Crashing vs. Fast-Tracking in Project Management

Crashing the schedule and fast-tracking are both techniques used in project management to shorten the project schedule and meet deadlines, but they are applied in different ways and have distinct characteristics. Here's a detailed comparison:

Crashing the Schedule

Definition:
Crashing is a technique used to shorten the project duration by adding extra resources to the critical path tasks without changing the project scope.

Key Characteristics:

• Increased Resources: Crashing involves adding more resources (e.g., additional team members, overtime work) to critical path tasks to accelerate their completion.
• Cost Implications: Typically leads to increased costs due to the additional resources required. The goal is to achieve the maximum schedule compression with the minimum cost increase.
• Critical Path Focus: Only tasks on the critical path are targeted since these determine the overall project duration.
• Feasibility: Not all tasks can be crashed. Some may not benefit from additional resources due to constraints like resource availability or task dependencies.

Pros

• Can significantly reduce project duration if done correctly.
• Provides a clear and direct approach to schedule reduction.

Cons

• Higher project costs due to increased resource expenditure.
• Potential for resource burnout and decreased morale if not managed properly.

Fast-Tracking

Definition:
Fast-tracking is a technique used to shorten the project schedule by performing tasks in parallel that were initially planned to be done sequentially.

Key Characteristics:

• Parallel Task Execution: Involves overlapping tasks that were originally scheduled to be done one after another. For example, starting the construction phase before the design phase is fully completed.
• Risk Implications: Increases the risk of rework and errors because tasks are performed concurrently without the completion of preceding tasks.
• Scope and Quality Risks: Can impact the project scope and quality due to the potential for errors and misunderstandings between overlapping tasks.
• Critical Path Impact: Can shorten the critical path if tasks on the critical path are fast-tracked.

Pros

• Does not necessarily increase project costs if managed well.
• Can significantly reduce project duration by efficiently utilizing time.

Cons

• Higher risk of rework and issues due to overlapping tasks.
• Increased complexity in project management and coordination.

Comparison

Aspect	Crashing	Fast-Tracking
Method	Adding extra resources to critical tasks	Performing tasks in parallel
Cost Impact	Increases due to additional resources	Generally neutral, but can increase if rework is required
Risk Level	Lower compared to fast-tracking	Higher due to potential for rework and errors
Task Focus	Only critical path tasks	Can involve both critical and non-critical tasks
Resource Impact	Higher resource utilization	More complex task coordination
Feasibility	Limited by resource availability and task nature	Limited by task dependencies and potential overlap

When to Use Each

Crashing is best when additional resources are available, and the project can bear the increased costs. It is suitable for tasks where adding resources will directly accelerate completion.

Fast-Tracking is ideal when tasks can logically overlap and when the project can handle the increased risk of rework. It’s useful when budget constraints make crashing impractical, but there’s a need to reduce the project timeline.