Should every task & milestone have a successor?

[trpy2k]

I can't be sure, but I believe that I was once told that every ask needs to
have a successor. However, not ALL tasks can link to anything but the
completion of the project.

Should I create a "end of project" task and link all tasks to that one?

Thanks so much,

T

 

[Rob Schneider]

Think about it this way. If a task did not anything in the project plan
as a successor, then what's the point of even putting it in the plan?
It is by definition not needed and is not part of the project.

Normally, not all tasks have as an immediate successor the project
completion task (normally I would set that as a milestone). Usually
tasks have other successors which eventually lead to the project completion.

You want to have all tasks (but the start) to have one or more
successors so that you model the project in a way that Project will
compute the schedule for you and tell you when the project will be complete.

--rms

www.rmschneider.com

 

[Mike Glen]

Hi T,

Welcome to this Microsoft Project newsgroup

Yes, definitely. (Not every task, but every task with no successor)

FAQs, companion products and other useful Project information can be seen at
this web address: http://project.mvps.org/faqs.htm

Hope this helps - please let us know how you get on

Mike Glen
MS Project MVP
See http://tinyurl.com/2xbhc for my free Project Tutorials

 

[Jim Aksel]

Yes, if you can't find anything else to link a task to, link it to the
"project finished" milestone.

Generally there are only two items in the schedule that do not have both a
predecessor and a successor. These are the "Authority to Proceed" milestone
and the "Project Compelte" milestone. Other than summary tasks, every detail
task should (and I said should not requires) both a predecessor and a
successor.

There is a paper about this on my blog. See the white paper on
"Predecessors and Successor Relationships"

Sometimes this "Program Complete" milestone gets a little over run with
predecessors. Some of these predecessors are important, others are level of
effort. What we do is create another milestone that we call "Garbage
Collection" and we use this as a successor to all the unimportant tasks in
the schedule like "Submit Activity Report - Sept 2009" ... The successor to
that would be "Garbage Collection". The successor to "Garbage Collection" is
"Program Complete"

This will help separate things out and give you a little less stress when
you try to find which of the 80 predecessors to "Program Complete" is driving
your program finish date.
--
If this post was helpful, please consider rating it.

Jim Aksel, MVP

Check out my blog for more information:
http://www.msprojectblog.com

 

[trpy2k]

Jim,

Thanks for the input. I took a look at your White Paper. Excellent work!
It did, however pose another question for me concerning Hammock Tasks and
Dependencies. From what I have seen and read, I have found it best that
Hammock tasks contain no predecessor/successor.

Does that sound correct?

 

[Rob Schneider]

True. For the reasons:
1. normally these stretch from the start to finish of a project.
2. these have fixed dates (as pasted in via links) and don't get
recalculated as part of the schedule. The dates they take on are a
*result* of the schedule recalculation.

--rms

www.rmschneider.com

 

[Jim Aksel]

Correct, no predecessors or successors on Hammocks. You can experiment with
it to see what irrational behavior that might produce. Or should I say, we
will leave that as an exercise for the poster. I look forward to your white
paper??
--
If this post was helpful, please consider rating it.

Jim Aksel, MVP

Check out my blog for more information:
http://www.msprojectblog.com

 

[Jim Aksel]

Thanks Trevor! I use one example that "always" makes the light go on in
people's eyes:

If this task has no successor (or customer) then why are you doing it? If
no one cares that it is completed, then save yourself some money and don't
perform the task.