Schedule Compression Techniques: Crashing and Fast-Tracking

Correct Answer: Fast-tracking requires overlapping activities while crashing adds resources to critical path activities

Fast-tracking and crashing are two distinct schedule compression techniques with different approaches to resources: Correct approach: Fast-tracking involves overlapping activities or phases that would normally be done in sequence, which does not necessarily require additional resources but increases risk. Crashing, on the other hand, involves adding resources to critical path activities to reduce their duration, which increases costs. Why other options are incorrect: - The statement about fast-tracking adding resources to parallel activities is incorrect because fast-tracking is about overlapping activities, not adding resources - Fast-tracking does not inherently demand additional resources upfront; it's about reorganizing the schedule - The claim about specific resource percentage increases is arbitrary and incorrect - the actual resource requirements vary by project and activity The key distinction is that fast-tracking is a schedule compression technique that reorganizes the schedule logic, while crashing is a technique that adds resources to reduce duration.

Correct Answer: Risk increases as parallel activities may have dependencies that were planned for sequential execution

Fast-tracking is a schedule compression technique where activities that would normally be performed in sequence are performed in parallel. When activities originally planned to be sequential are performed in parallel, there is an inherent increase in risk because: - Dependencies between tasks may be compromised - Resource conflicts may arise - Quality issues may emerge due to rushed work - Coordination becomes more complex The other answers are incorrect because: - Team focus does not automatically decrease risk during fast-tracking - Risk levels do not remain constant when changing from sequential to parallel execution - Enhanced communication, while important, does not minimize the inherent risks of parallel execution Fast-tracking always involves a trade-off between schedule reduction and increased risk, which is a fundamental principle in project management schedule compression.

Correct Answer: Crashing adds resources to reduce activity durations on the critical path

The key distinction between crashing and fast-tracking is in their fundamental approaches to schedule compression: Crashing involves adding resources or working overtime to reduce activity durations on the critical path, which is the correct characteristic. This often results in increased costs but can effectively reduce project duration. Fast-tracking actually involves performing activities in parallel that would normally be done in sequence, and it doesn't necessarily require additional resources. The misconception in other answers includes: - Fast-tracking does not require additional resources while crashing does - this is reversed - Crashing is not limited to non-critical activities; it specifically targets critical path activities - The cost comparison between the techniques isn't universally applicable, as costs vary by project Crashing specifically adds resources to reduce duration, while fast-tracking reorganizes the schedule to perform activities in parallel - this is the fundamental difference between these techniques.