Traditional Critical Path Method versus Critical Chain Project Management: A Comparative View
Deparment of Mechanical Engineering, Ksyushu University, Japan
- *Corresponding Author:
- Mohammed Shurrab
Deparment of Mechanical Engineering
Kyushu University, Japan
Tel: 81 92-642-2111
E-mail: [email protected]
Received date: September 07, 2015; Accepted date: October 05, 2015; Published date: October 10, 2015
Citation: Shurrab M (2015) Traditional Critical Path Method versus Critical Chain Project Management: A Comparative View. Int J Econ Manag Sci 4:292. doi:10.4172/2162-6359.1000292
Copyright: © 2015 Shurrab M. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Critical Chain Project Management (CCPM) provided a tangible progress to the Project Management Body of Knowledge. The Critical Chain Project Management (CCPM) differs from the traditional Critical Path Method (CPM) which includes never changing resource dependencies. CCPM improves the project plan by aggregating uncertainty into buffers at the end of activity paths. In this research, one hundred twenty random projects were generated and analyzed using Microsoft Project software according to the traditional CPM and the CCPM once using the Sum of Squares (SSQ) method and another using the cut and past (C&PM) method. CCPM-SSQ method revealed an average savings of 13% and 43% in duration and cost, with a standard deviation of 21 and 11 for duration and cost respectively. While the CCPM-C&PM method revealed an average overestimation of about 2% in duration and 43% savings in cost, with a standard deviation of 25 and 11 for duration and cost respectively.