Rita's Question on Roller Wave Planning. Need help....

Submitted by sumitdua10 on Wed, 05/20/2009 - 16:25

This is one of the Rita's question:

 During activity definiton, the team discovers that they do no kno enough to define the activities for 30 percent of the work packages. What would be the best course of action

a) Redo Scope Definition

b) Continue on activity sequencing and define the activities at a later date.

Correct answer as per Rita is A. But as per roller wave planning or progress elaboration, answer should be B. Isn't it ?

Any thoughts?

Forums: 
PMP / CAPM exam Question bank
  • Log in to post comments
  • 1314 reads
admin's picture

admin

Thu, 05/21/2009 - 04:54

For the 30% of the activities you will have to go back and redo the scope definition since you dont know enough. If you go ahead and sequence the activies then you may have to do rework, since from the set of 30% some activities would be either predecessor or succesor of other activities.

Also you may not be able to determine the critical path.

This is different from progressive elaboration. When you are doing progressive elaboration you are adding new requirements or enhancing existing requirements, but you already have your schedule and cost worked out. It is like change request analysis and then changing the project plan to accomodate the change.

 In this case there is no Change, the activity has been defined, you just need more information to do the sequencing..

 The option "Redo scope definition" may sound an extensive exercise, but it may just be a matter of few hours to get the required clarification.

ostralek

Wed, 05/27/2009 - 07:13

I second that.

I recall a similar question in this site on rolling wave planning. http://pmpbank.googlepages.com/