This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: ot to be making progress until the task is completed. This usually leads task leaders to wish they had taken time to quantify their tasks correctly in the first place. For the project manager, this is not a problem. Most project managers prefer a conservative approach for claiming credit for work in progress, anyway, and assigning a task a unit of measure of EA is extremely conservative. Task leaders do not get credit for any task until it is completely finished when the unit of measure is EA. Some experienced project managers force this type of quantification uniformly on their project to maintain a conservative progress measurement policy. But we consider this an extreme measure that should be avoided. The reason is that better cost and manpower estimates can be made if the work pack- Page 25 ages are quantified meaningfully. An old saying among project managers and cost estimators is: "If the work can't be quantified, it can't be estimated." It is important for project team members to understand this and to do their best to produce a meaningful quantification. After each task in a work package has been quantified, the work package itself needs to be quantified. Again, the responsibility for the quantification of a work package rests with the work package manager. And again, quantification of a work package involves selecting an appropriate unit of measure for the package and an appropriate quantity for the package expressed in this unit of measure. Often, it is the case that the unit of measure for a work package is the same as the unit of measure for one of the tasks within the work package. For instance, the Siteprep work package in the example project, as we will see in Section 2.3.3, has Tasks 1 and 3 with a unit of measure of Square Feet (SF) and Tasks 2 and 4 with a unit of measure of Cubic Yards (CY). We will also see in Section 2.3.3 that the unit of measure chosen for the Siteprep work package is SF, rather than CY or some other measure. This reflects the belief of the work package manager that quantifying the Siteprep work package is best done via SF, as opposed to CY or some other measure. In a case like this, it is sometimes said that among the units of measure for the tasks, SF is the dominant unit of measure, since it determines the unit of measure for the package. Unlike quantification of work packages, quantification of control packages above the work package level is the responsibility of the project manager. Quantification at this level does not affect the progress and performance measures that are based on the status information at the work package level. Nonetheless, it is important that the project manager or the project manager's staff select meaningful quantifications for the summary level control packages. This enables those reading reports to relate the progress measures at summary levels to something intuitively meaningful. Page 26 For instance, we will see in the WBS Listing report (Figure 2-6) that the unit of measure for the summary level "Foundation" control package is CY (of concrete). If a progress...
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 01/11/2011 for the course ACC 9 taught by Professor Yeetan during the Spring '10 term at Sunway University College.
- Spring '10