Record hours outside the start date or the finish date

[alex]

Hi,

Contexte:
Some resources record hours before the start date or after the finish date.
The impact is the planning is moved according to the new date because actual
is prior to the planning.

I don't use the summary task to record hour but only task.
I don't find any way to correct tis.
The impact is really unexpected.

Each project manager have a rule to auto accept the hours.
each days, around 15 resources updates the hours and the hours should be
apply to the planning. So the project manager don't have to check the hours,
he want to see the actual by reports.

Question
The project manager can't pass the time to check if the resource did a wrong
thing or not.
How can I handle this?

Best regards,
Alexandre BARAULT

 

[Dale Howard [MVP]]

Alex --

In the future, please post your Project Server questions in the
microsoft.public.project.server newsgroup, as this newsgroup is dedicated to
the Microsoft Project desktop application only. Here's what I don't
understand about your post:

If the resource enters Actual Work before the planned Start date on a task,
is this correct? Was the resource actually able to start before the planned
Start date? If so, this is called early progress or out of sequence
progress. In this case, "the facts don't lie."

If the resource enters Actual Work after the planned Finish date on a task,
is this correct? Did the resource actually finish the Actual Work on the
task after the planned Finish date? If so, then the task work slipped.
Once again, "the facts don't lie."

If both of the facts are true, as I stated above, then your PMs need to
learn how to deal with out of sequence progress and slipping tasks. On the
other hand, if the team members have typed the Actual Work on the WRONG
days, then your PMs are at fault for using Rule to automatically accept task
updates. Your PMs are the "gate keeper" between their projects and "dirty
data" coming from team members. It sounds like your PMs are too busy to be
the gate keepers.

To resolve this issue, I would recommend that your PMs delete all of their
Rules, and instead, take the time to study each team member's task updates.
Hope this helps.

 

[alex]

Hi Dale,

I really appreciate your feedback.
Ok for the next time, I will post on the other section, the right section.

So I see your answer and I'm agree with you.
I'm disagree with the technical solution.

I explain my context:
My start and finish shouldn't move;
But the remaining work move my dates. So I wrote a basic macro to changes
the date by the planify date and it's working (in the same time, I did test
with summary task with assignment, double each line).
I would like to lock the functionnality to record outside the dates, you can
trust the resources. The culture of the company is not to pass the time to
check the hours but to focus on the hours recorded and the planning.

You have by example 500 days to consume between date 1 and date 2.
The project manager don't want to see the dates moved without their action.
Pass the time to check the data everyday represent to check around at
minimum 80 hours by day. You should know each resource is assigned to around
15 tasks by day and the priority moved during the day.

I can't ask to project manager to check every day the datas, check the
planning, adapt the planning according to the recorded hours. They shouldn't
pass the time to do that, it takes to time and they have project with more
than 400 tasks so when one moved potentially several moved.

I think Microsoft understand a small part of this point because in december
the CU permit to avoid to record hours on summary tasks outside the start and
end date.

So I search a technical solution (hotfix ??).

In other side, if I don't find any solution i think it's too difficult with
the business constraints to use EPM 2007.

Best regards,
Alexandre BARAULT

 

[Steve House]

Your start and finish HAVE to move in response to postings of actuals if
your schedule is to remain accurate. I have a task scheduled to start 13
April that will last 5 days, then I can move on to something else. I
actually start the task 06 April. Doesn't it make sense that my schedule
should show that the 5 days of work will now finish on the 10th and I can
move on to start the next task a week earlier than originally expected?

If you need to preserve your original plan for comparison purposes, that's
what saved baselines are for. But your "working schedule" that you use for
day-to-day management needs to be a dynamic document continually changing to
reflect how the project is actually evolving and not just a static document
illustrating what you first thought would happen.
--
Steve House
MS Project Trainer & Consultant

 

[alex]

Hi Steve,

I understand your view and explanation.
I appreciate your return.

I don't want to enter in the discussion about it's right or wrong.

I worked on EPM 2007 since two years and each time I did the same thing,
training etc and after when I saw how the people works and what are the
constraints.

They don't want the dates to move so maybe you have others scenarios and
more experience. It's the fact.
Other product as PSNext concurrent of project don't move the planning.

I respect your point of view.
Maybe it's link with the culture of the country.
I don't know.

By example for the car industry, when you are a subcontractor you should
deliver a piece of car the 15 of june 2009. you shoudn't deliver the piece
after the 15.
So you estimate the days to consume and after when you do point of
coordination, you can increase the number of resource, change the work but
absolutely not change the end date.
So if the first resource start to record hour some days after the start
date, the dates moved. But you don't want.

So that's why I come here to share my point of view and the point of view of
one example customer.

I'm not here to fight about the point, I just want to speak and try to find
a solution.

Do you have any feedback about the content of the SP2 maybe it can mange
this point.

Best regards,
Alexandre BARAULT

 

[Dale Howard [MVP]]

Alex --

I know you came into this newsgroup asking good questions, and I hope you
don't feel like Steve and I "beating on you" with our answers. We can only
imagine how hard you have tried with the PMs in your organization to help
them use the tool correctly!

I think your basic problem lies with the expectations of your PMs. They
don't want the software to change the dates of tasks, based on early/late
Start or Finish dates submitted by team members, and that expectation is
simply unrealistic. In Microsoft Project and Project Server, actuals always
replace estimates. This is how the software works, in spite of what they
want or expect. And I can assure you (and them) that there there is no way
to make the software work any different than this. So there is no software
solution to the problem you face. I can only hope your PMs will listen to
your guidance on this issue. Hope this helps.

 

[Steve House]

Since your desire runs counter to the foundation principles of the Critical
Path Methodology that are the underpinning of Project's scheduling engine, I
don't think it will happen any time soon. In your example, you need to see
what the new date would be IF the resource starts late so you can take the
necesary steps to bring the project back on schedule.

Project will retain your original plan in the baseline and they do not
change as actuals are posted. By looking at the baseline you can always see
the dates the original schedule called for. But it is also prediciting what
WILL occur based on what has happend so far. If it says you'll be late
after the resource puts in what they've actually done, you need to do
something concrete in terms of a management decision such as calling
overtime, adding resources, or whatever tools you have at your disposal to
bring the dates that were changed back into alignment with the dates you
must hit. Project is most effective when you use it as a "what-if" tool to
anticipate the effectiveness of those options you have available to you.
It's not just a static document of what you want to happen - it's a
prediction of what is going to happen if the project continues to evolve as
it has been doing so far. You just can't expect software to fake the
numbers no matter how little you want to hear the bad news it's trying to
tell. Software should do your bidding but you shouldn't ask it to lie to
you.

 

[Dave]

Surely once you start recording actuals and see that the dates are
moving, then you have the option of adding resources to bring back the
delivery date to what you want. That is the whole point of the plan.
It shows you what you will achieve with the current estimates and the
current resource utilisation.

Take an extreme example. What would happen if all of your staff were
off sick for the next week? Would you still expect the delivery dates
for things falling within the week not to move? That is clearly an
impossibility.

In short, Project doesn't care about contractual deadlines and how bad
things will be if you miss them. It shows you what will happen for
various distributions of work amongst the resources.

If your customer wants to see plans consistently showing a delivery date
that they want when your plan shows that to be unattainable, then you
are storing up problems for the future and you would probably be better
placed to start working with them as early as possible to mitigate the
effects of late delivery.

SP2 will not affect the fundamental way in which Project is meant to work.

 

[alex]

Hi Steve and Dave,

Thank you very much.
I really appreciate to talk to you.

To summarize, I'm agree with you and I'm agree with your recommandations.
I think the project manager see this tool as an extension of their business
process. They don't have the necessary knowledge of how to manage the project
when the dates moved.


to go further, each time, they stay in their position because the product is
new, he product is difficult to manage (more than 400 tasks in one project),
technical limitation with reports(dataanalysis windows domain mandatory), the
timesheet and calendar are not linked(limitation of actual hours depending of
the calendar is not possible) and I think it's difficult to convince them.

I think I should change my approach when the tool is proposed.
And prepare a strong training about how to manage the projects.
Thank you for this idea come with the discussion and I can't solve it
technically.
If I do that I can point the unexpected behavior in the business process and
give me more good points. after they can accept or not the tool according
with the behavior of projects.

Best regards,
Alexandre BARAULT

 

[Dale Howard [MVP]]

Alex --

You are more than welcome, my friend!