Project Management Course: Solutions to Exercises

1. The structural breakdown: corrected ..........................................................................................2

2. Risk analysis: corrected...............................................................................................3

3. The analysis of expected monetary value (decision tree): corrected................................5

4. Types of responses to risks: corrected...........................................................................6

5. The development of the schedule: method of predecessors: corrected.......................................7

6. The development of the schedule: the Gantt chart: corrected ..........................................8

7. The management of the PARKING case: the monthly summary: corrected ........................................9

8. The management of the PARKING case: the individual assessment: corrected...............................................10

9. The management of the PARKING case: the progress of the project: corrected........................................11

10. The earned value method: corrected...............................................................12

12. Estimation using the analytical method and the proportional distribution method:
corrected......................................................................................................................................14

13. Estimation using the function point method: corrected..........................................15

14. Cost estimation - generalization: corrected .................................16

15. Calculation of the profitability of an IT investment: corrected......................................17

Note: Some exercises are subject to a single oral correction (discussion).

[Link] Project Management Corrected exercises and case studies - March 2005 1
 1. Structural cutting: corrected

• For the Customer Management domain, the structural breakdown is done according to an approach
static
Customer Management Domain

Client Person Links between

people

Professionals Individuals

• For the Production domain, it is an approach that encompasses both information and processes.
since the management of the four families leads to information and processes
different.
Production Domain

Automobile Multirisk Multirisk Risks Statistics

habitation agricultural industrial

• For the Claims Management field, the segmentation criterion is not the type of
guarantee, but the scale of the disaster. It is a segmentation by processes.
Disaster Domain

Minor accidents Disasters Significant claims Statistics

means

• For the Intermediaries domain, the segmentation is partly based on the information and in
part by the processes.
Intermediate Subproject

Identification of Contract tracking Calculation of

intermediaries placed commissions

[Link] Project Management Corrected exercises and case studies - March 2005 2
 2. Risk analysis: corrected

Taille du projet = 3
Criterion Degree Metric
1 <= 6 months
2 <= 18 months
Duration
3 <= 30 months x
4 30 months
1 <= 20 mp
2 =< 120 mp
Charge
3 <= 300 mp x
4 300 mp

Difficulté technique = 1,2

Criterion Degree Metric
1 More than 200 references x
Market experience on 2 More than 100 references
targeted architecture 3 More than 50 references
4 Fewer than 10 references
1 More than 200 references x
Market experience on the 2 More than 100 references
programming language 3 More than 50 references
4 Fewer than 10 references
1 More than 200 references x
Market experience on the 2 More than 100 references
DBMS 3 More than 50 references
4 Fewer than 10 references
1 Normal
2 A little high x
Performance constraint
3 Raised
4 Very high

Degree of integration = 2
Criterion Degree Metric
1 <= 1
Inter flow name (type) 2 <= 5
applications 3 <= 10 x
4 > 10
1 None x
Number of applications 2 = 1
connected under construction 3 = 2
4 2

Organizational configuration = 4
Criterion Degree Metric
1 = 1
Name of directions ensuring 2 = 2
the project ownership 3 = 3
4 3 x
1 Named, involved, legitimate
2 Named, involved
Nomination of a promoter
3 Named
4 No promoter x
Support from Management 1 Monitoring by the DG
general 2 DG informed

[Link] Project Management Exercises and corrected case studies - March 2005 3
 3 No involvement from the DG, but
a single MOA
4 No involvement from the DG and x
several project owners

Changement = 3,2
Criterion Degree Metric
1 No gap
Degree of evolution 2 Low gap
organizational 3 Mean deviation x
4 Strong gap
1 No gap
Degree of evolution 2 Low gap
functional 3 Mean deviation x
4 Strong gap
1 No gap
2 Low gap
Degree of technical evolution
3 Mean deviation x
4 Strong gap
1 1
2 Less than 10
Number of affected sites
3 Less than 50
4 More than 50 x
Ėquipe = 2
Criterion Degree Metric
1 good
2 averages
Technical skills
3 weak x
4 very weak
1 good x
2 averages
Functional skills
3 weak
4 very weak
1 Very rewarding
Image of the project
2 Enhancing x
3 Moderately rewarding
4 Weakly rewarding
Risk profile of the Assuretout Production project

Nature of the risk Degree of risk for the project

1 2 3 4
Project size * (3)
Technical difficulty * (1,2)
Degree of integration (2)
Organizational configuration (4)
Change (3,2)
Instability of the project team * (2)

[Link] Project Management Corrected exercises and case studies - March 2005 4
 3. The analysis of expected monetary value (decision tree): corrected

Positive contribution 20000: 50% Gain = 10 000

Zero contribution 30% Gain = 0
AGL Scenario
Cost 220,000 Negative contribution 20000: 20% Gain = -4000
AGL or
not AGL? Respect: 40% Gain = 0
Scenario not AGL Exceeding 20000: 30% Gain = -6000
Cost 200,000
Exceeding 60000: 20% Gain = -12000
Exceeding 100000: 10% Gain = - 10000

Expected monetary value of the AGL scenario:

- 220 000 + (50%. 20 000 + 30%. 0 – 20%. 20 000) =

- 220 000 + (10 000 – 4 000) =

- 214,000 euros (expense)

Expected monetary value of the scenario not AGL:

- 200,000 + (40% of 0 - 30% of 20,000 - 20% of 60,000 - 10% of 100,000) =

- 200 000 + (–6 000 – 12 000 – 10 000) =

- 228 000 euros (dépense)

[Link] Project Management Corrected exercises and case studies - March 2005 5
 4. The types of responses to risks: corrected

Lead the project as planned and negotiate an additional 4-month deadline:

ACCEPT (active)
2. Appoint the Director of the Automotive Department promoter of the project:
IMPROVE (and MITIGATE)
3. Adopt a W model to train developers and hire a specialist
Java: AVOID
4. Prototype different use cases of the processes with their variants. The prototype
must be validated by the decision-makers and tested by the operational group:
to attenuate
5. Renounce to develop the online store: AVOID
6. Start the project with the Common Part module: DIMINISH
7. Form a group of decision-makers to express needs regarding the static structure
from the common part of the contract, with work in the form of a JRP session:
to attenuate
8. If a Department refuses to cooperate, plan a transfer of its Director.
CONDITIONAL RESPONSE (Backup plan)
9. Subcontract the development of the website for a fixed price, which must capture the essence of
previously developed features for standard auto contracts:
TRANSFER
10. Create a change management cell: MITIGATE

[Link] Project Management Exercises and corrected case studies - March 2005 6
 5. The development of the schedule: predecessor method: corrected

T5 = 10 T7 = 4
2 ; 11 12 ; 15
T2 = 1 27 ; 36 25 37; 40 25 (25)
1;1
6;6 5 T11 = 5
41 ; 45
+1
T4 = 8 41 ; 50 0/5
3 ; 10
8 ; 15 5 (5)

T12 = 10 T14 = 30
41; 50 51 ; 80
Start T6 = 25
41 ; 50 0 51 ; 80 0 80
16 ; 40
16 ; 40 0

End
T10 = 1
26 ; 26
-2
T1 = 5 T3 = 12 68 ; 68 42 (1)
1;5 4 ; 15
1;5 0 4 ; 15 0

T8 = 10 T9 = 2 T13 = 12
16 ; 25 26 ; 27 28 ; 39
57 ; 66 41 67 ; 68 51 69 ; 80 51

[Link] Project Management Exercises and corrected case studies - March 2005 7
 6. The development of the schedule: the Gantt chart: corrected
We seek to assign tasks to R2 whose margin is at least double the duration.
You must start the critical path tasks immediately, then t11.

Overlap: t3 (with t1); t4 (with t2)

Compression : t3 (réduction durée)

Period1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
R1 t1 t3 t7

R2 t3 t2 t5

R3 t4 t6

Period31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
R1

R2 t8 (beginning) t11 t8 (fin)

R3 t6 t12 t14

Period61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90
R1

R2 t9 t10 t13

R3 t14

[Link] Project Management - Corrected exercises and case studies - March 2005 8
 7. The management of the PARKING case: the monthly summary: corrected

Month 1 Semaine 1 Semaine 2 Semaine 3 Semaine 4 Semaine 5 Total

month
Name Task t r a t r a t r a t r a t r a t r a

Claude
ParkingJE 4 4 4 5 0 4 9 0 8
ParkingET 3 0 3 3 0 3
ParkingPGM 2 28 2 4 24 4 2 22 2 8 22 8
Total 20 22 19
Camille
AuthorizationJE 5 0 8 5 0 8
VehicleAND 2 0 2 2 0 2
VehiclePGM 3 13 2 5 8 5 2 2 6 10 2 13
Total 17 2 23

[Link] Project Management Corrected exercises and case studies - March 2005 9
 8. The management of the PARKING case: the individual assessment: corrected

Individual assessment of:Claudefor the month of:month 2

Reminder Month Project summary
Task Charge Remaining Time Reste à Avan- Coefficient - SpeedWeather Coeffi- Perfor-
affected month past to do cement scient past scient performance
n-1 of utility of the duty
lisation localization
Parking 30 22 18 8 14 77% 26 88%
PGM
Total 18 14 0.9 77% 38 0.9 89%

Individual assessment of: Cfamilyfor the month of:month 2

Reminder Month Project summary
Task Charge Remaining Time Stay to Avant- Coefficient - SpeedWeather Coeffi- Perfor-
affected month passed to do cement scient passed scient performance
n-1 of the duty of duty
lisation localization

Vehicle 15 2 2 0 2 100 12 125%

PGM
Vehicle 1.5 1.5 3 0 1.5 50 3 50%
TEST
Authorize 2 2 2 0 2 100 2 100%
tionET
Authorize 25 25 12 13 12 100 12 100%
tionPGM
Total 19 13 17.5 0.95 92% 36 0.85 109

[Link] Project Management Corrected exercises and case studies - March 2005 10
 9. The management of the PARKING case: the progress of the project: corrected

Project progress table for Parking at the end of month 3

Month 2 Month 3 Project summary
Lots Time Stay Time Stay Avan- Evolu- Charge Time Evolu- Evolu Achèv
passed to do passed to do cement tion of initial passed tion in -tion em.
charge days in % in %
Parking 18 10 15 0 10 +5 43 53 + 10 +23 100
days days
Vehicle 5 0 18.5 17 1.5 -8 100
day
Authorize 14 15.5 14 2.5 13 +1 37.5 33 -2 -5 93
tion day days
Edition 21 9 13.5 7.5 + 1.5 21 9 + 1.5 +7 36
days day
Integrate 10 10 10 0 0
tion
Total 37 56.5 38 26 30.5 7.5 130 112 8 +6% 80%
days days

[Link] Project Management Exercises and corrected case studies - March 2005 11
 10. The earned value method: corrected
1°) Forecasts
VP / Week 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A 2.5 2.5
B 2 2 2 2 2 2
C 2 2 2 2 2
D 3 3 3
Total project (€K) 2.5 5 9 13 17 21 25 30 33 36
2°) Measures and deviations
1 2 3 4 5
A(5K€)
planned 2.5 2.5
real 3 2
% completed 40% 100% (+60%)
B(12K€)
planned 2 2 2
real 1 4 2
% completed 25% 35% (+10%) 55% (+20%)
C10K€)
planned 2 2 2
real 2 2 2
% completed 20% 40% (+20%) 50% (+10%)
D
CR 3 5 8 14 18
what we spent
VA 2 5 10 13.2 16.6
what we should have spent for the value of
work completed 40.5% 100.5 5 + 25%.12 + 20%.10 10 + 10%.12 + 20%. 10 13,2 + 20%.12 + 10%.10
VP 2.5 5 9 13 17
what we've budgeted and planned to do

Time gap (TG) - 0.5 0 1 0.2 -0.4

(VA - VP) retard advance advance delayed
Cost variance (CV) 1 0 2 -0.8 -1,4
(VA - CR) (overconsumption) (under-consumption) (overconsumption) (overconsumption)

[Link] Project Management Exercises and corrected case studies - March 2005 12
 3°) Indices and forecasts

IPC = VA / CR = 16,60 / 18 =0,92

IPD = VA / VP = 16,60 / 17 =0,98

Cumulative performance index IPCc= sum of VA / sum of CR = 46.8 / 48 = 0.96

Required performance index = remaining work / remaining budget

= (36 - 16.60) / (36 - 18) = 1.08

Forecasts:

1. discrepancies are accidental:

PAA = actual costs + remaining work = 18 + (36 - 16.60) = 37.40

2 gaps are representative of the future:

PAA = actual costs + remaining work/IPC = 18 + (36 – 16.60)/0.92

18 + 21.9 = 39.90

[Link] Project Management Corrected exercises and case studies - March 2005 13
 12. Estimation with the analytical method and the distribution method
proportional: corrected

Nb Standard weight or Charge

Lot Type of task
units ratio estimated
Automobile Real-time program 10 3 days/person 30
means
Technical study 10% 3
Test game 20% 6
Tests 7% 2
Multi-risk Real-time program 5 3 days/person 15
habitation mean
Technical study 13% 2
Tests 10% 1.5
Multirisk Real-time program 5 5 days/person 25
agricultural difficult
Technical study 8% 2
Test game 20% 8
Tests 10% 2.5
Risk Easy batch program 10 1.5 days/person 15
industrial
Technical study 10% 1.5
Test game 20% 3
Tests 10% 1.5
Integration 10
TOTAL 128
days/ p

The method of proportional distribution

Step Calculation rule Charge

Realization 128 days/person

Technical study 7 days/ person

Detailed study Half of the execution load 64 days/person

Preliminary study Between half and a third of the study load 21 days/person
détaillée : on prend le tiers.

Total 220 days/person

11 months/person

[Link] Project Management Corrected exercises and case studies - March 2005 14
 13. Estimation using the function point method: corrected

Function ENT (window) GDR Complexité

Contract management Contract Contract Complex
Car Client
Intermediate
Car Contract (auto) Medium
Vehicle Risk Complex
Vehicle
Owner Individual Medium
Driver Individual Simple
Contract management (Contract) Contract For reference
Habitation Client
Intermediate
Habitation Risky Average
Housing Contract
Contract management (Contract) Contract For record
Agricultural Client
Intermediate
Agricultural Risky Complex
Agricultural contract
Contract management (Contract) Contract For the record
Industrial Client
Intermediate
Industrial Contract (industrial) Simple
Site Site Complex
Risky

Type Complexity Name of Reminder Number of points of

element components Weight gross function

GDI Weak 2 7 14
Medium 1 10 10
Elevated 1 15 15
GDE Weak 2 5 10
Medium 1 7 7
ENT Weak 2 3 6
Mean 3 4 12
Raised 4 6 24
SOR Raised 5 7 35
INT Elevated 4 6 24
TOTAL GROSS FUNCTION POINTS 157

Charge = 157 * 2 days/person, or 314 days/person.

Detailed study 98 Completion / 2
Technical study 20 10% rounded completion
Achievement 196 314 / (1 + 0.5 + 0.1)
Total outside of implementation 314

[Link] Project Management Corrected exercises and case studies - March 2005 15
 14. Cost estimation – generalization: corrected
The total workload corresponds to 58.8 person-days, to be distributed among the different actors and
their skills, according to the table below.

Unit of work Nb Weight Charge

Installation posts post 34 0.25 8.5
Server installation unique 1 2 2
Recipe use case 5 0.5 2.5
Training preparation simple entries 2 0.5 1
average entries 3 1 3
functional entities 13 2 26
complexes (ENT, SOR,
INT)
Training session 3 2 6
Subtotal 49
Coordination 20% 9.8
58,8
TOTAL

[Link] Project Management Corrected exercises and case studies – March 2005 16
 15. Calculation of the profitability of an IT investment: corrected
1°) Between year 4 and year 5
Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total
Expenses 700 1400 1300 1150 950 900 1000 1500 8900
Gains 0 300 1000 2000 2500 3000 3000 3000 14800
Cash flow (gains-expenses) -700 -1100 -300 850 1550 2100 2000 1500 5900
Cumulative cash flow -700 -1800 -2100 -1250 300 2400 4400 5900

2°)
Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total
Expenses 700 1400 1300 1150 950 900 1000 1500 8900
Gains 0 300 1000 2000 2500 3000 3000 3000 14800
Cash flow (gains-expenses) -700 -1100 -300 850 1550 2100 2000 1500 5900
Cumulative cash flow -700 -1800 -2100 -1250 300 2400 4400 5900
Updated expenses 670 1,282 1 139 964 762 691 735 1 055 7,298
Updated gains 0 275 876 1,677 2 006 2,304 2 204 2,110 11,452
Discounted cash flow -670 -1007 -263 713 1244 1613 1470 1055 4 154
Cumulative discounted cash flow -670 -1677 -1940 -1227 17 1629 3099 4154
VAN 4 154
TRI 37%
Rate 1,045 1.09 1,14 1.19 1.25 1.30 1.36 1.42

[Link] Project Management Corrected exercises and case studies - March 2005 17
 A B C D E F G H I
1 Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total
2 Expenses 700 1400 1300 1150 950 900 1000 1500 SUM(B2:I2)
3 Gains 0 300 1000 2000 2500 3000 3000 3000 =SUM(B3:I3)
4 Cash-flow (gains- =B3-B2 =C3-C2 =D3-D2 =E3-E2 F3-F2 =G3-G2 =H3-H2 =I3-I2 =SUM(B4:I4)
expenses)
5 Cumulative cash flow =B4 =B5+C4 =C5+D4 =D5+E4 =E5+F4 =F5+G4 =G5+H4 =H5+I4
6 Updated expenses =B2/B12 =C2/C12 =D2/D12 =E2/E12 =F2/F12 =G2/G12 =H2/H12 =I2/I12 =SUM(B6:I6)
7 Updated gains =B3/B12 =C3/C12 =D3/D12 =E3/E12 =F3/F12 =G3/G12 =H3/H12 =I3/I12 =SUM(B7:I7)
8 Discounted cash flow =B7-B6 =C7-C6 =D7-D6 =E7-E6 =F7-F6 =G7-G6 =H7-H6 =I7-I6 =SUM(B8:I8)
9 Discounted cash flow =B8 =B9+C8 =C9+D8 =D9+E8 =E9+F8 =F9+G8 =G9+H8 =H9+I8
cumulative
10 VAN =NPV(4,5%;B4:I4)
11 TRI =TRI(B4:I4)
12 Rates 1,045 ["=B12*B12","=C12*B12","=D12*B12","=E12*B12","=F12*B12","=G12*B12","=H12*B12"]

3°) See next page

[Link] Project Management Corrected exercises and case studies - March 2005 18
 5,000

4 000

3,000

2,000
Updated expenses
1,000 Updated gains
Cumulative discounted cash flow
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
-1 000

-2 000

-3 000

[Link] Project Management Corrected exercises and case studies – March 2005 19
4°)
Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total
Expenses 700 1400 1300 1150 950 900 1000 1500 8900
Gains 0 300 1000 2000 2500 3000 3000 3000 14800
Cash flow (income-expenses) -700 -1100 -300 850 1550 2100 2000 1500 5900
Cumulative cash flow -700 -1800 -2100 -1250 300 2400 4400 5900
Updated expenses 510 744 503 324 195 135 109 119 2,640
Updated gains 0 159 387 564 514 449 327 239 2,640
Discounted cash flow -510 -584 -116 240 319 315 218 119 0
Cumulative discounted cash flow -510 -1094 -1210 -971 -652 -338 -119 0
VAN 0
TRI 37.22%
Rate 1.3722 1.88 2.58 3.55 4.87 6.68 9.16 12.57
5°)
Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total
Expenses 700 1400 1300 1150 950 900 1000 1500 8900
Gains 0 300 1000 2000 2500 3000 3000 3000 14800
Cash flow (gains-expenses) -700 -1100 -300 850 1550 2100 2000 1500 5900
Cumulative cash flow -700 -1800 -2100 -1250 300 2400 4400 5900
Updated expenses 660 1,246 1,092 911 710 634 665 941 6859
Updated gains 0 267 840 1,584 1,868 2 115 1,995 1,882 10 551
Discounted cash flow -660 -979 -252 673 1158 1480 1330 941 3,692
Cumulative discounted cash flow -660 -1639 -1891 -1218 -60 1421 2751 3692
VAN 3,692
TRI 37%
Rate 1.06 1.12 1.19 1.26 1.34 1.42 1.50 1.59

[Link] Project Management Exercises and corrected case studies - March 2005 20