PERT, Gannt , MBO PERT INTRODUCTION The Program (or Project) Evaluation and Review Technique, commonly abbreviated

PERT, is a model for project management designed to analyze and represent the tasks involved in completing a given project. It is commonly used in conjunction with the critical path method or CPM.This project model was the first of its kind, a revival for scientific management, founded by Frederick Taylor (Taylorism) and later refined by Henry Ford (Fordism). DuPont corporation's critical path method was invented at roughly the sametime as PERT DEFINITION Program (Project) Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT) is a project management tool used to schedule, organize, and coordinate tasks within a project. PERT is a method to analyze the tasks involved in completing a given project, especially the time needed to complete each task, and to identify the minimum time needed to complete the total project. PERT was developed primarily to simplify the planning and scheduling of large and complex projects. It was developed by Bill Pocock of Booz, Allen Hamilton and Gordon Perhson of the U.S. Navy Special Projects Office in 1957 to support the U.S. Navy's Polaris nuclear submarine project. It is more of an event-oriented technique rather than start- and completion-oriented, and is used more in projects where time, rather than cost, is the major factor. OBJECTIVE The main objective of PERT is to facilitate decision making and to reduce both the time and cost required to complete a project. STEPS PERT planning involves the following steps that are described below. 1. Identify the specific activities and milestones. The activities are the tasks required to complete a project. The milestones are the events marking the beginning and the end of one or more activities. It is helpful to list the tasks in a table that in later steps can be expanded to include information on sequence and duration. 2. Determine the proper sequence of the activities. This step may be combined with the activity identification step since the activity sequence is evident for some tasks. Other tasks may require more analysis to determine the exact order in which they must be performed. 3. Construct a network diagram. Using the activity sequence information, a network diagram can be drawn showing the sequence of the serial and parallel activities. Each activity represents a node in the network, and the arrows represent the relation between activities. Software packages simplify this step by automatically converting tabular activity information into a network diagram.

4. Estimate the time required for each activity. Weeks are a commonly used unit of time for activity completion, but any consistent unit of time can be used. A distinguishing feature of PERT is its ability to deal with uncertainty in activity completion time. For each activity, the model usually includes three time estimates: Optimistic time generally the shortest time in which the activity can be completed. It is common practice to specify optimistic time to be three standards deviations from the mean so that there is a approximately a 1% chance that the activity will be completed within the optimistic time. Most likely time the completion time having the highest probability. Note that this time is different from the expected time. Pessimistic time the longest time that an activity might require. Three standard deviations from the mean is commonly used for the pessimistic time.

5. Determine the critical path. The critical path is determined by adding the times for the activities in each sequence and determining the longest path in the project. The critical path determines the total calendar time required for the project. If activities outside the critical path speed up or slow down (within limits), the total project time does not change. The amount of time that a non critical path activity can be delayed without the project is referred to as a slack time. If the critical path is not immediately obvious, it may be helpful to determine the following four quantities for each activity: ES Earliest Start time EF - Earliest Finish time LS Latest Start time LF - Latest Finish time These times are calculated using the expected time for the relevant activities. The earliest start and finish times of each activity are determined by working forward through the network and determining the earliest time at which an activity can start and finish considering its predecessors activities. The latest start and finish times are the latest times that an activity can start and finish without delaying the project. LS and LF are found by working backward through the network. The difference in the latest and earliest finish of each activity is that activitys slack. The critical path then is the path through the network in which none of the activities have slack. Since the critical path determines the completion date of the project, the project can be accelerated by adding the resources required to decrease the time for the activities in the critical path. Such a shortening of the project sometimes is referred to as project crashing.

6. Update the PERT chart as the project progresses. Make adjustments in the PERT chart as the project progresses. As the project unfolds, the estimated times can be replaced with actual times. In cases where there are delays, additional resources may be needed to stay on schedule and the PERT chart may be modified to reflect the new situation. BENEFITS PERT is useful because it provides the following information:

activities that have slack time and that can be lend resources to critical path activities;

LIMITATIONS o There can be potentially hundreds or thousands of activities and individual dependency relationships o The network charts tend to be large and unwieldy requiring several pages to print and requiring special size paper o The lack of a timeframe on most PERT/CPM charts makes it harder to show status although colours can help (e.g., specific colour for completed nodes)

Gantt A Gantt chart is a type of bar chart that illustrates a project schedule. Gantt charts illustrate the start and finish dates of the elements and summary elements of a project. Terminal elements and summary elements comprise the work breakdown structure of the project. Some Gantt charts also show the dependency (i.e., precedence network) relationships between activities. Gantt charts can be used to show current schedule status using percentcomplete shadings and a vertical "TODAY" line Historical development The first known tool of this type was reportedly developed in 1896 by Karol Adamiecki, who called it a harmonogram. Adamiecki did not publish his chart until 1931, however, and then only in Polish. The chart is named after Henry Gantt (18611919), who designed his chart around the years 19101915. One of the first major applications of Gantt charts was during the First World War. On the initiative of General William Crozier, then Chief of Ordnance these charts were used in the United States arsenals during 1918, in the production of naval aircraft, and in other government work, such as that of the Emergency Fleet, the Shipping Board, etc

Advantages and limitations Gantt charts have become a common technique for representing the phases and activities of a project work breakdown structure (WBS), so they can be understood by a wide audience all over the world. A common error made by those who equate Gantt chart design with project design is that they attempt to define the project work breakdown structure at the same time that they define schedule activities. This practice makes it very difficult to follow the 100% Rule. Instead the WBS should be fully defined to follow the 100% Rule, then the project schedule can be designed. Although a Gantt chart is useful and valuable for small projects that fit on a single sheet or screen, they can become quite unwieldy for projects with more than about 30 activities. Larger Gantt charts may not be suitable for most computer displays. A related criticism is that Gantt charts communicate relatively little information per unit area of display. That is, projects are often considerably more complex than can be communicated effectively with a Gantt chart. Gantt charts only represent part of the triple constraints (cost, time and scope) of projects, because they focus primarily on schedule management. Moreover, Gantt charts do not represent the size of a project or the relative size of work elements, therefore the magnitude of a behind-schedule condition is easily miscommunicated. If two projects are the same number of days behind schedule, the larger project has a larger impact on resource utilization, yet the Gantt does not represent this difference. Although project management software can show schedule dependencies as lines between activities, displaying a large number of dependencies may result in a cluttered or unreadable chart. Because the horizontal bars of a Gantt chart have a fixed height, they can misrepresent the time-phased workload (resource requirements) of a project, which may cause confusion especially in large projects. A related criticism is that all activities of a Gantt chart show planned workload as constant. In practice, many activities (especially summary elements) have front-loaded or back-loaded work plans, so a Gantt chart with percentcomplete shading may actually miscommunicate the true schedule performance status. MBO DEFINITION Management by Objectives (MBO) is a process of agreeing upon objectives within an organization so that management and employees agree to the objectives and understand what they are in the organization. MBO aims to increase organizational performance by aligning goals and subordinate objectives throughout the organization. The term "management by objectives" was first popularized by Peter Drucker in his 1954 book 'The Practice of Management'. The essence of MBO is participative goal setting, choosing course of actions and decision making. An

important part of the MBO is the measurement and the comparison of the employees actual performance with the standards set. Ideally, when employees themselves have been involved with the goal setting and choosing the course of action to be followed by them, they are more likely to fulfil their responsibilities. NATURE OF OBJECTIVES Objectives state end results and overall objectives need to be supported by sub objectives. Thus, objectives form a hierarchy as well as a network. Organizations have multiple goals that are sometimes incompatible and may lead to conflicts within organization, within the group, and even within individuals. A manager may have to choose between short term and long term performance, and personal interests may have to be subordinated to organizational objectives. Hierarchy of Objectives Objectives form a hierarchy, ranging from the broad aim to specific individual objectives.

The top-down approach remains extremely popular in contemporary project management. The phrase top-down means that all the directions come from the top. Project objectives are established by the top management. Top managers provide guidelines, information, plans and fund processes. The bottom-up approach implies proactive team input in the project executing process. Team members are invited to participate in every step of the management process. The decision on a course of action is taken by the whole team. Bottom-up style allows managers to communicate goals and value. Then team members are encouraged to develop

personal to-do lists with the steps necessary to reach the milestones on their own. The choice of methods and ways to perform their tasks is up to the team. The advantage of this approach is that it empowers team members to think more creatively According to many experts, the bottom-up approach is not the perfect solution, as sometimes it lacks clarity and control. The best way is to find a balance between the two opposite approaches and take the best practices from both of them Network of Objectives: Both objectives and planning programs form a network of desired results and events. If goals are not interconnected and if they do not support one another, people very often pursue paths that may seem good for their own department but may be detrimental to the company as a whole.Goals and plans form an interlocking network. Managers must make sure that the components of the network fit one another. Fitting is a matter not only of having the various programs carried out but also of timing their completion, since undertaking one program often depends on first completing another. PROCESS OF MBO The success of Managing by Objectives can be judged by checking how it works in practice. The exercise generally starts at the top of the organization. The Chief Executive Officer gives direction to the organization. It is not mandatory that the exercise starts at the top. It can start at division level, department level etc, as and when the need is felt by the respective department head. Setting Preliminary Objectives at the top: The top manager determines the mission/ purpose of the organization for the given time period. The time period may range from one quarter to five years, depending upon the objectives. Longer time frames are usually assigned at top levels, where the objectives defined are broad and cover many aspects. Down the hierarchy, the time periods set tend to become shorter, as the goals pertain to a specific field or aspect Clarifying Organizational Roles: It is important to clarify goals and responsibilities. Many a time, the purpose of the objectives gets lost because of the lack of clarity on who is responsible for what. The responsible parties must be identified clearly: the person setting the objectives- the manager/ supervisor, the person for whom objectives are set- individual employee. This helps to build a sense of accountability, responsibility in the employee. Setting Subordinates Objectives: After making sure that subordinate managers have been informed of pertinent general objectives, strategies and planning premises, the supervisor then proceeds to work with subordinates in setting their objectives. This step is essentially a two-way process. The supervisor first presents his preliminary objectives to his subordinates individually. He then asks for the subordinates views on what

he thinks to be a feasible target, the resources that he might require to improve. The discussion then moves on to what is in line with the companys, departments goals Recycling Objectives: Top-down approach by itself seldom succeeds in delivering the desired results. The key to success is the readiness of the system for minor changes, within company guidelines, based on employee feedback/ recommendations. It might not always result in reduction of the target, but in fact could be vice versa. BENIFITS OF MBO 1. Improvement of managing: Objectives of a business cannot be achieved without planning. MBO forces managers to think about planning for results, rather merely planning activities or work. This has a long term positive impact on the firm. MBO also provides for better resource allocation as mangers start thinking about how to accomplish the goals and the personnel and organization they will require to do so. It also facilitates in better incentives to control and set the standards for control. 2. Clarification of Organization: MBO forces managers to clarify organizational roles and structures. To the extent possible, positions should be built around the key results expected of the people occupying them. Managers often forget that to get work done one has to delegate work and MBO helps managers identify these deficiencies. 3. Encouragement of Personnel commitment: MBO helps people to commit themselves to their goals. Individuals are working towards clearly defined purposes, setting up of which was partly done by them. 4. Development of effective controls: MBO not only helps in more effective planning but also aids in developing effective controls. Control involves measuring results and taking actions to correct deviations from plans in order to ensure that goals are reached. WEAKNESS OF MBO 1. Failure to teach the philosophy of MBO Managers who are to put MBO into practice should have good understanding of it. They in turn must explain to subordinates what it is, how it is done, why is it being implemented, how participants can benefit, etc. The philosophy is built on concepts of self control and self direction that are aimed at making managers professionals. 2. Failure to give guidelines to goal setters MBO cannot succeed if those who are expected to set goals are not given needed guidelines. Managers must understand what the corporate goals are and how their own actions fit in with them. If corporate goals are vague, unreal or inconsistent, it is virtually impossible for managers to tune in with them.

3. Difficulty in setting goals Truly verifiable goals are difficult to set, particularly if they are to have the right degree of stretch or pull, quarter in and quarter out, year in and year out. Goal setting may not be much more difficult than any other kind of effective planning, although it will probably take more study and work to establish verifiable objectives that are formidable but attainable than to develop many other plans, which tend to lay out work to be done. 4. Emphasis on Short run goals In most MBO programs managers set goals for short run rather than long run. There is clearly a danger of emphasising the short run, perhaps at the expense of the longer range. This means that superiors will have to ensure that current objectives are designed to serve longer range goals. 5. Danger of inflexibility Managers often hesitate to change objectives. Although goals may cease to be meaningful if they are changed too often and do not represent a well thought out and well planned result, it is nonetheless important to change the goals as per the changes in corporate policies, change in environment, etc. 6. Other dangers a. Over use of quantitative methods. b. Its difficult to arise at a goal oriented planning in a very dynamic and complex environment.

CONCLUSION MBO has undergone many changes, it has been used to motivate individuals and most recently in strategic planning. MBO as a comprehensive system of managing indicates that most key managerial activities can and should be integrated with MBO process. In short, MBO should be considered as a way of managing and not as an addition to the managerial job. BIBLIOGRAPHY Guptha,Sunil Kant.Hospital and health care administration.1st edition.Jaypee brothers:2004. B.M Sakharkar. Principles of hospital administrationand planning.1st edition.jaypee brothers.2006. Ann Mariner Tomey.Nursing management and leadership. 8th edition. Missouri: Mosby Publishers;2009. Francis CM. Souza de C Mario. Hospital administration.3rd edition.New Delhi : Jaypee publications ; 2004. Basvanthappa B. Nursing administration. 2nd edition. New Delhi : Jaypee publishers ; 2009. www.scribd.com www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/gannt_chart

PERT GANNT MBO

Submitted To Mrs. Saritha T Fernandes Lecturer NUINS Submitted By Ms. Riya Joy 2nd Year MSc. N NUINS

Submitted On: 22/06/2011