Please See Attachment For The Question Answer Below Is What

Please See Attachment For Question Answer Below Is What Professor Pro

Answer below is what professor provided Here is my answer. Please check my work. Initially, the critical path takes 10 weeks. The critical path is B-F-H. We choose B as it is only 500. F is 650 H is 1200. After redrawing the diagram, we see the project duration is 9 weeks and TWO critical paths. A-F-H and B-F-H. I chose F as its only 650 and it is common to both paths. The next closest is A and B (200 plus 500) which is 700. H is 1200. After redrawing the picture, we see project duration is 8 weeks and we still see THREE critical paths A-E-H and A-F-H and B-F-H. F cannot be crashed again. While A is in common to two critical paths, crashing A will not shorten the 3rd critical path. So I choose A and B which is 700. While H is in common to all three critical paths, H costs1200 which is more than 700. After redrawing the diagram, we see the project duration is 7 weeks and THREE critical paths A-E-H A-F-H and B-F-H If you wanted to crash it to 6 weeks - we need to crash H despite its high cost. (You do not need to crash to 6 weeks.) F cannot be crashed again. A cannot be crashed again. While we can crash B, it will not save time on A-E-H and A-F-H. The only alternative is to choose H for 1200.

Paper For Above instruction

Project crashing is a critical technique used in project management to shorten the duration of a project without altering its scope. It involves allocating additional resources to specific activities on the critical path to reduce their duration, thereby accelerating the overall project timeline. Effective crashing requires careful analysis of the project schedule, costs, and potential benefits to determine the most cost-effective way to meet deadline constraints.

The initial project schedule indicates a duration of 10 weeks, with the critical path being B-F-H. This means that activities B, F, and H are sequentially linked such that any delay in these activities would directly impact the total project duration. The focus then shifts to crashing activities on the critical path to reduce the overall timeline. The initial choice is to crash activity B, which has a cost of 500 units, and subsequently, activity F, costing 650 units, and activity H, at a higher cost of 1200 units.

After redistributing and re-analyzing the project activities, the schedule is refined. Achieving a reduction to 9 weeks involves assessing the potential of activities F and B, considering their crash costs and their impact on the critical path. The analysis reveals two critical paths: A-F-H and B-F-H, both sharing activity F. Since activity F has a relatively low crash cost and is common to both paths, it is a strategic choice for crashing. Additionally, the activities A and B are evaluated, with crashing B costing 500 units and A costing 200 units, totaling 700 units, which represents an efficient combination to expedite the project to 8 weeks.

The analysis proceeds further to determine the possibility of shortening the project to 7 weeks. In this stage, activity H, with a high crash cost of 1200 units, is considered for crashing because it appears in all three critical paths—A-E-H, A-F-H, and B-F-H—making it an influential activity in reducing overall duration. However, since H's crashing cost is significant, and activities F and A can no longer be crashed, the optimal decision involves evaluating the remaining options, including the potential to crash B if it yields time savings. The conclusion indicates that crashing activity H is necessary to reach a 6-week timeline, despite its high cost, as activities F and A have been exhausted for crashing, and crashing B would not impact the critical paths effectively.

In conclusion, project crashing requires strategic decision-making centered around activities on the critical path, their costs, and the impact on overall project duration. It involves balancing the cost of crashing activities against the deadline constraints and selecting the activities that provide the most significant time reduction per unit cost. The analysis indicates that crashing H, despite its high expense, is vital for achieving the most accelerated project timeline when other options have been exhausted.

References

  • Kerzner, H. (2017). Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Heagney, J. (2016). Fundamentals of Project Management. AMACOM.
  • PMI. (2017). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) (6th ed.). Project Management Institute.
  • Lewis, J. P. (2014). Fundamentals of Project Management. AMACOM.
  • Meredith, J. R., & Mantel Jr, S. J. (2014). Project Management: A Managerial Approach. Wiley.
  • Gido, J., & Clements, J. (2018). Successful Project Management. Cengage Learning.
  • Chapman, C., & Ward, S. (2014). How to Manage Project Opportunity and Risk. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Wysocki, R. K. (2014). Effective Project Management: Traditional, Agile, Extreme. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Heldman, K. (2018). Project Management JumpStart. Wiley.
  • Lock, D. (2013). The Essentials of Project Management. Gower Publishing.

Related Assignments