I have seen a lot of expensive messes made with P3, when perfectly
equivalent messes could have been made with MSP a lot cheaper.
P3 is good. It has some features that would be nice to have in MSP, such as a zero free float constraint.
So that is one point of comparison, but it is irrelevant if you can live
without a free float constraint, and you can.
Since P3 is relatively expensive, wherever it is used there is less of it
and that there are fewer people in the outfit who use it and understand it,
so there is a danger of creating a project planning priesthood, a small
group who reinforce and perpetuate any misunderstanding they might have with no widespread peer review to act as a check.
At least with MSP you have a chance to teach a lot more people to use it on
a regular basis, which might allow project planning to become a common kind of literacy, like readin and writin, and this is a kind of check, if not a
guarantee, on mis-conceptions.
Most MSP users go nowhere near having an exhaustive knowledge of MSP.
It tends to be under-used because people don't like to push the envelope,
don't like to push themselves beyond their comfort zone and don't seem to
have or care about having a strong grip on the fundamentals of the Critical
Path Method and planning/tracking in general. Many people who use MSP on a daily basis cannot even tell you what it is for.
Regardless of which software you use, your real problem is literacy
standards.
Answered by
keshto
at
10:36 AM on April 27, 2008
