GENERAL ARTICLES

 

Project activity analysis without the network model

 

 

E. Munapo

Department of Decisions Sciences, University of South Africa, South Africa. munape@unisa.ac.za

 

 

---

ABSTRACT

This paper presents a new procedure for analysing and managing activity sequences in projects. The new procedure determines critical activities, critical path, start times, free floats, crash limits, and other useful information without the use of the network model. Even though network models have been successfully used in project management so far, there are weaknesses associated with the use. A network is not easy to generate, and dummies that are usually associated with it make the network diagram complex - and dummy activities have no meaning in the original project management problem. The network model for projects can be avoided while still obtaining all the useful information that is required for project management. What are required are the activities, their accurate durations, and their predecessors.

---

OPSOMMING

Die navorsing beskryf 'n nuwerwetse metode vir die ontleding en bestuur van die sekwensiële aktiwiteite van projekte. Die voorgestelde metode bepaal kritiese aktiwiteite, die kritieke pad, aanvangstye, speling, verhasing, en ander groothede sonder die gebruik van 'n netwerkmodel. Die metode funksioneer bevredigend in die praktyk, en omseil die administratiewe rompslomp van die tradisionele netwerkmodelle.

---

 

 

“Full text available only in PDF format”

 

 

REFERENCES

1. Arora, H. & Kumar, S. 1994. (k+1)th shortest path from k shortest paths in a network, in Gupta, O.P. (ed.), Mathematics today, PC Vaidya Sanman Nidhi Trust, Ahmedabad, Vol 12-A, pp 75-84.         [ Links ]

2. Busch, D.H. 1991. The new critical path method, Probus Publishing Company, Chicago.         [ Links ]

3. Kumar, S. 2005. Information recycling mathematical methods for protean systems: A path-way approach, South African Journal of Industrial Engineering, Vol. 16, No. 2, May 2005, pp 81-101.         [ Links ]

4. Virine, L. & Trumper, M. 2007. Project decisions: The art and science, Management Concepts, Vienna, VA.         [ Links ]

5. Munapo, E., Jones, B.C. & Kumar, S. 2008. A minimum incoming weight label method and its application in CPM networks, ORION, Vol. 24 (1), pp 37-48.         [ Links ]

6. O'Brien, J.J. 1999. CPM in construction management, 5th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York.         [ Links ]

7. Winston, W.L. 2004. Operations research-applications and algorithms, 4th ed., Thomson/Brooks/Cole, Belmont, Calif.         [ Links ]

8. Woolf, M.B. 2007. Faster construction projects with CPM scheduling, McGraw-Hill, New York.         [ Links ]