meesh1224 said:
Hi John,
All great questions.
First, I am assuming that the supporting team schedule is leveled because
there is no indicator that a constraint has forced the dates. The creator of
the schedule is on vacation and sent the schedule at the 11th hour with no
detail around how it was created.
I do not want a static copy of the schedule inserted. I want it to be active
tasks in the plan that I can track to. The owner of the plan works in a
different office and thought it would be easier just to provide his own plan.
There lies the underlying problem. There was no communication about the
standards that should have been used to establish his schedule (i.e.
calendar, working hours, etc.).
The resource assigned to all of the tasks in the scheduled I'd like to add
has already been assigned to other tasks already in the master schedule that
were added on behalf of that same team - this additional schedule is like a
second bucket of work that the resource will be working on next... The
existing tasks she is assigned to should be complete before she started this
next bucket of work which should nicely waterfall. However, when I remove the
link to the inserted project or I paste the tasks in, these new tasks are
being scheduled before and around the existing tasks.
I apologize for the interchanging use of plan and schedule. They mean one in
the same in this context.
Thanks.
Michelle
Michele,
Ah, the old 11th hour trick - I think we have all experienced that at
one time or another.
My feeling is that if the other party is on vacation and he didn't
communicate with you about his plan, then you are free to make your own
decisions with regard to the schedule, although it may be a little tough
to get him to buy in to it when he returns from vacation.
You mention that you do NOT want a static copy of his schedule. Did you
try linking in his project dynamically (i.e. insert it into you master
via Insert/Projects). The default setting will give a dynamic insertion.
I haven't personally tried dynamically inserting a leveled project into
a non-leveled master but it should work just like you want (i.e. the
subproject will stay in its leveled state) because the subproject isn't
actually a part of the master. Rather, the master only contains a
pointer to the separate subproject. What you see at the master level is
a combination view.
If for some reason you cannot insert his file as a dynamic subproject
into your master, there are other ways to get the same schedule effect
but then it's an either/or proposition. Either his works to your version
of their schedule or you will only be able to get a snapshot of the
sub-team's schedule on a periodic basis (i.e. periodic static
insertion). One other option is to link selected tasks from the sub-team
schedule to your master (i.e. external predecessors/successors).
Your last paragraph is a bit confusing. It sounds like the sub-team's
schedule, (or at least some of it), is already in yours (i.e. ". . .in
the master schedule that were added on behalf of that same team. . .").
The mentioned resource's assignments will only dovetail (i.e. waterfall)
with tasks in the master and subproject if the links are appropriate. In
other words, the overall schedule should be laid out such that tasks are
linked in a logical order of progression. If the resource of interest is
assigned to those tasks there shouldn't be an issue with tasks being out
of sequence or overallocation of the resource.
I know, it is not easy to explain your schedule structure to someone
else. I'm not sure if I'm helping or just confusing you more. And by the
way, I don't have a problem with using "plan" and "schedule"
interchangeably. I guess one could argue that a plan is more
encompassing (i.e. the whole job, of which the schedule is just a part)
but for our discussion, assume they are one in the same.
John
