Project Management Institute Practice Standard for Work Breakdown Structures Second Edition $CHFM Practice Standard for Work. Project professionals use a WBS to define project deliverables and establish the structure to manage work to completion. The Practice Standard for Work. Book Review. Practice Standard for Work Breakdown Structures – 2nd Edition. Author: Project Management Institute. Publisher: Project Management Institute.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Hindi|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Sign up for free]|
Project Management Institute - PMI Practice Standard for sourphocingcardmi.gq - Free download as PDF File .pdf), Text File .txt) or read online for free. The concept of work breakdown structure developed as part of the Program PMI examinations assume the terms 'total scope of work' and see: https://www. sourphocingcardmi.gq 3 . Practice Standard for Work Breakdown Structures 2nd Edition – sourphocingcardmi.gq sourphocingcardmi.gq: Practice Standard for Work Breakdown Structures ( ): Project Management Institute: Books.
All significant reporting items e. All WBS elements should be compatible with organizational and accounting structures. A coding scheme for WBS elements that clearly represents the hierarchical structure when viewed in text format should be used.
Technical input should be obtained from knowledgeable technical subject matter experts SMEs , and communicated to and validated by other key SMEs assigned to the project.
Proper linking between the WBS and associated cost and schedule is critical if integrated analysis of cost, schedule, and performance is to be accomplished. In doing so, the project manager should keep the following in mind: Cost and schedule impacts can be determined only if there is a clear link between performance parameters and budgeted work packages via the WBS. This link is accomplished in order to obtain a performance budget baseline or the budget associated at the work package level.
All work in the WBS must be estimated, resourced, scheduled, budgeted, and controlled. The WBS has two parts: It is the mechanism that divides and organizes the work scope into units of work so that each unit can be estimated, resourced, scheduled, budgeted, and controlled while progress is reported.
Where there is a clear link between performance parameters and budgeted work packages via the WBS, the linkage should be made at a high level within the WBS. All work packages can then be associated with the performance parameters. Separate WBS elements should be included for integration tasks where several components are being brought together to create a higher-level WBS element.
By identifying the integration work separately where ever the above occurs, performance measurement information will provide a timely indication that problems are emerging. Cost and schedule variances occurring in WBS elements that contain integration work can also indicate potential future rework in areas that have previously been completed. When these trends are projected, the result could be a far greater impact on revised estimates at completion than from projections of trends in other areas.
Identification and tracking of performance metrics in a disciplined and systematic fashion helps provide significant early warning of potential problems and their nature.
Balancing the project definition aspects of the WBS with the data collecting and reporting requirements. Remember that the primary purpose of the WBS is to define the projects scope through the decomposition of deliverables. Each WBS is a tool designed to assist the project manager with decomposition of the project only to the levels necessary to meet the needs of the project, the nature of the work, and the confidence of the team. Excessive WBS levels may require unrealistic levels of maintenance and reporting.
Developing a WBS that defines the logical relationships among all the components of the project. This is generally clarified through the use of a dependency network in the project schedule.
Ensuring the development and utilization of the WBS. Omitting WBS development and proceeding directly to the network diagram such as a Gantt chart, CPM Schedule, or Precedence Diagram may lead to unforeseen and unexpected difficulty, including project delay. Avoiding the creation of WBS elements that are not deliverable-focused for example, structuring the WBS strictly by process or organization.
WBS elements that are not deliverable-focused may lead to project failure. Defining WBS elements representing opening and closing stages such as planning, assembly, and testing.
Identifying and detailing all key project deliverables e. Preventing the use of WBS elements that define overlapping responsibilities for the creation of a deliverable s.
Each WBS element must have one person who is clearly accountable for its completion. Identifying key project management work such as: These should be defined as level-of-effort WBS elements in those cases where they may be interim deliverables, do not themselves generate discrete deliverables, and may not be included in the final project deliverables. This process can be summarized in the checklist in Section 4.
If the answers to most of the items in the checklist are positive, then further decomposition should be considered. The greater the number of positive answers to the questions in Section 4. Not all legs of the WBS must be symmetrical in terms of the number of levels developed. There is no need to decompose all legs of the WBS if the need is only present in one area. Questions for consideration: Is there a need to improve the accuracy of the cost and duration estimates of the WBS element?
Is more than one individual or group responsible for the WBS element? While there may be a variety of resources assigned to a WBS element, there should be one individual assigned overall responsibility for the deliverable created during the completion of the WBS element.
Does the WBS element content include more than one type of work process or more than one deliverable? Is there a need to precisely know the timing of work processes internal to the WBS element? Is there a need to separately define the cost of work processes or deliverables internal to the WBS element? Are there significant time gaps in the execution of the work processes internal to the WBS element?
Do resource requirements change over time within a WBS element? Do prerequisites differ among internal deliverables within the WBS element? Are clear, objective criteria missing for measuring progress for the WBS element? Are there acceptance criteria applicable before the completion of the entire WBS element? Are there specific risks that require focused attention to a portion of the WBS element?
Can a portion of the work to be performed within the WBS element be scheduled as a unit? Is the WBS element clearly and completely understood to the satisfaction of the project manager, project team members, and other stakeholdersincluding the customer? Is there a stakeholder interested in analyzing status and performance of only a portion of the work covered by the WBS element?
As identified earlier, the level of the detail in a WBS is a function of the size of the project and a balance between complexity, risk, and the project managers need for control. The level of detail may also vary during the evolution of a project. A top-down and bottom-up analysis of the WBS can clarify whether the WBS is both complete and defined at the proper level of detail. Short-duration projects may lend themselves to decomposition to appropriate levels of detail at the outset, while projects of longer duration and higher complexity may preclude decomposition of all deliverables until further in the future.
Again, this may mean that on any given project, some portions of the WBS may have different levels of decomposition. This is especially true when doing rolling wave planning, where the plan is detailed for the immediately upcoming work only and work far in the future is defined at a high level until later in the project life cycle.
WBS development is the technique for accomplishing this decomposition. In structuring the WBS, one must look to the future and determine how the work will be accomplished and managed. The WBS should reflect this structure.
In addition to strict end-product identification, the WBS may also reflect level-of-effort functions such as project management activities and life-cycle timing project phases. These other elements should only be used, however, to the required level of detail necessary to organize the work tasks.
Remember that each of the lowest-level WBS elements should reflect work with specific, tangible deliverables. The risk eventsevents that might have a detrimental impact on the projectare evaluated to identify and characterize specific risks. Project risk is related to the likelihood of events positively or adversely affecting project objectives, including key elements such as technical design, quality, cost, and schedule.
The WBS decomposition approach may assist in risk identification and mitigation. For instance, projects that require permits and approvals from regulatory authorities can be high risk. Since risk can impact several WBS elements, it would be prudent for the project manager to perform impact analyses against all WBS elements, thus isolating the risks, providing for individual treatment, and permitting more effective focus for risk management.
The first step in this technique is to review the WBS elements to the level being considered and segment them into risk events. Using information from a variety of sources such as program plans, prior risk assessments, and expert interviews, the risk events are examined within critical areas to determine the probability of occurrence, severity of consequence impact , and interdependency.
The risks associated with an effort may also define the level of detail necessary. Additional detail in high-risk areas provides for better assumption definition, as well as improved cost estimates and time assessment. This forced structuring provides an opportunity to define the assumptions and expectations at a controllable level. Risk planning can be incorporated directly into the WBS by defining and including contingency activities as successors to the risk-impacted activities.
The duration of the contingency activities are set to compensate for the degree of uncertainty and potential impact of the risk event. As an example, a permit-contingency activity could be created as a successor to the permit-application activity. The duration of the permit-application activity is set to the normal time period expected for a permit application, and the duration of the contingency activity is set to reflect the probability and impact of the risk of delay. Are the deliverables completely and clearly defined?
Will the quality of the work be evaluated through efforts such as testing and inspection? What is the likelihood of change? Is the technology changing faster than the project can be accomplished? Have manpower, facilities capability, availability of internal resources, and potential suppliers been checked? Is extensive subcontracting expected? Is management committed to the project and will they provide the support needed? Are requirements defined and approved?
Has a formal change process been defined and implemented? Have metrics been defined for how the deliverables will be measured? Have resource requirements been identified for development of the project deliverables? Have other risks been identified, including stakeholder download-in, public relations, management approval, team understanding, and project opposition?
Has a communication plan internal and external been defined and implemented? Are third-party dependencies understood and monitored for change?
Have alternate suppliers of required products, supplies, or expertise been identified?
Normally this will be at least one level below the reporting requirementsone that allows for the effective planning, control, and performance measurement of discrete activities with uniquely identifiable resources. Although full resource identification will come later in the planning process, it can be useful to understand in general how that will be done, and ensure that the level of detail in the WBS will support those efforts.
Is all the work planned to a degree of detail necessary to make and keep commitments? Is there an ability to establish and manage individual work assignments with the reporting structure indicated by this WBS?
Can work assignments be established from a progressive expansion of the WBS? How will work generally be assigned and controlled? Will it be possible to reconcile individual work assignments to the formal scheduling system? How will budgets be established? Will it be possible to relate the budget to the proposed work assignments?
Is the level of detail in the WBS appropriate for effective planning and control? Is the work defined by the WBS grouped in a logical manner? Is more than one organization involved indicating the need to validate the WBS with others before doing detailed resource planning? How will the status of work in progress be determined? Once the WBS is developed, it is important that the project manager and other stakeholders involved in the management of the project know how things are going on a regular basis.
In this regard: Think reporting and control mechanisms. How will WBS element completion be determined? Standards Documents may be original works published by PMI, or they may be publications of other organizations or individuals. Standards Documents will be developed in accordance with the Code of Good Practice for Standardization developed by the International Organization for Standardization ISO and the standards development guidelines established by the American National Standards Institute.
The Manager may also request such proposals. The Manager will inform the prospective developer s as to the decision and the rationale for the decision. If an approved proposal requires funding in excess of that budgeted for standards development, the Manager will submit the proposal to the PMI Executive Director for funding.
For all approved and funded proposals, the Manager will support the developers efforts so as to maximize the probability that the end product will be accepted.
When the proposed material has been completed to the satisfaction of the developer s , the developer s will submit the material to the PMI Standards Manager. The PMI Standards Program Member Advisory Group, with the Manager, will review the proposed material and decide whether to initiate further review by knowledgeable individuals or request additional work by the developer s. The Manager will appoint, subject to review and approval by the PMI Standards Program Member Advisory Group, at least three knowledgeable individuals to review and comment on the material.
Based on comments received, the Member Advisory Group will decide whether to accept the material as an Exposure Draft. Exposure Drafts will be published under the aegis of the PMI Publishing Department and must meet the standards of that group regarding typography and style.
At the conclusion of the review period, the PMI Standards Manager will review comments received with the PMI Standards Program Member Advisory Group and will work with the developer s and others as needed to incorporate appropriate comments. The PMI Executive Director will verify compliance with procedures and ensure that member input was sufficient.
The PMI Executive. Director will a approve the document as submitted; b reject the document; or c request additional review, and will provide explanatory comments in support of the chosen option.
If accepted, the Manager will appoint, subject to review and approval by the PMI Standards Program Member Advisory Group, at least three knowledgeable individuals to review and comment on the material.
The Manager will inform the submitter as to the decision and the rationale for the decision.
The Manager will prepare a proposal for the PMI Executive Director for consideration of a prospective relationship with the owner s of the material. The PMI Executive Director will verify compliance with procedures and will ensure that member input was sufficient.
The PMI Executive Director will a approve the document as submitted; b reject the document; or c request additional review, and will provide explanatory comments in support of the chosen option.
A volunteer team was assembled and during the year worked through a number of drafts and revision cycles. In late spring , Kim Colenso was approved as the new project manager for the Practice Standard. He was tasked to form a new team to make minor modifications to the current draft, and add example WBSs.
A team was assembled during the summer and fall of through solicitation of participation from the PMI Specific Interest Groups and other volunteer sources.
During this period, a controversy developed within the project team on whether or not an activity was or should be part of the WBS. The project team implemented a formal change-control procedure to guide and control the evolution of the Practice Standard.
This procedure required all. As a result of this process, the following events occurred: Over forty formal change requests were submitted and approved by the team between October and April Another six were disapproved, as the arguments were deemed unpersuasive.
The Exposure Draft was submitted for public review on 29 September , with an exposure closure on 30 November During this period, comments were received. Due to the constraints of the review process, each idea proposed during the review was evaluated against the potential for delaying the schedule to incorporate new material and the subsequent impact to information that had been previously established in the draft.
As in all successful projects, there is a tradeoff between quality, cost, and schedule. In this case all comments that the project team accepted for the current version have been incorporated.
It has gone through an evolutionary process for fourteen years. Each edition has improved upon the previous version. After several editions, the result is an extremely refined and powerful document.
It has gone through its initial development. Now it is ready to begin its journey through the refinement process. Norman, Getronics Inc.
Parcels, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania E. These were used as delivered by the team members or as the basis for several of the examples that appear in this document. Robert Trafton, Merant Eric S. Cruise, SPMgroup Ltd. James W. Parcels, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Dr.
Coronado, ExperienceApplication. Max Smith, Compaq Computer Corporation. Bowman, PMP J. Chris Boyd Dennis H. Carignan Frank Carney Gene D. Fleming Pablo P. Simpson Nancy L. Skulmoski Joyce A. Swarthout Esq. Judy L. Wassel, PMP K. Watkins, PMP S. Westermann Tammo T. Steven L. Each practice standard provides guidelines on the mechanics e. A practice standard does not necessarily mirror the life-cycle phases of many projects.
But, an individual practice standard may be applicable to the completion of one or more phases within a project. Therefore, practice standards are not required to use the name of any knowledge area. Each practice standard should include information on what the significant process is and does, why it is significant, how to perform it, when it should be performed and, if necessary for further clarification, who should perform it.
Each practice standard should include information that is accepted and applicable for most projects most of the time within the project management community.
Processes that are generally restricted or applicable to one industry, country, or companion profession i. With strong support and evidence, an application areaspecific process may be considered as an extension practice standard, in the same manner as extensions to the PMBOK Guide are considered. Each practice standard will benefit from the inclusion of examples and templates.
It is best when an example or template includes a discussion of its strengths and weaknesses. A background description may be necessary to put this discussion in the appropriate context.
The examples should be aligned with the relevant information in the standard or its appendix and placed in proximity to that information. All practice standards will be written in the same general style and format. Each practice standard project will assess the need to align with or reference other practice standards. As the detailed engineering, fabrication, and installation are distinct phases of the work, these are placed at level 1 of the WBS.
This fits with the progression of the work, but also with the contracting strategy; i. Flag for inappropriate content. Related titles. Jump to Page. Search inside document. Scope Time 5. Adib Tawfiq. Mostafa Elsayed. Manoj Singh. Ajay Kumar. Hisbullah Kalanther Lebbe. Hasan Hamdan. Each of the items listed can continue to be broken down as indicated by the arrows until there is a specific task that can be assigned to members of the concrete canoe team.
These are work tasks that can be given specifically to a group or individual. Ideally, all WBS elements should be stated as nouns that describe decomposed elements of the work. All examples reflect the quality principles expressed in this Practice Standard.
References Haugan, Gregory T. Effective Work Breakdown Structures.
Vienna, VA Manage- mentConcepts. Pritchard, Carl L. Arlington VA. ESI International. Project Management Institute. ProjectManagement Institute.
The Practice Standard for Scheduling. Available May The Standard for Portfolio Man- agement. The Standard for Program Man- agement.
Uyttewaal, Eric Boca Raton, FL: J. Ross Publishing, Inc. McDonald Bradley, Inc. Berg, Cindy and Colenso, Kim. Project Management Institute, Work Breakdown Structures, Version 2. Cleland, David I.
Air University Review. Why Project Management? Business Horizons. Department ofDefence.