Tips on using this forum..

(1) Explain your problem, don't simply post "This isn't working". What were you doing when you faced the problem? What have you tried to resolve - did you look for a solution using "Search" ? Has it happened just once or several times?

(2) It's also good to get feedback when a solution is found, return to the original post to explain how it was resolved so that more people can also use the results.

Can MS Project change the % assignment, when doing resource leveling?

1 reply [Last post]
Evgeny Z.
User offline. Last seen 12 weeks 1 day ago. Offline
Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Posts: 405
Groups: None

 

Hi, I am just wondering, whether MS Project can do the following:

Situation:

Task1 has priority 1000, duration 5 days (Mon-Fri) and resource A, assigned 50%

Task2, has priority 500, could start on the same Monday, has resource A assigned 100%. Task is effort driven.

As a result, before leveling, this schedule creates resource A over allocation (150%) for Mon-Fri.

What I want:

Is it possible to run resource leveling in a way, that will leave Task1 intact. Task2 will still start on Monday, but for 1st week will have Resource A work 50% on a task and the remaining 50% of work will move to the next week with 100% assignment (hence will finish somewhere on Tue). 

1332
afterresourceleveling.jpg

Replies

Trevor Rabey
User offline. Last seen 9 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Posts: 528
Groups: None

No. Levelling never changes assignments. It produces a feasible solution if one exists, but it is not guaranteed to be optimal.

In this case, whichever combination of leveling options are used, Task2 gets delayed in its entirety, and is scheduled to start after Task1 finishes.

You seem to be trying to get it to give you a solution which is "optimal" or "ideal", being defined (by you) as producing the shortest duration.

However, "optimal" can be defined in various ways depending on what the planning strategy and goals are, and MSP can't read your mind to know what they are.

In this case, it seems at first obvious that MSP should know that A is/becomes available for Task2, but that is only because in this simple case there are only two tasks and one resource.

Although not perfect (because it does not optimise) MSP levelling still works a treat to give you a plan which is at least feasible after you have made one which is not. So that's a good thing, right?

At execution, if A really does become available to start Task2 in the first week (as long as its predecessors are finished), then it will come out in the updating when you find out that Task2 started and finished earlier than scheduled. So the planning is conservative (as it should be) and the execution is aggressive and opportunistic.