Schedule Compression Techniques

Correct Answer: The marginal cost of compression exceeds the value gained from schedule reduction

The marginal cost of compression exceeding the value gained from schedule reduction is the most reliable indicator of reaching the optimal compression point. This is based on the fundamental economic principle of diminishing returns. When the cost of additional compression becomes greater than the benefits received, you've reached the optimal point. The total duration reduction matching the baseline target isn't a reliable indicator because the target might not be realistic or economically feasible. Full resource allocation doesn't necessarily indicate optimal compression - resources could be inefficiently allocated or over-allocated. Minimal float on critical path activities after implementing compression techniques doesn't indicate optimality - it only shows the schedule is tight, but doesn't consider the cost-benefit relationship.

Correct Answer: Fast tracking parallel activities that have minimal risk

When compressing a project schedule while minimizing costs, fast tracking is the preferred initial technique because it does not typically incur additional costs. Fast tracking involves executing activities in parallel that would normally be done in sequence, focusing on those with minimal risk to maintain project integrity. This approach is more cost-effective than the alternatives because: 1. It rearranges the schedule sequence while keeping the same resources 2. It targets low-risk activities first to minimize potential issues 3. It does not require additional resource costs The other options are less optimal because: - Adding resources to all critical path activities is excessive and costly when not all activities may need compression - Crashing activities through premium resources is more expensive and should only be used when fast tracking has been exhausted - Implementing overtime across all activities is the most expensive option and creates unnecessary costs for non-critical activities

Correct Answer: The risk tolerance level of the project stakeholders

The risk tolerance level of project stakeholders is the most crucial factor when choosing between crashing and fast tracking because: Crashing involves adding resources and costs to compress the schedule, while fast tracking involves overlapping activities that would normally be done in sequence. Each method carries different levels of risk: - Crashing typically has lower risk but higher costs - Fast tracking typically has higher risk but lower direct costs Stakeholders' risk tolerance determines which approach is more appropriate for the project situation. The other options are less relevant: Parallel activities on the critical path relate to the feasibility of fast tracking but don't help choose between methods. Schedule float in non-critical activities doesn't impact the choice between compression techniques for critical path activities. Resource utilization is a constraint to consider but not the primary factor in choosing between these specific compression techniques.