Guild of Project Controls: Compendium | Roles | Assessment | Certifications | Membership

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.

8 dimensions for a project....

8 replies [Last post]
Jean-Yves Moine
User offline. Last seen 3 years 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 17 Jan 2009
Posts: 87
Groups: None

WBS has 3 dimensions, and the OBS is added. But there are also "dynamic" dimensions.

It looks like that: http://3d-wbs.blogspot.fr/2014/06/part-120-tetrahedron-projects-like.html

Replies

Jean-Yves Moine
User offline. Last seen 3 years 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 17 Jan 2009
Posts: 87
Groups: None

Hi Stephen,

I modified my artcle: http://3d-wbs.blogspot.fr/2014/06/part-120-tetrahedron-projects-like.html

Thanks again !

Stephen Devaux
User offline. Last seen 14 weeks 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 23 Mar 2005
Posts: 667

Jean-Yves, however I can help...

And by the way;

"I am a just a scheduler..."

As far as I am concerned, a good scheduler is one of the most valuable professions around! A good scheduler can save millions of dollars and, on some projects, human lives.

But as a scheduler, I think you'll really like the concepts of critical path drag and drag cost, especially.

Dans la fraternite du monde projet,

Etienne le Bajan

Jean-Yves Moine
User offline. Last seen 3 years 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 17 Jan 2009
Posts: 87
Groups: None

Hi Stephen,

 

I am trying to build a full 3D WBS model but I am a just a scheduler, and I was not satisfy of my interpretation of WHY…

I needed help... But now, I agree with you:

SCOPE = WHAT + HOW + WHERE + FOR WHAT

PROJECT VALUE = WHO + WHEN + HOW MUCH + WHY

With for what = configuration management, and why = value. This is our new conclusion !! Thanks a lot. 

I will buy your two books. Could you send me please a mail if I have questions (jymoine@gmail.com), and to discuss in order I can build the 3D WBS model in the right way regarding these others dimensions I do not really know (almost why).

I will to the corrections on my blog. Just let me the time to digest this new information for me.

Thanks (and excuse me for my Engish)

Jean-Yves MOINE

http://3d-wbs.blogspot.fr/

PS: we say "Dans la fraternité du monde projet"

Jean-Yves Moine
User offline. Last seen 3 years 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 17 Jan 2009
Posts: 87
Groups: None

Dear Patrick,

 

Thanks for you papers.

Regarding the dimensions of projects, we are not talking about the same things.

Your paper describes the size, degrees of technical difficulty and incertainty, and complexity of the relationships; it is a classification system for projects. Whereas dimensions, in 3D WBS method, allow to: structure the project, find the interfaces, do the schedule, define the cost structures, etc. It is not the same. Dimensions in 3D WBS refer to WBS and OBS.

3D WBS is fully compatible with 4D BIM. You define tasks with ZBS (Zones), PBS (Products) and ABS (Activity in terms of process), you assign resources (OBS/RBS), and then the dimension Time comes.

Take the time to read my blog: http://3d-wbs.blogspot.fr/

Stephen Devaux
User offline. Last seen 14 weeks 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 23 Mar 2005
Posts: 667

Hi, Jean-Yves.

"Who is about OBS/RBS, not the sequence/relationships which is Why (I did not find another idea)."

Oops! So sorry -- typo! I typed "who" with an "o" instead of "why" with a why. But I meant why.

"Do you have another idea to name these two groups? I mean different than static/dynamic."

I really don't have a problem with the names. All of the "statics" are scope related (either product or project) except for the "who". Additionally, I'd say that the configuration mangement (For what?) may fit best with the scope items. They are the items that generate the project's value/benefit.

it seems to me that the others, including RBS/OBS are items that impact the value of the scope: Do we have the needed Who and how competent are they? When will each activity occur (the realionships/predecessors) and when will the project finish (which usually impacts the value)? How much cost, which is both a measure of resource usage as well as being its own limited resource.

"There is also how much, therefore cost. It is may be not far than VBS of your method."

Cost is how much, but its how much is invested. The value breakdown structure is more related to Why: what is the value of each item of work that is causing us to perform it? (And, analyzed properly, may sometimes cause us to omit that worik item if its true cost is greater than the value its expected to add -- true cost = drag cost + resource cost.)  

"In 3D WBS method, physico-functional characterics of the Products answer the question "for what". We do projects to satisfy the client with a good product, with right characteristics."

Yes, but what if the activities creating those characteristics migrate to the critical path and accrue drag? And what if the cost of that drag is greater than the value of those characteristis? That's where the VBS, critical path drag and true cost computations combine to ensure that we are not causing a less valuable project by including work that, given the estimated value/cost of time, is adding less value than it is truly costing. 

I will read your method which seems very intersting.

You seem like a very thoughtful person, so I'd be interested in your comments. My newest book Managing Projects as Investments (directed in large part at project sponsors, customers, and senior management, is not due out until September:

http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781482212709

But my first book, Total Project Control, is more of a practitioner's guide to the approach. And the six-article series at ProjectsAtWork.com starting with "The Value-abled Project" is a pretty decent summary of the concepts, and is free with registration:

http://www.projectsatwork.com/content/articles/233444.cfm

Dans Fraternite du management project, (pardon mon francais!)

Steve the Bajan

Patrick Weaver
User offline. Last seen 5 days 10 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 18 Jan 2001
Posts: 372
Groups: None

I think you are somewhat confused Jean-Yves between dimensions and characteristics and reasons and organization. These days projects are generally viewed has having four basic dimensions, size, technical difficulty / characteristis, uncertainty and complexity. How a project is organized is a management decision based on their understanding of these 4 basic dimensions. See: http://www.mosaicprojects.com.au/WhitePapers/WP1072_Project_Size.pdf

The characteristics of a project have multiple dimensions, the standard BIM model is ever expanding, see: http://www.mosaicprojects.com.au/WhitePapers/WP1082_BIM_Levels.pdf Your model does not really distinguish between the fundamental factors and the management responses to those stimuli.

Jean-Yves Moine
User offline. Last seen 3 years 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 17 Jan 2009
Posts: 87
Groups: None

Hi Stephen,

 

Who is about OBS/RBS, not the sequence/relationships which is Why (I did not find another idea).

Do you have another idea to name these two groups? I mean different than static/dynamic.

There is also how much, therefore cost. It is may be not far than VBS of your method.

In 3D WBS method, physico-functional characterics of the Products answer the question "for what". We do projects to satisfy the client with a good product, with right characteristics.

I will read your method which seems very intersting. Thanks, and best regards,

Stephen Devaux
User offline. Last seen 14 weeks 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 23 Mar 2005
Posts: 667

Hi, Jean-Yves.

In general, I like your multi-dimensional approach to the breakdown structure. (I also like your "fractal" model of a project.)

However, there is a crucial omission, and that is the value breakdown structure (VBS), a key part of the Total Project Control toolbox for managing projects as investments (along with expected project profit, the DIPP, DPI, critical path drag, drag cost, true cost, and the doubled resource estimated duration).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_project_control

You list in blue what you call the statics (what, who, how, and where), and then in red you show the dynamics, with who as being the relationships/predecessors. I perhaps don't understand the terms "statics" and "dynamics" as you are using them -- it seems to me that relationships/predecessors is definitely about sequence, which should be the when.

The "Why" is crucial -- it is the raison d'etre of the project investment. And that should definitely be the VBS. The value of the scope is why we are taking the time and spending the money, and nothing is more important than the value we expect from the project -- without that, we don't do the project.

The VBS, per your fractal model, breaks the Why down to the work package and activity level: what is value this particular element of scope is adding to the entire project's expected value? Through that analysis, we can sometimes see where the value-added of an item of scope is less than its true cost. (True cost = resource cost + drag cost.)

Please say hi to Dr. Paul for me.

Fraternally in project management,

Steve the Bajan