&
&e7
Something I've often struggled with when managing big projects in MSP is the
battle between ordering my schedule in a heirarchical manner or a
chronological manner.
To make things easier and stop MSP making 'clever' decisions as to when
tasks happen, I always use ID only levelling. I find that gives me more
control over when things happen.
During project breakdowns, I organise my scheudle hierarcihly into software
features, and it all looks nice and neat. Of course that's not how a project
gets MADE, so I have to set the order in which they're done.
The SIMPLEST method for me is to simply move the features from the BACKLOG
into roll-ups for the month it looks beautiful and then it's nice and easy
for myself and the team to see what activities and dependencies are for the
months ahead. I can also track VERY easily if a month's work is running
behind. However, that's at the price of seeing the context of where the work
fits into the rest of the project.
What do other people do to get the best of both worlds?
I've tried tagging tasks with feature names, that's good but prone to human
error.
battle between ordering my schedule in a heirarchical manner or a
chronological manner.
To make things easier and stop MSP making 'clever' decisions as to when
tasks happen, I always use ID only levelling. I find that gives me more
control over when things happen.
During project breakdowns, I organise my scheudle hierarcihly into software
features, and it all looks nice and neat. Of course that's not how a project
gets MADE, so I have to set the order in which they're done.
The SIMPLEST method for me is to simply move the features from the BACKLOG
into roll-ups for the month it looks beautiful and then it's nice and easy
for myself and the team to see what activities and dependencies are for the
months ahead. I can also track VERY easily if a month's work is running
behind. However, that's at the price of seeing the context of where the work
fits into the rest of the project.
What do other people do to get the best of both worlds?
I've tried tagging tasks with feature names, that's good but prone to human
error.