Yes I do think assigning the time frame for each task is a tough ask and I think to assign the task the appropriate time the PM has to look into the past to see if such a task was performed before and what was the time required for that task and does it match the current task at hand. The manager has to do his calculations and come up with the ideal time for a particular task. Also, I think an experienced PM would know how much time a certain task would require and will assign the time perfectly.
For the second question, I think if we finish a process early we can utilize the time for the other phases.

I think the best way to avoid an inaccurate estimation is to actually have members on the team that have done similar tasks before, you wouldn't want to take the opinion of an inexperienced person. This goes to show how each phase of project management is built off of the previous phase. Within the planning phase, team selection impacts how the well the WBS will be composed and how well the critical task durations will be estimated. I know it sounds bland, but the best way to get the most accurate timeline for a task is to ask the individual who is experienced in the task, and will be the one responsible for its completion. Now in my opinion I think it is better to over estimate the time it takes rather than underestimate, because underestimation will lead to delays and can ruin the planning that went into later stages. The only real downside to overestimation is for example, a case where multiple project teams have to share a piece of critical equipment and your team scheduled their usage for 2 weeks from today because you had some project slack, but you've finished early and have nothing to do because you need that piece of equipment to proceed into the next stages. This looks bad on your team and is especially why expert opinions should be surveyed prior to scheduling for a critical task.

I believe the simplest remedy to the situation proposed would be to have the project manager hold a meeting with each team member, and ask them how long they think it will take them to complete the project. If the team members completion time is too long then perhaps the project manager could assign a new member to the task. However, we also learned there are many uncontrollable resource pitfalls, such as sick days or vacations. Overall though, doing this will give the project manager a better aspect of how much time to account for when planning. Being able to know when your team members are going to take a vacation allows for a much more accurate planning of a project timeline. As the saying goes, "Communication is key", and it applies evermore so on a team. Having a meeting with the team to go over the DDP and WBS would also be an extreme aide in completing the project within a set time frame.

From what I've seen there's a few things that happen. When making a timeline, if the task seems similar to previous tasks, they will use the previous task's timeline as an indicator of how long it will take. There is always opportunities for extensions depending on importance, and finishing earlier than previously thought is never an issue. Entire teams, lead by the project manager, will usually have weekly planning meetings. Any subdivisions of the team will have their own meetings concerning due dates and when they are going to finish portions of the project. I don't believe that remaking the plan because of an early finish is an issue that arises.

Personally, I do not believe it should be too difficult to design a time line. Of course there will be challenges, but for the most part there should be some sort of precedent where a team can look and devise an accurate time line. Also, a good rule of time is to add time on a task that might be more difficult because it is always better to deliver something early than late. To address the question on updating the whole planned process due to finishing a tasks too early. There should not be so much extra time added where it becomes an issue to finish tasks earlier.

In order to set a reasonable timeline for project completion, all members of the group should meet up and discuss their time estimations for each step and why. If there is any trouble agreeing on a timeline, the team can reference previous projects that were similar to the current one. They can talk about the changes they could have made that would have let the prior project run more smoothly (ex: spend more time planning before execution). I believe that adjustments to the timeline can be made if the team overestimated the time required for the initial steps, as long as the whole team is on board after checking to make sure all requirements were met. This will create more time buffer for further steps in the design process.

Accurate time estimation is essential for a good project management. Sometimes project manager fails to estimate correct time due to unexpected events or unscheduled high priority works or may be unfamiliar with the type of task . For estimating correct time project manager should identify all the work need to be done within a project and how much time should allow for meetings, reporting, testing and other activities needed for project's success. Project should be break up into number of task and prioritize tasks and activities and evaluate the time estimate for a task and then sum up time estimate for whole project. Identify the correct order in which things are meant to be happen . Project manager should use the prior experience of team member for a similar tasks . Team members sometimes are more optimistic can under or over estimate the amount of time have a bad effect on overall project time estimation. Project manager should consider the factors like emergencies and accidents, missed delivery by suppliers, breakdown in equipment, people who are working part time, holidays and sickness. If team member finishes process early then time can be spent on important things like missed milestones and mistakes .Team have more time to manage the unexpected risks and improve quality.

One way to think about solving this problem is to brainstorm any potential risks that may arise while doing the actual project. I think that getting input from people who've had experience in doing the tasks similar to the ones that must be done for this project is essential. Input should be taken from not only the team members, but the project sponsor, and different departments as well. It can't hurt to have more input because even though some of it may not valid or useful, it can always be discarded during planning. I think that all shareholders should have a meeting and brainstorm any potential sources of risks and failures that may occur and try to develop something to counteract each one. Another way to solve this problem is to have the individuals who will finish their tasks early to help other members with their parts so that it can expedite the entire process instead of having people split up and be responsible for their on tasks. After all, this is a team effort and even though one task may be finished early, all of the tasks must be completed if the project is to yield the expected results. It's in the interest of all individuals to contribute beyond what they are expected if they can.

The initial project timeline is never set. The planning process of a project breaks down the project into actionable tasks (WBS), allowing team to make rough estimates for each task, but the timeline will constantly be revisited. When a team is put together and a Team Communication Plan is completed, PM will have several team meetings where the project breakdown, tasks, and the duration of each task can be discussed. This time duration is estimated by using past experience, project deadlines, and the project's critical path. However, due to the nature of a project, especially complex projects with thousands of tasks, the timeline will likely run through several iterations in accordance to the progress of the project. If task deadlines are missed, the schedule timeline is pushed back and the PM must ensure the schedule does not get pushed beyond the project's late finish time.

I think the tasks should be arranged in a way that if one task is completed early the other tasks that are independent of any other task that has to be completed during that time can be worked on. The team has to be updated at each and every milestone for clarity and proper completion of the project.

This type of scenario was part of the mini-sim this week in which we were asked to deal with delays in timeline which happened due to incorrect task duration. Creation of WBS and task duration is a critical activity that occurs during project initiation. The one key aspect of this activity is to include the actual SMEs (Subject Matter Experts) that will lead the activities and have experience with them to inform the project manager of the appropriate time required for each task. Failure to involve/ consult these SMEs will likely result in an incorrect time schedule which will create churn and stress amongst project team as well as project risks.

I agree with ec52. When you assume you know everything, you tend to make mistakes. Consulting someone who is an expert in the area of interest can be a tremendous help with scheduling. The Subject Matter Expert will be able to give a realistic timeframe for the completion of the task, while also being aware of overworking others. It is also good to remember that when you first create a timeline, it will be inaccurate. Things happen and some tasks will finish earlier or later than expected. Buffering the tasks is still a viable option of making sure a project gets completed in reasonable time & within a projected timeline.

In relation to the miniSim that was done this week, it would be best to find those who have closest knowledge of these tasks (have done them before typically or something of the like) and involve them in the conversation.Like we found in the sim, the people who were more distant from the actual work needed to be done cannot be expected to give a realistic summary. Naturally, those more higher up are going to care more about timelines while those closer to the task are going to be more focused on getting the task done properly. I've seen this clash of priorities in my own experience as we've had higher managers of departments ask for things to be done/promise things in much less time than was actually required. When those people much more familiar with the neccessary processes were notified of this, there would be an uproar as it would be nearly impossible to do the task in the first place, and if it got done, it would cause more problems than the actual solution solved.

Prior to assigning a not so trivial task the wide range of time between the earliest and latest completion it would be a good decision for the team to have a meeting and discuss about best possible ways to get the task done even before assigning the completion dates so that a definite way could be found to complete the task. Apart from that a little extra time could be devoted on finding out from records about a similar task previously done and coming up with alternatives to save up on the time that could be given for the task to be completed.