Thursday, December 07, 2023
Project Scheduling Still Struggles Over Software Honesty Issues
Engineering News-Record: I view much of what’s happened in critical path method (CPM) scheduling and planning as a direct offspring of the ENR cover story, “Off the Critical Path,” published in 2003. It discussed widespread abuses of scheduling software that several critics, including me, said were used to produce badly flawed or deliberately deceptive schedules. Those schedules looked good but lacked mathematical coherence or common
sense about the way work is done. The result was confusion, delays and lawsuits.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
The second half of the article stunned me. When I clicked on the article, I thought that the software issues would be along the lines of overscheduling, as would be expected from software with no knowledge of human limitations. Instead, reading this article it appears that ultimately there are humans at fault. Knowledge of this software being incorrect existing since 2019 with nothing being done about it out of the selfish interests of the association is crazy. It baffles me that even the software developers haven't tried to remedy this, at least not seriously. As an engineer, if something I had designed and worked on did not work as intended and could even be maliciously manipulated, I would at the very least independently work to attempt a solution. I do not even understand how a program can give different results from the same inputs without some sort of randomization in the program. Obviously, a scheduling software is going to be more complicated than any of the coding I have done, but there are so many levels here that have issues that are seemingly not addressed on a level that matters. 20 years since the initial article with no significant work towards a solution is crazy to me.
Post a Comment