Resource-allocation capabilities of commercial project management software. An experimental analysis

When project managers determine schedules for resource-constrained projects, they commonly use commercial project management software packages. Which resource-allocation methods are implemented in these packages is proprietary information. The resource-allocation problem is in general computationally difficult to solve to optimality. Hence, the question arises if and how various project management software packages differ in quality with respect to their resource-allocation capabilities. None of the few existing papers on this subject uses a sizeable data set and recent versions of common software packages. We experimentally analyze the resource-allocation capabilities of Acos Plus.1, AdeptTracker Professional, CS Project Professional, Microsoft Office Project 2007, Primavera P6, Sciforma PS8, and Turbo Project Professional. Our analysis is based on 1560 instances of the precedence- and resource-constrained project scheduling problem RCPSP. The experiment shows that using the resource-allocation feature of these packages may lead to a project duration increase of almost 115% above the best known feasible schedule. The increase gets larger with increasing resource scarcity and with increasing number of activities. We investigate the impact of different complexity scenarios and priority rules on the project duration obtained by the software packages. We provide a decision table to support managers in selecting a software package and a priority rule.

Resource allocation with project management software

We present results of a benchmark test evaluating the resource allocation capabilities of the project management software packages Acos Plus.1 8.2, CA SuperProject 5.0a, CS Project Professional 3.0, MS Project 2000, and Scitor Project Scheduler 8.0.1. The tests are based on 1560 instances of precedence– and resource–constrained project scheduling problems. For different complexity scenarios, we analyze the deviation of the makespan obtained by the software packages from the best feasible makespan known. Among the tested software packages, Acos Plus.1 and Project Scheduler show the best resource allocation performance. Moreover, our numerical analysis reveals a considerable performance gap between the implemented methods and state–of–the–art project scheduling algorithms, especially for large–sized problems. Thus, there is still a significant potential for improving solutions to resource allocation problems in practice.

Resource-Constrained Project Scheduling with Project Management Information Systems

Most commercial project management software packages include planning methods to devise schedules for resource-constrained projects. As it is proprietary information of the software vendors which planning methods are implemented, the question arises how the software packages differ in quality with respect to their resource-allocation capabilities. We experimentally evaluate the resource-allocation capabilities of eight recent software packages by using 1,560 instances with 30, 60, and 120 activities of the well-known PSPLIB library. In some of the analyzed packages, the user may influence the resource allocation by means of multi-level priority rules, whereas in other packages, only few options can be chosen. We study the impact of various complexity parameters and priority rules on the project duration obtained by the software packages. The results indicate that the resource-allocation capabilities of these packages differ significantly. In general, the relative gap between the packages gets larger with increasing resource scarcity and with increasing number of activities. Moreover, the selection of the priority rule has a considerable impact on the project duration. Surprisingly, when selecting a priority rule in the packages where it is possible, both the mean and the variance of the project duration are in general worse than for the packages which do not offer the selection of a priority rule.

A note on the selection of priority rules in software packages for project management

Various software packages for project management include a procedure for resource-constrained scheduling. In several packages, the user can influence this procedure by selecting a priority rule. However, the resource-allocation methods that are implemented in the procedures are proprietary information; therefore, the question of how the priority-rule selection impacts the performance of the procedures arises. We experimentally evaluate the resource-allocation methods of eight recent software packages using the 600 instances of the PSPLIB J120 test set. The results of our analysis indicate that applying the default rule tends to outperform a randomly selected rule, whereas applying two randomly selected rules tends to outperform the default rule. Applying a small set of more than two rules further improves the project durations considerably. However, a large number of rules must be applied to obtain the best possible project durations.

Assessing and mapping LD and SLM to directly support the planning and scaling up of SLM interventions to combat desertification

Global investment in Sustainable Land Management (SLM) has been substantial, but knowledge gaps remain. Overviews of where land degradation (LD) is taking place and how land users are addressing the problem using SLM are still lacking for most individual countries and regions. Relevant maps focus more on LD than SLM, and they have been compiled using different methods. This makes it impossible to compare the benefits of SLM interventions and prevents informed decision-making on how best to invest in land. To fill this knowledge gap, a standardised mapping method has been collaboratively developed by the World Overview of Conservation Approaches and Technologies (WOCAT), FAO’s Land Degradation Assessment in Drylands (LADA) project, and the EU’s Mitigating Desertification and Remediating Degraded Land (DESIRE) project. The method generates information on the distribution and characteristics of LD and SLM activities and can be applied at the village, national, or regional level. It is based on participatory expert assessment, documents, and surveys. These data sources are spatially displayed across a land-use systems base map. By enabling mapping of the DPSIR framework (Driving Forces-Pressures-State-Impacts-Responses) for degradation and conservation, the method provides key information for decision-making. It may also be used to monitor LD and conservation following project implementation. This contribution explains the mapping method, highlighting findings made at different levels (national and local) in South Africa and the Mediterranean region. Keywords: Mapping, Decision Support, Land Degradation, Sustainable Land Management, Ecosystem Services, Participatory Expert Assessment