I totally agree with the points you made in your post. It is crucial to develop both an effective and realistic schedule. As you briefly mentioned, a great way to do this is by using Gantt charts. While I have not experienced major delays due to poor critical path management, I have worked on projects that utilized Gantt charts. At the start of a project, designing a Gantt chart may seem like it consumes more time than it is worth. However, they are extremely useful for keeping things on schedule. Gantt charts make it easy to know which tasks to prioritize, based on how long they may delay a project. In one project I worked on, we ran into some complications. I truly believe we would have experienced major delays had it not been for our Gantt chart. What are some other ways to optimize critical path management? 

The critical path method, a cornerstone of project management, may initially seem daunting due to the extensive processing required to align input and output. However, understanding its importance can help project managers and team members appreciate its value. One way to manage a project's workload is to incorporate schedule flexibility and a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) that helps mitigate procrastination.

Hence, a hierarchical breakdown of tasks performed for the project, for example, is put on paper and solidified from there. For instance, if forward pass is established as the overall projection duration, a task schedule calculates the total float. This calculation allows us to identify the critical path, which is a list of critical activities. Critical activities are those that, if delayed, will directly impact the project's completion date. This concept of action reinforces that a delay in any vital activity will cause any delay that can significantly delay the project. Thus, to manage such challenges, work on the most time-consuming projects, putting under a slack activity time, giving flexibility between the earliest activity and the latest activity.

Giant charts are helpful for project planning, showing project schedules and task durations. Do you think such a chart is efficient for large projects? If so, can you explain how the total slack time will be applied?

You're right. Identifying and managing critical paths is crucial for keeping a project on schedule. One of the biggest mistakes teams make is treating all tasks equally rather than focusing on the ones impacting the final deadline. Regularly updating the critical path as the project progresses is as important as identifying it since delays or task durations can shift it over time.

A great way to stay on track is by using buffer time strategically, not just padding all tasks but adding buffers where the risk of delay is highest, such as prototype development or regulatory approval. Rolling wave planning (where you plan details in phases rather than all at once) can also help teams adapt to changes without constantly reworking the entire schedule.

Project management software with real-time tracking and automated critical path updates can make a huge difference. Regular check-ins and quick decision-making also play a key role. If a delay is identified early, teams can adjust resources or resequence tasks to minimize the impact.

I would agree that many teams struggle with identifying which tasks are truly critical versus those with flexibility, leading to wasted resources and unnecessary delays. One of the biggest issues I’ve seen in my personal experience is scope creep, where teams add extra tasks that weren’t initially planned, sometimes even interfering with the critical path. Scope creep can be very difficult to control among motivated team members who want to go above and beyond in creating a successful device. While many project contributing to scope creep may be beneficial to overall development, it is also important to monitor how these additional tasks impact the timeline. Another common issue I have seen is misjudging task durations, where teams assume best-case scenarios without factoring in risks like regulatory hurdles or supply chain issues. I have noticed many times gantt charts being built off of ideal timelines with very little slack built in, which can be unrealistic. To keep projects on track, I’ve found that buffering high-risk tasks is essential, along with regular risk assessments and timeline check ins. 

Instead of having one fixed critical path over the entire project, breaking the work into smaller pieces and having multiple critical paths for each phase allows for some leeway to reassess the next critical path once the current one is done. This can reduce scope creep by having scheduled meetings to ensure the project's next critical path stays in scope while also ensuring any issues that pop up can be adapted to. Would there be specific cases where a rigid overall plan would be preferable? 

I don’t have industry experience yet, but from what I’ve learned, figuring out the critical path seems super important for keeping projects on track. It makes sense that not all tasks are equally urgent, and if teams don’t recognize that, they might waste time on things that don’t impact the deadline. Using Gantt charts or PERT charts sounds like a great way to map everything out and catch potential delays early. Plus, regular check-ins seem like a solid way to stay on top of things. Since I haven’t dealt with this firsthand, I’m curious, how do teams usually handle unexpected delays on critical tasks? Do you plan for them ahead of time, or is it more about reacting fast when something goes wrong?

Maintaining the critical path is just as important as it sounds, it is absolutely critical to the success of the project. I was the dedicated "Project Manager" for my BME capstone team during my time as an undergrad. Although the project only spanned a year and was not a large-scale project, one of my clear tasks was just as you described in this post, to keep the project on schedule and meet our deadlines. One of the best ways I found to do so was using a Gantt Chart and identifying each deadline we had to meet, then tracking every essential task that needed to be complete to meet these deadlines. This was my first time having experience with formal project management, so I had tried to build in "grace periods" of extra time for each tasks and time for revisions and extra trials where applicable, but we still ran into some issues. At first, our issues began with a team member struggling with their assigned task. We did not keep to the Gantt Chart as we intended and when it was time to evaluate their progress only a few days before assembly was scheduled, they had nothing at all. They were supposed to have designed, modelled, 3D printed, and fit together multiple components but had not even began modelling as they never installed SolidWorks to do so. Unfortunately for us, it was much too late to proceed as planned and we had to change a major portion of the project and spend hours machining sheets of PMMA and metal to assemble necessary components. We barely met our deadline, and the prototype was certainly not up to par and had to be recreated according to the original plan later in the project.

To prevent future issues like this, we elected to have more meetings. I cannot stress enough how much this helped. Regardless of deadlines, we met twice a week on Mondays and Fridays to provide each other with updates, physical proof of progress, and discuss what needs to be done by the next meeting/deadline. This absolutely aided in the overall success of the project. Even if we did not necessarily need to meet and had no updates as we were ahead of schedule, it is better to be sure than to risk falling behind. My personal advice would be to meet as much as possible, even if the duration is short and it is just to provide updates and/or reminders. This helped us succeed and I believe it applies to any project.

I agree with the posts above. Indentifying the critical path will aid in a seamless execution of the project. Another tool I find to be helpful is a prioritization matrix. It will allow the stakeholders and project managers to break down all the components and deliverables for the project and evaluate their prioritization due to set factors. Anything with high importance and urgency should definitely be added onto the critical path. Similarly, a risk management solution is also necessary to find where the most problematic areas are so that project managers can take proactive steps such as allocating more resources or expanding the timeline. Another thing to keep in mind is to keep revisiting the critical path and adding on any other items with zero float.

In the development of medical devices, determining the critical path of a project is necessary for keeping the project on target. The critical path is described as the longest series of dependent tasks that determines the minimum time necessary to finish a project. Missing the due dates for any of these tasks will have an adverse effect on the overall calendar, which is why planning needs to be done properly.

One of the major advantages of path analysis is that it aids in the appropriate allocation of resources. Identifying the most important tasks like design verification, clinical testing, and regulatory submission helps the project team plan their key activities better. It also helps detect bottlenecks early and re-allocates projects resources to relieve the identified constraints.

Despite these positive aspects, problems can occur with delay of activities, like prototype testing or submission to regulatory bodies. In the case where no built-in buffers are placed, such a simplistic approach may have a dire effect. The reality involves working on the plan on an ongoing basis to minimize the impact of issues and conflicts.

In your opinion, should critical path delays be managed by skipping some activities or putting more effort into achieving the planned milestone?

Market research should happen before any work on the project begins. It's important to find out if there are similar devices on the market, and if there is, what would this new product accomplish if completed? If there isn't a similar device, and given it's not a novel idea, then why isn't there a device on the market already? Finding the answer to that question can help the team realize which time sinks and pitfalls to avoid. If caught early, it allows the team time to communicate with the stakeholder and convince them to approve an alternate approach to the project that is tangible instead of trying to force an idea to work only to find out the project is not feasible at all after time and resources have been invested.