Skill Based Shceduling Structure - Best Practices

[Darrell]

I am in the process of establishing the skill sets to be used for the generic
resources in an enterprise resource pool for the skill based scheduling
process. Can anyone provide a structure for assigning skills to the generics
and then matching them to enterprise resources.

What is the best process for decomposing the skill set? Department>Job
Title> Skill>Proficiency?

How would you establish the skill structure for an IT department so that a
generic resources could be inserted by the Project Manager and later replaced
by matching the skills required on a multi-skill level using both filters and
availability?

I am interested in what has worked the best as well as what has not worked
so well. Is there anyone who created this structure and wished they had done
things diferently that can share their experiences? Have you done this and
used the system with success?

 

[Dale Howard [MVP]]

Darrell --

If you are going to use the skills field(s) for matching human resources
with Generic resources, I would recommend the KISS approach. For example,
if it were me, I might build two custom enterprise Resource fields called
Primary IT Skill and Skill Proficiency. In the Primary IT Skills field, I
would include a Lookup Table that is simply a flat list of IT skills, with
none of the hierarchy you propose. In the Skill Proficiency field, I would
include a Lookup Table that contains a flat list of proficiencies, such as
Junior, Senior, and Expert, for example. Keep in mind that for every
combination of skill and proficiency, you would need a Generic resource (ie,
Junior SQL DBA, Senior SQL DBA, and Expert SQL DBA). The key to all this is
simplicity. That's my humble opinion and I'm sticking to it! I'll bet
the others in this group will have some good ideas for you as well.

 

[Paul Conroy]

You could use a single custom field/nested lookup table similar to:-

Microsoft
SQL DBA
Junior
Senior
Expert
Exchange
Junior
Senior

etc

You would still need a generic resource for each skill as is Dale's post,
but this approach only uses on field.

I'd suggest trying different approaches to see which best suits your
requirements.

Paul
--
Please rate this post if it has helped

http://www.fundraiseonline.co.nz/TheProjectServerGuru/

http://theprojectserverguru.spaces.live.com

 

[Darrell]

Dale thanks for the reply and I definitely like the KISS approach.

However, if I use a flat field will it still be possible to list all
proficiency levels when checking for enterprise resources that can be
substituted using the “Build Team†dialog box? For example, if I have Level
I, Level II and Level III skill sets and I need a Level I enterprise resource
shouldn’t the list of available enterprise resource still contain all Level
II and Level III resources as well since they can also do the job? If my
Level I resources are not available I could then choose a Level II or Level
III provided there was one available. In addition, if I needed a Level III
all that should appear on the list are Level III resources.

I want the process to be as easy as possible for the users, project and
resource managers, so that I do not have to create filters or macros to get
them the information they want. If the PM understands the level of skill
required they can select the generic with the level they want, AND, if they
don’t they can simply select the skill type and then let the Resource Manager
replace the generic with the required skill level. This is why I was asking
about using a hierarchical lookup structure. Something like –
Dale thanks for the reply and I definitely like the KISS approach.

However, if I use a flat field will it still be possible to list all
proficiency levels when checking for enterprise resources that can be
substituted using the “Build Team†dialog box? For example, if I have Level
I, Level II and Level III skill sets and I need a Level I enterprise resource
shouldn’t the list of available enterprise resource still contain all Level
II and Level III resources as well since they can also do the job? If my
Level I resources are not available I could then choose a Level II or Level
III provided there was one available. In addition, if I needed a Level III
all that should appear on the list are Level III resources.

I want the process to be as easy as possible for the users, project and
resource managers, so that I do not have to create filters or macros to get
them the information they want. If the PM understands the level of skill
required they can select the generic with the level they want, AND, if they
don’t they can simply select the skill type and then let the Resource Manager
replace the generic with the required skill level. This is why I was asking
about using a hierarchical lookup structure. Something like –

Programmer
Java
Level III
Level II
Level I
C++
Level III
Level II
Level I

Selecting a Programmer – Java - Level I should include all resources about
them, I think that is how it works? Is this correct? So if I assigned an
enterprise resource to Programmer – Java – Level III and wanted to replace a
Level I Generic the Level III Enterprise resource would be included in the
list of available enterprise resources in the “Build Team†dialog box (along
with all of the Level II and Level I). Right? <grin>


Selecting a Programmer – Java - Level I should include all resources about
them, I think that is how it works? Is this correct? So if I assigned an
enterprise resource to Programmer – Java – Level III and wanted to replace a
Level I Generic the Level III Enterprise resource would be included in the
list of available enterprise resources in the “Build Team†dialog box (along
with all of the Level II and Level I). Right? <grin>

 

[Darrell]

Paul,

Thanks for the input, this is similair to what I posted in response to
Dale's reply. I will definitely be running this through our development
server used for testing this very thing. My post was in hope of reducing the
number of possible scenarios!!

Thx again,

 

[Darrell]

Sorry about the cut and paste.

Also, I think I am backwards with regards to the look up table. I think all
subordinate levels are included in the level about so the Level I would have
Level II and III as subs... right?

 

[Ueli]

Darrell,

For example, if I have Level
I, Level II and Level III skill sets and I need a Level I enterprise resource
shouldn’t the list of available enterprise resource still contain all Level
II and Level III resources as well since they can also do the job? If my
Level I resources are not available I could then choose a Level II or Level
III provided there was one available.

We use the same one-field skill-breakdown-structure as Paul Conroy suggested
and it works fine for us (.NET Estagiário, Júnior, Pleno, Sénior etc.).
Staffing a project and looking for a Pleno (advanced) .NET developer we we
then set the filter to:

'.NET Pleno'
OR
'.NET Sénior'

The skill-breakdown-structure is quite extensive, that´s true, but this
doesn´t affect efficiency. The line managers update the skill set after the
regular performance/staff review.

Managing a project is quite a complex task in general, so our project
managers get along with that level of difficulty filtering resources;

 

[Dale Howard [MVP]]

Darrell --

My suggestion about using a flat list of skills and proficiencies was simply
to help you keep it simple. As Paul Conroy suggested, you could also
combine the two fields into one field. The problem you are going to face,
no matter how you do it, is that you will need a Generic resource for EVERY
combination of skill and proficiency. Either approach should work for you.
Give it a try and let us know if you need more help.

 

[Darrell]

Dale,

Thank you for the input. Part of my problem is in assuming 2007 is similar
to 2003 in how you configure or how you go about setting things up. I am just
now working in 2007 and quickly learning that after years of 2003 that when
it comes to 2007 I do not know what I am doing anymore! Thankfully I have a
great set of 2007 books from some really coool guys at MSPojectExperts and
this group as a resource to help me get up to speed ASAP.

Darrell

 

[Darrell]

Ueli,

Thank you for the information. When you say you filter for skills is this
done in the Build Team dialog box? Using your example - you have a generic
resource in your schedule named Pleno .NET Developer and you are able to do a
match in Build Team and then filter to get down to the skill level you
require?

Darrell

 

[Dale Howard [MVP]]

Darrell --

Thank you for the kind thoughts about our books!

 

[Darrell]

No Thank You for the books! And, I am sorry I missed the oppurtunity to meet
you at the San Fran MPA meeting.

Darrell

 

[Ueli]

Thank you for the information. When you say you filter for skills is this

done in the Build Team dialog box? Using your example - you have a generic
resource in your schedule named Pleno .NET Developer and you are able to do a
match in Build Team and then filter to get down to the skill level you
require?

We mark real resources, let us say a Pleno .NET in the
skill-breakdown-structure as Pleno .NET and as well as the lower levels
(Júnior .NET, Estagiário .NET).
In the 'Build Team' dialog you can mark the generic developer on the right,
click 'match' and you will get on the left all the real resources that have
at least the skills of the generic one.

hth,
Ueli Sonderegger, PMP
http://www.vettatech.com/