(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.
Hey All,
I am so intrested to know your experience in having multiple planners for a single project. I am thinking about all of the risks which are associated with having about 8-10 planners from different locations for a single schedule in a share database. Curently, we have a seperate schedule for each sub-project, but and we are going to combine them all into one single schedule. what are the risks? any possible data loss? mistakenly deleting activities,lower speed, etc ?
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
Ellie,
The data in P6 is safe. I have lots of criticisms of the applicaton's functionality, but none about the underlying data integrity.
BUT P6's greatest strength is the multi-project structure you can generate to fulfil a single "real-world" project. In that world there may well be a one planner/one project relatonship.
There are no risks in what you are about to do BUT you lose some of the opportunities that a multi-project portfolio offers.
For example, growth. We all try and measure growth and account for its impact. So in P6 we should put all growth/variation activities in a seperate project. All we have to do to create relationships with the base scope is open all the projects.
BUT if we are clever in our use of the "Ignore Relationships to and from other Projects" tick-box in the Scheduling Options dialogue we are only THREE (count 'em) Keystrokes away from demonstrating the impact of growth in the schedule.
Thanks David,
I am using P6 software. My biggest concern is data or update loss. If we merge all of the schedules into a gient single schedule, it means that 10 planners should concurently work on one schedule from different locations with different primavera server performance. I read somewhere that F5 functionality for higher version of primavera is not that reliable. Isnt it possible that by hitting F9 by one planner, the other planner looses his update.
My only real experience of this is with P6 and just a little with P3 in the '90s.
P6 is a database. When introduced its USP was that all of the activities were in a single database table, which had a field "Project" that told you which project the activity is in. In this environment I want to break the "Contract" into multiple projects, because you can open any number of projects together and schedule them as one.
This is WAY better than a giant single schedule, where one planner is trying to make sense of electrical comissioning, another mechanical installation etc.
I do not know what software you are using, but I would be very keen NOT to merge the projects, if I have an easy way to schedule them together. All sorts of advantages the first few I can think of are:
One planner, one project is great. One contract is almost aways a lot of projects.
Email: PPadmin@planningplanet.com
Replies