The Critical Path Method And PERT Or The MOSCOW And Agile Method

Introduction

According to Zwikael and Globerson (2004), "Faulty planning will result in project failure, whereas high-quality project planning increases the project's chances of success." So the trick for any successful project manager is to have the greatest possible awareness of planning tools, techniques, and methods. While we can utilize many project planning tools in several ways that may be interrelated, or even have similar functions i.e. The Critical Path Method and PERT or the MOSCOW and Agile methods, each process can shine under the proper conditions. The availability of IT and cloud-based systems has also increased the accessibility of many of these methods to include Kanban, Scrum, and various simulations. This wide variety and ready availability make skipping the project planning phase inexcusable.

This paper will provide a comparison

According to a Rand Corporation Memorandum for the US Air Force in 1963, “the mathematical assumptions underlying the PERT management system are of doubtful validity, and even granting these assumptions there are still serious computational difficulties involved in getting the desired answers.” It also notes that the deficiencies of the system include its failures to address resource allocation, correlations between activity durations, and limited feedback value (Slyke, 1963). A 1965 study conducted at the University of Iowa revealed that 42 percent of the companies surveyed wanted to utilize PERT but were “Functionally unable to use it (Schoderbek, 1965). The passage of did not change much. A 1978 study found that PERT was still used in less than half of the US Aerospace industry, one of the most technologically sophisticated industries at that time (Klementowski, p. 65). While project software and computer technology have streamlined the development of PERT charts since then, its use is still limited in its accessibility to the average