This is a test
- 96 pages
- English
- ePUB (mobile friendly)
- Available on iOS & Android
eBook - ePub
The Triple Constraints in Project Management
Book details
Book preview
Table of contents
Citations
About This Book
From the novice to the most experienced and senior project manager, triple constraint issues are at the core of the most crucial decisions about a project. The Triple Constraints in Project Management explores the triangle of time, cost, and performance that bounds the universe within which every project must be accomplished – and shows how controlling the hierarchy of constraints can mean the difference between success and failure on virtually any project.
Frequently asked questions
At the moment all of our mobile-responsive ePub books are available to download via the app. Most of our PDFs are also available to download and we're working on making the final remaining ones downloadable now. Learn more here.
Both plans give you full access to the library and all of Perlegoâs features. The only differences are the price and subscription period: With the annual plan youâll save around 30% compared to 12 months on the monthly plan.
We are an online textbook subscription service, where you can get access to an entire online library for less than the price of a single book per month. With over 1 million books across 1000+ topics, weâve got you covered! Learn more here.
Look out for the read-aloud symbol on your next book to see if you can listen to it. The read-aloud tool reads text aloud for you, highlighting the text as it is being read. You can pause it, speed it up and slow it down. Learn more here.
Yes, you can access The Triple Constraints in Project Management by Michael S. Dobson PMP in PDF and/or ePUB format, as well as other popular books in Business & Project Management. We have over one million books available in our catalogue for you to explore.
Information
CHAPTER 1
The Art of Strategic Failure
You probably wonât see American Movie Classics run a festival of âGreat Project Management Moviesâ any time soon, but if they did, Ron Howardâs motion picture Apollo 13, based on the real-life story, would be a natural candidate. Faced with a potentially disastrous accident, project teams overcome one potentially fatal barrier after another to bring the crew safely back to the earth, guided by mission director Gene Kranzâ mantra, âFailure is not an option.â
But, of course, failure is an option. Sometimes, in fact, it looks like the most likely option of all. The odds in the actual Apollo 13 disaster were stacked against a happy outcome, and everyoneâincluding Gene Kranzâhad to be well aware of that fact. At the same time, letting the idea of failure into your mind can be a psychological trap that leads you to premature surrender.
Within the overall project âGet the astronauts home safely,â there are a number of subprojects, including:
- Develop a power-up sequence that draws fewer than 20 amps.
- Calculate a burn to get the reentry angle within tolerance using the earth in the capsule window as the sole reference point.
- Design a way to fit the square command module CO2 scrubber filter into the round Lunar Excursion Module (LEM) filter socket.
That last subproject is vital, because the LEMâs CO2 scrubbers are meant to take care of the needs of two people for a day and a half, not three people for three days. And nobody ever imagined that the command module scrubbers would need to be used in the LEM, so they were not designed to be compatible. Theyâre square, and the necessary holes are round. Meanwhile, the CO2 levels have gone up past 8, and at 15 things become dangerous, and eventually deadly. Gene Kranz assigns a project team: âI suggest you gentlemen invent a way to put a square peg in a round holeârapidly.â
As the engineers gather in a conference room, boxes of miscellaneous junkâeverything thatâs loose on board the spacecraftâare being dumped onto tables. The project engineer gestures at the stuff and says: âWe have to make this [square filter] fit into the hole for this [cylindrical filter] using nothing but that [miscellaneous junk].â The engineers dive in with the right attitude, but for all they know, there isnât even a solution present on the table. If theyâre one 20¢ screw short of what they need, it might as well be a $20 million screw, because either way, they canât have it.
We understand that a psychological commitment to success is a way to improve the likelihood of achieving itâgiving up too easily increases the risk of failureâbut thatâs not quite enough. How else can we increase the odds of our success? Interestingly enough, when the stakes are high enough, thereâs another way to look at âfailureâ and find an opportunity!
FAILING YOUR WAY TO SUCCESS
How good is âgood enoughâ? For a lot of project managers, the answer is to reject the question: ââGood enoughâ isnât!â By rejecting the very concept of âgood enough,â they strive to take projects to a higher order of excellence, to bring the ideas of quality front and center into the discipline of project management, and to motivate people to achieve their absolute best. These are noble goals, and we salute them.
But the question still lurks in the bosom of the project, and it demands an answer. How good is âgood enoughâ? In this project, three lives are riding on a performance outcome, and the clock is ticking. If perfect performance takes too long, can we afford it? What level of performance will be satisfactory as long as we can achieve it by our deadline?
This doesnât imply that we intend to squeeze by with minimum performanceânot at all. We plan to do our absolute best. But every golfer wants to know what par is, even if he happens to be Tiger Woods.
DEFINING QUALITY
Pontius Pilate asked, âWhat is truth?â and arguments still rage among philosophers. The project managerâs equivalent question is, âWhat is quality?â The PMBOKÂŽ Guide definition, taken from the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), is âthe totality of characteristics of an entity that bear on its ability to satisfy stated or implied needs.â1 In other words, quality is to some extent in the eye of the beholder, and different eyes see and value different things under different circumstances.
In general, ideas about quality are classified as:
- Judgmentalâsynonymous with superiority or excellence, also known as a transcendent view of quality.
- Product-basedâlinked to specific and measurable variables, such as the chip speed of a computer.
- User-basedâdetermined by what the customer wants, or fitness for intended use. (If youâre off-roading, a Jeep is superior to a Cadillac, but if you plan to run a luxury limousine service, the Cadillac is more appropriate.)
- Value-basedâthe ratio of usefulness/satisfaction/other quality criteria to price.
- Manufacturing-basedâconforming to requirements or specifications, six sigma defect rates, low allowable variation.2
Each of these definitions has value and legitimacy depending on context, so definitions of âgood enoughâ and quality must be reached through an understanding of the individual project environment.
Performance Criteria
Our CO2 filter project, like all projects, is bounded by the triple constraints. It is always vital at the beginning of the project to ensure that you have a good understanding of the project goal and the project context. The initial mission statement, as youâll recall, is â[I]nvent a way to put a square peg in a round holeârapidly.â In other words, take the square CO2 scrubber and figure out a way to make it do its job adequately in the round socket of the LEM. Thatâs the performance criterion, one of the three triple constraints.
Why âadequatelyâ? Why not âperfectlyâ? In defining the performance criteria for triple constraints purposes, you should specify the minimum acceptable, not the best possible. We need to know what par is. Once weâve defined par, we can then define superior performance. Superior performanceâqualityâis superior only if it adds value.
Letâs look at some âqualityâ metrics that wonât add value in this particular situation:
- Standardization. In general, having parts conform to standard designs, templates, and toolings is good practice. Here, it adds no value. This is a one-shot effort.
Superior performanceâqualityâis superior only if it adds value.
- Durability. Making it good enough to last ten years adds no value. If it breaks ten minutes after splashdown, no harm is done.
- Industrial design. Its attractiveness, visual design, and aesthetic qualities add no value. If it keeps them alive, itâll be beautiful enough in the eyes of the beholders.
On the other hand, some quality elements would add value and might be worth a bit of extra time if there is some to spare:
- Ensure ease of assembly. Especially as CO2 levels build up and the astronauts begin to suffer mental impairment, an easy-to-assemble design would lower risk.
- Use fewer parts. Given the possibility of other breakdowns and needs to improvise, consuming fewer scarce resources would be superior.
- Work more efficiently. If the CO2 filter does a better filtering job or consumes less power, this would add real value.
Time Constraint
We donât know what the deadline is, but the deadline is nevertheless absolute. The clock is ticking and the CO2 is accumulating. The astronauts will begin to suffer from impaired judgment followed eventually by unconsciousness and death. We can only approximate how long we have, but it isnât long and it isnât subject to negotiation.
If there is a tradeoff to be made between the time constraint and the performance criteria, we know that ultimate failureâthe death of the Apollo 13 astronautsâcomes from failure to meet the time constraint. That is, if we build a perfect CO2 filter, but we finish it too late, weâve still failed. Perfect performance does not compensate for a missed deadline.
But wait! Isnât the reverse equally true? If you fail to meet the performance criteria, isnât it irrelevant how quickly you fail to do so? Well, it actually depends on the extent of the failure.
To illustrate, letâs look at this scenario: Youâve managed to come up with an inefficient partial solution that will last only half as long as itâs going to take to get the astronauts back home, but youâve done so within the original time constraint. Do you take this solution? Absolutely! Even though you have failed to make the performance goal for the project within the original time constraint, youâve reset the game clock and given yourself a whole new window of time in which to attack the problem anew. With a day or more to work instead of mere hours, your chance of coming up with a solution for the remainder of the problem has become that much better.
The right kind of failure is not only an option, but sometimes it is a desirable one.
In other words, the right kind of failure is not only an option, but sometimes it is a desirable one! We canât accept a failure in the time constraint, but we can live with a partial performance failure and stay in the game.
Cost Constraint
This project has a zero dollar budget, but it has a budget nevertheless, and itâs a highly restrictive one. Itâs a resource availability budget, and itâs highly constrained. Itâs the junk on the tableâeverything thatâs loose on the spacecraft that you can adapt to make the filter work.
The problem with the cost constraint is that itâs also an absolute. We have what we haveâwhether it turns out to be adequate or not. It has nothing to do with how much we value the astronauts or how much itâs worth to us to bring them home; itâs that we donât have the option to send up as much as a gram extra.
The first issue in analyzing our cost constraint is this: have we found everything we can possibly use? (The final resource tally to build the CO2 filter included som...
Table of contents
- Cover
- Title Page
- Copyright
- About the Author
- Dedication
- Table of Contents
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- CHAPTER 1 The Art of Strategic Failure
- CHAPTER 2 The Triple Constraints: Time, Cost, and Performance
- CHAPTER 3 The Hierarchy of Constraints
- CHAPTER 4 Strategies for Managing Time-Driven Projects
- CHAPTER 5 Strategies for Managing Performance-Driven Projects
- CHAPTER 6 Strategies for Managing Cost-Driven Projects
- CHAPTER 7 Conflict Management and Multiple Stakeholders
- CHAPTER 8 The Power of Three
- Bibliography
- Index