Loughborough University
Leicestershire, UK
LE11 3TU
+44 (0)1509 263171
Loughborough University

Loughborough University Institutional Repository

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/32738

Title: Do projects really end late? On the shortcomings of the classical scheduling techniques
Authors: Ballesteros-Perez, Pablo
Larsen, Graeme D.
Gonzalez-Cruz, M. Carmen
Keywords: Gantt
Critical path method (CPM)
Program evaluation and review technique (PERT)
Scheduling
Merge event bias
Project delay
Issue Date: 2018
Publisher: Omnia Science
Citation: BALLESTEROS-PEREZ, P., LARSEN, G.D. and GONZALEZ-CRUZ, M.C., 2018. Do projects really end late? On the shortcomings of the classical scheduling techniques. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 8(1), pp. 17-33.
Abstract: © 2018, OmniaScience. Many engineering projects fail to meet their planned completion dates in real practice. This is a recurrent topic in the project management literature, with poor planning and controlling practices frequently cited among the most significant causes of delays. Unfortunately, hardly any attention has been paid to the fact that the classical scheduling techniques-Gantt chart, Critical Path Method (CPM), and Program Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT)-may not be as fit for purpose as they seem. Arguably, because of their relative simplicity, these techniques are still almost the only ones taught nowadays in most introductory courses to scheduling in many engineering and management degrees. However, by utterly ignoring or inappropriately dealing with activity duration variability, these techniques provide optimistic completion dates, while suffering from other shortcomings. Through a series of simple case studies that can be developed with a few participants and common dice, a systematic critique of the classical scheduling techniques is offered. Discussion of the case studies results illustrate why limiting the contents of scheduling education and teaching can be detrimental, as the aforementioned classical scheduling techniques cannot not provide project managers with sufficient resources to effectively plan and control real projects.
Description: This is an Open Access Article. It is published by Omnia Science under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Licence (CC BY-NC). Full details of this licence are available at: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Sponsor: This work was supported by the CIOB Bowen Jenkins Legacy Research Fund under Grant number BLJ2016/BJL.01 at the University of Reading (United Kingdom)
Version: Published
DOI: 10.3926/jotse.303
URI: https://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/2134/32738
Publisher Link: https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.303
ISSN: 2014-5349
Appears in Collections:Published Articles (Architecture, Building and Civil Engineering)

Files associated with this item:

File Description SizeFormat
Articulo JOTSE 2018.pdfPublished version523.37 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

 

SFX Query

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.