix Organization, the horizontal reporting like I shall report to the owner of the company and to my organizational boss too. This kind of double reporting structure exists in Matric organization.

Project Risks (Winters, 2009):

Risk No.	Risk Description	Impact	Likelihood of occurrence (Low, Medium, High)	Degree of impact (Low, Medium, High)
1	There is a risk of non-availability of the resources throughout the project life cycle	The impact is high on the project, it at all it happens	Medium	High
2	There is a risk of getting schedule overrun because of the resource constraints	Again the impact would be high	Medium	High

The highlighted changes are marked in the attached file The impact changes on duration of the schedule are as below:

Change	Impact on Project duration	By how much	Explanation
Increase duration from 3 person-weeks to 6 person-weeks for ‘5.6.1’ & ‘5.6.2’ & from 2 person-weeks to 4 person-weeks for ‘5.6.3’	There was no impact on the overall duration of the project	0 days	Original end date was = 17/Jul/2018 Revised due to 5.6.1 = -NIL- Revised due to 5.6.2 = -NIL- Revised due to 5.6.3 = – NIL- Since the activity 5.6.1, 5.6.2 and 5.6.3 was not in the critical path (Stelth, 2009) and the float was available more than the increased duration, so there was no change in the overall duration of the project.
Allocation  of  additional  DB  to  task  ‘5.6.1’,  ‘5.6.2’  &  ‘5.6.3’	There was no impact on the overall duration of the project. But the individual durations of task 5.6.1, 5.6.2 & 5.6.3 got reduced	0 days	The duration of 5.6.1 & 5.6.2 became 15 from 30 & the duration of 5.6.3 became 10 from 20 because the additional DB absorbed the extra job of old DB and shared the % of volume equally
Increase duration from 1 person-week to 2 person-weeks for 3.4	There was no impact on the overall duration of the project	0 days	Original end date was = 17/Jul/2018 Revised due to 3.4 = -NIL- Since the float available in 3.4 was more than the increased duration, it didn’t impacted the overall duration of the project.
Reduction in time between first to second installation from 6 person-weeks to 4 person-weeks	Duration decreased	10 days	The overall duration for the project decreased from 239 days to 229 days. Since both the activities ‘6.2 Installation at first new store’ and ‘6.3 Installation at second new store’ are in critical path, so the reduction in the duration of link or lag has directly reduced the overall duration of the project.

The impact changes on cost of the schedule are as below:

Change	Impact on Direct Labor Costs	By how much	Explanation
Change in person-weeks required for tasks 5.6.1-5.6.3	Cost increased	$380,320 – $346,720 = $33,600	Budgeted Cost to Complete = $346,720 Revised due to 5.6.1 = $359,320 Revised due to 5.6.2 = $371,920 Revised due to 5.6.3 = $380,320 Due to increase in duration the resource usage also increases, and the cost is directly proportional to the use of resources (Pmbook, 2017), so the cost increased.
Allocation of additional DB to task 5.6.1, 5.6.2 & 5.6.3	No Change	$0	Budget did not changed from $380,320 as the additional DB has reduced the duration by 50% so the increased cost of additional DB has been countered by the reduction of duration
Change in person-weeks required for task 3.4	Cost increased	$383,920 – $380,320 = $3,600	Overall cost before change in 3.4 = $380,320 But after the duration increased by 2 person-weeks because of the duration of resource usage the cost of the project also got increased
Reduction in time between first to second installation from 6 person-weeks to 4 person-weeks	No Change	$0	Overall cost before change in duration of lag = $383,920 & now also same. This happened because we changed the lag duration not the duration of any activity & lag (Usmani, 2017) don’t need any resource either to increase or decrease, it is just a representation of the relationship between the activities.

References

2020projectmanagement, 2017. What is the Critical Path? [Online] Available at: https://2020projectmanagement.com/2014/05/what-is-the-critical-path/ [Accessed 29 July 2017].

Fremouw, B., 2017. Functional Organizations vs Projectized Organizations. [Online] Passionate Project Management Available at: https://www.passionatepm.com/blog/functional-organizations-versus-projectized-organizations-pmp-concept-10 [Accessed 23 September 2017].

Pmbook, 2017. 5. Cost Estimation. [Online] Available at: https://pmbook.ce.cmu.edu/05_Cost_Estimation.html [Accessed 23 September 2017].

Stelth, P., 2009. Projects’ Analysis through CPM (Critical Path Method). School of Doctoral Studies (European Union) Journal, pp.10-51.

Usmani, F., 2017. Lead Time and Lag Time in Project Scheduling Network Diagram. [Online] PM Study Circle Available at: https://pmstudycircle.com/2013/02/lead-time-and-lag-time-in-project-scheduling-network-diagram/ [Accessed 23 September 2017].

Winters, L., 2009. Deadliest catch: risk identification in the vast Bering Sea. In PMI® Global Congress 2009. North America, Orlando, 2009.