A Statistical Method for Estimating Activity Uncertainty Parameters to Improve Project Forecasting

Just like any physical system, projects have entropy that must be managed by spending energy. The entropy is the project’s tendency to move to a state of disorder (schedule delays, cost overruns), and the energy process is an inherent part of any project management methodology. In order to manage the inherent uncertainty of these projects, accurate estimates (for durations, costs, resources, …) are crucial to make informed decisions. Without these estimates, managers have to fall back to their own intuition and experience, which are undoubtedly crucial for making decisions, but are are often subject to biases and hard to quantify. This paper builds further on two published calibration methods that aim to extract data from real projects and calibrate them to better estimate the parameters for the probability distributions of activity durations. Both methods rely on the lognormal distribution model to estimate uncertainty in activity durations and perform a sequence of statistical hypothesis tests that take the possible presence of two human biases into account. Based on these two existing methods, a new so-called statistical partitioning heuristic is presented that integrates the best elements of the two methods to further improve the accuracy of estimating the distribution of activity duration uncertainty. A computational experiment has been carried out on an empirical database of 83 empirical projects. The experiment shows that the new statistical partitioning method performs at least as good as, and often better than, the two existing calibration methods. The improvement will allow a better quantification of the activity duration uncertainty, which will eventually lead to a better prediction of the project schedule and more realistic expectations about the project outcomes. Consequently, the project manager will be able to better cope with the inherent uncertainty (entropy) of projects with a minimum managerial effort (energy).

[1]  C. E. SHANNON,et al.  A mathematical theory of communication , 1948, MOCO.

[2]  D. Malcolm,et al.  Application of a Technique for Research and Development Program Evaluation , 1959 .

[3]  F. David,et al.  Statistical Estimates and Transformed Beta-Variables. , 1960 .

[4]  S. Looney,et al.  Use of the Correlation Coefficient with Normal Probability Plots , 1985 .

[5]  Terry Williams.  Criticality in Stochastic Networks , 1992 .

[6]  Simaan M. AbouRizk,et al.  FITTING BETA DISTRIBUTIONS BASED ON SAMPLE DATA , 1994 .

[7]  Terry Williams,et al.  A classified bibliography of recent research relating to project risk management , 1995 .

[8]  Sergey Bushuyev,et al.  Entropy measurement as a project control tool , 1999 .

[9]  A. Asllani,et al.  An Entropy-Based Approach for Measuring Project Uncertainty , 2007 .

[10]  Rodolfo Ambriz.  Dynamic Scheduling with Microsoft Office Project 2007: The Book By and For Professionals , 2008 .

[11]  Mario Vanhoucke,et al.  Using activity sensitivity and network topology information to monitor project time performance , 2010 .

[12]  W. Cosgrove.  Entropy as a Measure of Uncertainty for PERT Network Completion Time Distributions and Critical Path Probabilities , 2010 .

[13]  Mario Vanhoucke,et al.  On the dynamic use of project performance and schedule risk information during projecttracking , 2011 .

[14]  Kenneth R. Baker,et al.  Modeling activity times by the Parkinson distribution with a lognormal core: Theory and validation , 2012, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[15]  Mario Vanhoucke.  Project Management with Dynamic Scheduling: Baseline Scheduling, Risk Analysis and Project Control , 2012 .

[16]  Mario Vanhoucke.  Integrated Project Management and Control: First Comes the Theory, then the Practice , 2014 .

[17]  Mario Vanhoucke,et al.  Classification of articles and journals on project control and earned value management , 2015 .

[18]  Mario Vanhoucke,et al.  Construction and evaluation framework for a real-life project database , 2015 .

[19]  Mario Vanhoucke,et al.  Empirical Evaluation of Earned Value Management Forecasting Accuracy for Time and Cost , 2015 .

[20]  Ching-Chih Tseng,et al.  Measuring schedule uncertainty for a stochastic resource-constrained project using scenario-based approach with utility-entropy decision model , 2016 .

[21]  Mario Vanhoucke,et al.  Empirical perspective on activity durations for project management simulation studies , 2016 .

[22]  E. A. Druzhinin,et al.  A Quantitative Measure For Evaluating Project Uncertainty Under Variation And Risk Effects , 2017 .

[23]  Mario Vanhoucke,et al.  Fitting activity distributions using human partitioning and statistical calibration , 2019, Comput. Ind. Eng..

[24]  Mario Vanhoucke,et al.  The impact of applying effort to reduce activity variability on the project time and cost performance , 2019, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[25]  Carreño Carreño,et al.  Evaluación de la diversidad taxonómica y funcional de la comunidad microbiana relacionada con el ciclo del nitrógeno en suelos de cultivo de arroz con diferentes manejos del tamo , 2020 .