Baselining postpones the start of leveled tasks?! What's happening?

T

The Spaniard

Has anyone come across this problem?

I'm having the following issue in MS Project 2002 Professional/Enterprise
Server. After assigning a resource to several tasks that have the same
predacessor task and could logically start simultaneously, the resource
is, predictably, overallocated.

By choosing the resource sheet view, highlighting the resource, choosing
tools, leveling, level selected resource, Project adds values to the
Leveling Delay Column on the Entry Table/Gantt View and shifts each task
alleviating the overallocation. GREAT! Exactly what I was trying to
accomplish.

Now I choose to baseline the selected tasks which results in an unexpected
behavior in the program. Each task that has a value in the Leveling Delay
Column is pushed out into the future by the precise amount of elapsed time
indicated in the Leveling Delay Column. The outcome is that five one day
tasks that had been leveled to fill one week of duration become staggered
out over five weeks!

As I understood baselining, it simply copies current
start/finish/duration/cost etc. fields to corresponding baseline versions
of those fields, a passive activity I thought.

Is this a bug? Any insight would be much appreciated.

One additional note - The Leveling Delay added by the leveling function
adds values only to the column mentioned above. Individual assignment
delay, and plain old delay, are not affected (the values seen in a split
window with resource schedule view chosen). Will the real delay please
stand up.

Thanks for any help!

Mark
 
J

JackD

The Spaniard said:
Has anyone come across this problem?

I'm having the following issue in MS Project 2002 Professional/Enterprise
Server. After assigning a resource to several tasks that have the same
predacessor task and could logically start simultaneously, the resource
is, predictably, overallocated.
As I understood baselining, it simply copies current
start/finish/duration/cost etc. fields to corresponding baseline versions
of those fields, a passive activity I thought.

Is this a bug? Any insight would be much appreciated.

Sure sounds like a bug to me.
I tried but can not reproduce it.
Can you make it do it on a new file?

-Jack
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top