Numerous project management discussions and fora and seminars, and all participants love to ask for examples for a Start to Finish (S2F) scenario. They love to put the presenter in a spot, and most of the times they succeed. The most usual response to their request is met with a belligerent grin followed by an expression which conveys bonhomie - which might have been or might have not been present till this point in the time continuum. Mutual comraderie apart, the response also never fails to acknowledge the shared common confusion which the questioner is trying to announce, but the presenter suo moto offers an explanation that one would rather use a 'Finish to Start' relationship - thus ducking the need to present an example.
History repeats itself, and will do so again. So when this cadent flummoxed moment presents itself again, be ready to claim it.
Our presumptuous nature makes us think about these task relationships with respect to time. We interpret a Finish to Start (F2S) relationship, as the task which has to be done 'first' must finish so that the next step can start. Nothing wrong with that, but as soon as the same bourgeois logic attempts to explain a S2F relationship, it looks like child Krishna asserting his innocence to his mother with butter all over his face.
The logic to consider is: which activity is the driver and which activity is the driven one. As soon as 'le temp' is left out of the logic, the conundrum fails to manifest.
Best examples would be tasks for which start dates have been fixed - like birthdays, weddings etc. One would work backwards from the target date - and using the S2F relationship for antecedent tasks.
No comments:
Post a Comment