MLO and project management

[Michael Emerald, CFA]

I appreciated the comments from whomever talked about projects a day or two ago.

 

I agree that MLO will probably not become a major force in the Project Management sphere, but for SMALL projects, I’ve been begging to see MLO upgraded to do so.  Specifically, I enjoy the simple checklist format of MLO, far easier than marking bars 100% complete, or reading down a gantt chart to find what needs to be done or is slipping.

 

On the other hand what I sorely miss in MLO, and I know it’s been discussed before, is:

a.       Dependency relationships, and more importantly

b.      Lag times between steps.

 

While the above are probably obvious, an example is setting up client meetings.  There are about 20 steps I take, and MLO is perfect for it.  3 days before the meeting I prepare all client docs, and a day or so I send out a reminder, and the day of the meeting I prepare my web-conference environment.  For this, I need a template that allows for lags.  Manually changing the start date, or worse the due date, is cumbersome. 

 

But for repeating small projects, like client meetings, MLO fits the bill well.  What do you think?

 

Regards,

 

Michael Emerald, CFA

 

Performance Business Design

Owner, Business Planner

 

Performance Business Design:

http://www.PerformanceBusinessDesign.com

 

My Blog:

http://www.performancebusinessdesign.com/page14.php

 

[Mark Levison]

Please don't turn MLO into something it isn't. It works well as a personal organizer. As Dwight (I think) mentioned its missing many things project management tools miss. Further the whole idea that you can just assign tasks to people and get high quality work done just perpetuates the myths I fight everyday, see: http://agilemanifesto.org-- Cheers

Mark Levison
Agile Pain Relief Consulting | Writing
Proud Sponsor of Agile Tour Gatineau Ottawa Nov 28, Toronto 26 and Montreal 24

Michael Emerald, CFA

9 November, 2012 11:56 AM

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MyLifeOrganized" group.
To post to this group, send email to mylifeo...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mylifeorganiz...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mylifeorganized?hl=en.

[Lisa Stroyan]

I only use MLO as a personal organizer, but I too would find the idea of "lag" time quite useful, if it could be implemented in a way that fits the current design.

With recurring tasks it's kind of, sort of, possible to set them up with a lag, but it's kludgy. If you set up a tree with child and parent, set the parent date's (e.g., every Monday starting X date), set child to the first offset (X +1, e.g. Tuesday), and if parent is set to recur and reset subtasks, then the two tasks will keep their offsets. (for both start and due dates).

However, the date difference only is updated when the task recurs, so the "lag" must be created manually each time. You can't really set up a "template" (by which I simply mean a tree in my "Templates" folder, which is duplicated whenever needed) because editing the parent's date will not update the children's.

I'm not sure how this could be cleanly implemented, though. There would have to be two new fields, start lag and due lag, and would they count from the parent or the sibling above them?  It would be hard to explain to users, also.

--
Lisa

---

Lisa Stroyan, mailto: lstr...@gmail.com

[Nick Clark]

Dependency options are already there in the PC version, but definitely need asking to the mobile version. Relative dates for sub tasks is something that has been mentioned before and would be really useful.
Nick

[westpo...@yahoo.com]

Hi Lisa.

How was your week?

For sure, any project implementation would have to be a separate product,  MLO Project.

Sent from my android device.

[m...@grantsmiths.org]

I would envision the lag thing a little different from how you described it, Lisa.

 

The objective is to say that Task B starts x days after task A completes. I see that as a combination of two existing functions. One is the recurrence pattern that says the task recurs x days or weeks after it completes. The other is the dependence pattern that says that Task A starts when task B completes. Put them together and you get Task A starting x days or weeks after Task B completes.

-Dwight

[Richard Collings]

I would agree that this is an appropriate use of MLO and also that there are some gaps in capability in the area you describe – ie a programme of things that you need to do over a period of time.

--

[Lisa Stroyan]

Which task does the second sentence refer to? I think you switched which task comes first, but even if I swap the first sentence I'm not quite sure what you mean.

But, you are right, I think, that we only need a start lag, because the due date would track the start date on the second task, hopefully.

Can you give an example?

Lisa

On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 8:55 PM, <m...@grantsmiths.org> wrote:

The objective is to say that Task B starts x days after task A completes. I see that as a combination of two existing functions. One is the recurrence pattern that says the task recurs x days or weeks after it completes. The other is the dependence pattern that says that Task A starts when task B completes. Put them together and you get Task A starting x days or weeks after Task B completes.

-Dwight

 

[m...@grantsmiths.org]

Lisa,

You are right that I switched my tasks in midstream. Here’s a concrete example. I have a project template that has a number of dependencies build into it. Most tasks inherit the start and due dates of the overall project, with the dependencies governing which ones appear in today’s to-do list. However, after I deliver a proposed final document to a client I want to wait exactly one week before nagging for comments. Too early annoys the customer and enables counterproductive comments like “I’m sure it’s fine, I trust you” (the consultants on this forum will recognize why this nice-sounding comment is deadly) and too late introduces delays into the remainder of the project. Right now I am including a @lag task “wait for comments” which is “hidden in to-do list” and I have a view that I see briefly every morning that shows @lag tasks that are due or overdue, all of which I immediately complete, which brings the nag task to my to-do.

 

Proposed: the nag task would have a + 1 week start date (based on the recurrence pattern, regenerate one week after task is completed) triggered by completion of the “deliver proposed final document to client for comment” task (based on the dependency screen “select all tasks on which the current task depends”). When I complete the “deliver” task the completion date + one week would be set as the “nag” task’s start date. If the nag task has a defined and locked lead time, that would be used to establish the nag task’s due date. One week later, it would pop onto my to-do.

-Dwight

 

From: mylifeo...@googlegroups.com [mailto:mylifeo...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Lisa Stroyan
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 8:21 AM
To: Groups, Email
Subject: Re: [MLO] MLO and project management

 

Which task does the second sentence refer to? I think you switched which task comes first, but even if I swap the first sentence I'm not quite sure what you mean.

--

[Lisa Stroyan]

Sounds good :)