Multitasking and resource allocation in project management

Confused Availability

Project team personnel were initially confused due to the number of assignments, lack of communication between individuals and the team, and with only a small number of full-time and mostly part-time personnel assigned to the project, it seems as if the employees were not sure as to who was expected to complete the assignments as well as who was expected to ensure their completion. As one recent study found "the decrement in performance that can occur when multiple tasks are performed concurrently is typically attributed to interference between the tasks" (Nijboer, Taatgen, Brands, Borst, van Rijn, 2013, p. 2). Additionally, the same study found that there was indeed a capacity for sharing of resources between two or more tasks, but another very early study found that "when two tasks have to share the capacity of a single resource, performance degrades" (Navon, Gopher, 1979, p. 254). Perhaps the early study reflected the era when multitasking was not quite as prevalent as it is now, but certainly it shows that even then multitasking was a tough assignment.

Additionally the company had failed to realize that assigning various tasks to certain employees would undoubtedly mean that the employees would choose to do first the tasks that promised the most return, and the tasks that had the least potential would likely be put to the side for future consideration. Because inadequate resources were devoted to the projects those tasks that had been put to the side, though they started small in nature, eventually grew to problematic status. Once the tasks had reached the problematic stage, they affected not only the projects directly akin to them, but they seemed to negatively affect most of the projects overall.

Is multitasking here to stay? (yes)

In today's modern business organization it would seem that multitasking is an ongoing procedure, and that it would be virtually impossible to eliminate multitasking in that environment. Research shows that some individuals have inherent multitasking capabilities and that they subsequently are better at it than other individuals (Salthouse, Miles, 2002). Since multitasking seems to be here to stay, then it might behoove companies to test for that capability and to consider that capability when assigning multitasking responsibilities. I believe that it is impossible to rid companies of most multitasking duties due to the fact that certain employees will always strive to gain the knowledge needed to accomplish tasks that other employees do not wish to accomplish. Additionally, if those tasks are important enough (as many seem to be) then only certain employees will be trusted enough to handle them.

Crashing, fast tracking and scope reduction

Project crashing means that more resources are allocated to assist in completing a project that is running behind schedule. It usually will happen when there are the resources necessary to handle the tasks of a speeded up project under deadline.

Fast tracking also assists in ensuring that a slowed project can be completed in a quicker amount of time. However, dissimilar to project crashing, more resources are not allocated to the project, instead what fast tracking does is reprioritizes the schedule and allows for flexibility in accomplishing tasks not necessarily in sequential order.

Scope reduction takes place when certain jobs or tasks to complete the project are done away with entirely. This can take place when the project does not have to meet stringent requirements, or some of the requirements are not necessary at all.

Each of these three methods to speed up a project that is lagging can be considered based on the circumstances of the project. The project manager will either allocate resources, prioritize the schedule, or eliminate parts of the project based on the flexibility of his/her resources, what the client wants, or even what schedule can be switched.