Alternative to using the task dependancy RRS feed

  • Question

  • Hi Everyone,

    Im hoping you may be able to assist.

    Im trying to get 5 tasks to start at the same time. I identified which task started futhest in front and then linked the other tasks as a start - start to that one.

    The problem is that when I resource level, the furtherest infront tasks might change, making my SS efforts useless. I then end up in a loop of reidentifying the front task etc etc.

    Obviously I cant link them in a loop (which would solve my issue) as project wont let me.

    Is there a way around this issue?



    Monday, July 7, 2014 5:31 PM

All replies

  • cossie2Know,

    Something doesn't sound quite right. If you're willing to let tasks move as a result of leveling, then you're willing to not have them all start at the same time. On the other hand, if they all must start at the same time, and some of them have resource conflicts (i.e. overallocation), then you must either allow the overallocation or assign different resources. So which do you want?

    If you have leveled and the tasks have moved, then it should only take one iteration to identify which of the 5 tasks is the frontrunner.


    Monday, July 7, 2014 6:35 PM
  • Change the resource work (effort) on each task to 1/5 or increase the resource maximum units (resource sheet) to 500%. We use 500% when we have generic users or a team working on the task.

    Monday, July 7, 2014 7:45 PM
  • Alex,

    You need to move away from using the method (CPM) and the tool to express what you want. The purpose, and a more effective way of approaching the problem, is to build a network model to find out what you can have, ie what is feasible. What you "want" is irrelevant until you first find out what you can have. A predecessor/successor link ("dependency" as you call it) is not there to make tasks start/finish at the same time. It is there to place a limit on the successor, Task B. With SS, "Task B cannot start any earlier than the start of Task A". This imposes a strict limit on how early Task B can start, relative to Task A, but  leaves open the possibility that some other reason (another predecessor or leveling, for example) may be the cause of Task B to start later than that.

    Only make predecessor/successor links which are true. Don't make predecessor links just to push and pull tasks to where they look like they are in the right place. Otherwise, you are doing the scheduling, which is hard work and confusing (eg, "loop"?), instead of letting the software do its job.

    Hope this helps.

    Monday, July 7, 2014 10:31 PM
  • Hi Everyone,

    I see your points. Ill have a look at my predecessors and make sure that Im not doing the levelling. Ive never changed my resource % so Ill have a go at that too.

    Thanks for your help


    Tuesday, July 8, 2014 7:03 AM
  • Alex,

    You're welcome and thanks for the feedback. If one or more of us has answered your question or at least been helpful, we appreciate a vote or marked as answer. In particular, I think Trevor provided the best response.


    Tuesday, July 8, 2014 2:30 PM