CPM diagram
Differences between critical path analysis and integrated cost schedule analysis
Critical path analysis is a tool used in management projects widely. The project managers use its network analysis to handle operations that are complicated, detailed and time sensitive. Critical path analysis is used in rescheduling project task and determining the duration of a project (Heerkens, 2013). A big organization that more often do the project that is not only sophisticated in their operations but also has risk investment associated to the use project CPA. Due to the risk and complexity increase in the projects, it’s vital to understand the relationships among the activities that are involved and come up with the most efficient way to ensure completion of the projects. Technique essentials used by the CPA in constructing project models focus on the three top components that include: the listing of the activities needed to ensure completion of the project, the period or the duration to be taken for business to in a project to be finished, how the activities depend on one another. Based on the above stated require essentials CPA therefore, helps in the calculation of the latest and the earliest that each activity can start and end. It also enables the identification of activities with time floats which can be rescheduled (Tayntor, 2010). It’s important to note that CPA process helps to determine that event intentionally delayed without necessarily making the project longer or that project that is urgently critical on the longest path. In the project management assists in the determination of the shortest time required for the completion of the project. A negative impact on the project planned observed when activity on the critical path delayed, therefore, is important to note that significantly there should be no float. Critical path analysis is also beneficial in project crashing to reduce its duration by enabling the identification of critical activities (Lewis, 2011). Critical activities are given priority during resource allocation (Lock, 2007).
Integrated cost schedule analysis: Many times the cost estimates are believed by managers of the project, whether such costs were below or exceeded the budget in the past. Agreeing to such unrealistic and optimistic engineered cost estimates is dangerous. These values result obtained from the projects not rigorously assessed. The use of the integrated cost schedule analysis comes in handy the likelihood of the project being over budgeted compared to the current plan, how the certainty level achieved and those risks that are vital for the manager of the project to mitigate to achieve the required results. These and other challenges provided for by the integrated cost schedule analysis. The analysis helps in evaluating risk and costs of complex projects (Heldman, 2011).
Joint confidence level v. cost schedule risk analysis
Joint confidential level is one of the core measures got from integrated cost schedule risk analysis, is the probability that schedule and cost meet a given confidence level. Joint confidential level, therefore, is that process that brings together project risk, schedule and cost into one complete picture. According to Burke (2007), if the confidence levels have both been defined by schedule and costs then, then the management will be needed to make the decision concerning mitigation of risk measures and change of the scope of the project (Collins, 2011). In project management, it’s represented by numbers that have in-depth meaning used in the communication of the risk exposure for the project program. For instance, if I were to watch the news and it says that there are 88% chances of rainfall being experienced tomorrow, the figure 88% is just but a number but what the number is communicating to everyone within that environment is that we need to carry with us an umbrella tomorrow. Such communications are what presented to management who are the decision makers and externally. As a management tool, it cannot solve all the management problems, but it does almost reliable information on the risk exposure especially by the use of numbers, making it a game that is so rigorous.
JCL is beneficial since it provides the managers a holistic view of the project in the possible outcome terms given the level of risk and uncertainty of the project unlike the CPA that does the careful assessment of individual activities of the project. CPA is a tool for planning and decision making all at once after JCL providing relevant project insights that assist in the decision-making process. JCL provides a holistic view by combining the cost, schedule and risk of the project (Cleland & Ireland, 2008). When a lot of projects are involved, it makes a sophisticated network making activities be broken down into mini-projects. It makes the analysis tough unlike JCL charts seem to be oblong tilted like the football tables, but the shapes interestingly provide an instant correlation between schedule and costs hence creating flexible plans that are credible. Through JCL, the project manager is able to estimate the probability that the actual project cost will be equal, less than or more than the targeted cost (Heagney, 2012).
Integrated program analysis uses the cost estimates given based on the timing of the project loaded with the loss of resources. The same with critical path analysis that primarily relies on the cost estimates, this is a drawback with the two methods because it never guarantees the project success but the project must still manage properly. CPA, unlike integrated schedule analysis, helps in the cost and risk reduction of the projects that are complex (Maylor, 2010). Integrated program analysis deals with those activities detailed like software construction, engineering conducted by the professionals who need to be paid expensively making the use of this analysis to be quite costly especially if the duration of the project exceeded.
References
Burke, R. (2007). Introduction to project management. [New Zealand]: Burke
Publishing.
Cleland, D. & Ireland, L. (2008). Project manager's handbook. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Collins, R. (2011). Project management. New York: Nova Science Publishers.
Heagney, J. (2012). Fundamentals of project management. New York: American
Management Association.
Heerkens, G. (2013). Project management. New York: McGraw-Hill Professional.
Heldman, K. (2011). Project management jumpstart. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Lewis, J. (2011). Fundamentals of project management. New York: American
Management Association.
Lock, D. (2007). The essentials of project management. Aldershot, England: Gower.
Maylor, H. (2010). Project management. Harlow, England: Financial Times Prentice
Hall.
Tayntor, C. (2010). Project management tools and techniques for success. Boca
Raton: CRC Press.
