Modification of the PERT method for project time evaluation taking into account unexpected delays

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2018.140752

Keywords:

PERT, evaluation of project implementation time, quality of expert, sources of evaluation errors

Abstract

The PERT-based method for estimation of project implementation time, which uses Rayleigh distribution instead of β-distribution, was proposed. The modification of the PERT, which made it possible to involve the quality of an expert into the assessment and to simplify the examination procedure was proposed. We offered a new method for project evaluation, based on the properties of Rayleigh distribution and taking into consideration the peculiarities of plotting a network diagram in IT- projects with a high degree of work detailing in the face of the existing possibilities of extending the time of particular tasks. Three different methods project time evaluation, based on two different statistics and two different methods for calculation of project time, were compared. Comparison was performed with the view to search for the simplest method in terms of information acquisition and suitable for algorithmic implementation. It was shown that the estimation result is more consistent with specificity of complex IT-projects and makes it possible to reduce the number of iterations within project implementation time, as well as to use an objective assessment of the main sources of errors in determining time, giving evaluation with the probability that was assigned beforehand. It was shown that the estimate of the most probable and minimum time of project completion during the calculation by the new method is consistent with the results of the calculations using the PERT method, while the evaluation of maximum time differs strongly, as the new method is more pessimistic in this sense, and it matches better the characteristics of complex IT-projects that have a high probability of unexpected delays during implementation. We draw conclusions on the possible application of results in creation of a project time evaluation system based on the methods of artificial intelligence, and determined parameters for setting such a system.

Author Biographies

Vladimir Litvinov, Industrial Technologies, Design and Management Institute Odessa National Polytechnic University Shevchenka ave., 1, Odessa, Ukraine, 65044

PhD, Associate Professor

Department of Information Technologies of Design in Mechanical Engineering

Andrii Moskaliuk, Odessa National Polytechnic University Shevchenka ave., 1, Odessa, Ukraine, 65044

PhD

Department of Systems Management Life Safety

References

  1. Trietsch, D., Baker, K. R. (2012). PERT 21: Fitting PERT/CPM for use in the 21st century. International Journal of Project Management, 30 (4), 490–502. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2011.09.004
  2. Anggara Hayun, A. (2005). Perencanaan dan Pengendalian Proyek dengan Metode Pert – CPM Studi Kasus : Fly Over Ahmad Yani – Karawang. The Winners, 6 (2), 155. doi: https://doi.org/10.21512/tw.v6i2.605
  3. Krivenkov, Yu. P. (1968). Nekotorye voprosy teorii setevyh metodov planirovaniya. Kibernetika, 2, 45.
  4. Pearl, R. G., Bowen, P. A. (2002). Construction time prediction. Acta Structilia, 9 (1), 1–12.
  5. Han, W. J., Jiang, L. X., Lu, T. B., Zhang, X. Y. (2015). Comparison of Machine Learning Algorithms for Software Project Time Prediction. International Journal of Multimedia and Ubiquitous Engineering, 10 (9), 1–8. doi: https://doi.org/10.14257/ijmue.2015.10.9.01
  6. Kanoglu, A. (2003). An integrated system for duration estimation in design/build projects and organizations. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 10 (4), 272–282. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/09699980310489988
  7. Mohamed, D., Srour, F., Tabra, W., Zayed, T. (2009). A prediction model for construction project time contingency. Construction Research Congress 2009, 736–745. doi: https://doi.org/10.1061/41020(339)75
  8. Gogunskii, V., Kolesnikov, O., Kolesnikova, K., Lukianov, D. (2016). "Lifelong learning" is a new paradigm of personnel training in enterprises. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 4 (2 (82)), 4–10. doi: https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2016.74905
  9. Pospieszny, P., Czarnacka-Chrobot, B., Kobylinski, A. (2018). An effective approach for software project effort and duration estimation with machine learning algorithms. Journal of Systems and Software, 137, 184–196. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2017.11.066
  10. Chao, L.-C., Chien, C.-F. (2010). A Model for Updating Project S-curve by Using Neural Networks and Matching Progress. Automation in Construction, 19 (1), 84–91. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2009.09.006
  11. Norouzi, G., Heydari, M., Noori, S., Bagherpour, M. (2015). Developing a Mathematical Model for Scheduling and Determining Success Probability of Research Projects Considering Complex-Fuzzy Networks. Journal of Applied Mathematics, 2015, 1–15. doi: https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/809216
  12. Vahdani, B., Mousavi, S. M., Mousakhani, M., Hashemi, H. (2016). Time Prediction Using a Neuro-Fuzzy Model for Projects in the Construction Industry. Journal of Optimization in Industrial Engineering, 9 (19), 97–103. doi: https://doi.org/10.22094/JOIE.2016.231
  13. Habibi, F., Taghipour Birgani, O., Koppelaar, H., Radenović, S. (2018). Using fuzzy logic to improve the project time and cost estimation based on Project Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT). Journal of Project Management, 183–196. doi: https://doi.org/10.5267/j.jpm.2018.4.002
  14. Golsnko, D. I., Shirvinskiy, E. V., Ponomarev, M. (1967). Primenenie statisticheskih metodov dli openki prodolzhitel'nosti rabot v sistemah SPU (na primere konstruirovaniya tipovyh blokov cifrovyh upravlyayushchih ustroystv). Trudy 1 Vsesoyuznoy konferencii po matematicheskim metodam v SPU. Kyiv.

Downloads

Published

2018-08-21

How to Cite

Litvinov, V., & Moskaliuk, A. (2018). Modification of the PERT method for project time evaluation taking into account unexpected delays. Eastern-European Journal of Enterprise Technologies, 4(3 (94), 6–13. https://doi.org/10.15587/1729-4061.2018.140752

Issue

Section

Control processes