Forum Discussion
Solved
Linking two resources inside resource pool
Is it possible two take two resources and link them together so that if one is allocated it takes from that resource as well as another? Example: if you have two workers and one of them is certi...
- CorbittO,
Is it possible to "link" resources? No
When you say the certified worked is assigned but "available in a separate category", what exactly do you mean by "separate category"?
It doesn't matter what the resource's capability is, if that resource is assigned to two or more tasks that will exceed the resource's Max Unit level, then that resource will be overallocated
You also mention something about a resource "should only be removed from that one pool". What exactly does that mean? Do you have multiple resource pools? If you do have multiple resource pools, I strongly suggest you abandon that idea and have a single resource pool. By itself a resource pool is part of a linked structure (i.e. pool/sharer structure) and linked structures in Project are prone to corruption if not rigorously maintained. Having more than one pool will increase the risk.
If you are going to use a resource pool I suggest you put all resources in that pool. If you have more than one resource that is certified and it doesn't matter which of those certified individual resources is assigned to a task requiring a certified resource, then you could create a group resource (e.g. "Certified Welders") with a Max Unit value equal to the combined equivalent of those resources. For example, if you have 3 resources that are certified, the certified group resource Max Unit value would be 300%, assuming each of those is a full time employee. Or, if you want to keep individualized resources but need to identify those that are certified, you could use the Group field on the Resource Sheet. There are a few different ways to get there depending on what you want to track.
Hope this helps.
John
CorbittO,
Is it possible to "link" resources? No
When you say the certified worked is assigned but "available in a separate category", what exactly do you mean by "separate category"?
It doesn't matter what the resource's capability is, if that resource is assigned to two or more tasks that will exceed the resource's Max Unit level, then that resource will be overallocated
You also mention something about a resource "should only be removed from that one pool". What exactly does that mean? Do you have multiple resource pools? If you do have multiple resource pools, I strongly suggest you abandon that idea and have a single resource pool. By itself a resource pool is part of a linked structure (i.e. pool/sharer structure) and linked structures in Project are prone to corruption if not rigorously maintained. Having more than one pool will increase the risk.
If you are going to use a resource pool I suggest you put all resources in that pool. If you have more than one resource that is certified and it doesn't matter which of those certified individual resources is assigned to a task requiring a certified resource, then you could create a group resource (e.g. "Certified Welders") with a Max Unit value equal to the combined equivalent of those resources. For example, if you have 3 resources that are certified, the certified group resource Max Unit value would be 300%, assuming each of those is a full time employee. Or, if you want to keep individualized resources but need to identify those that are certified, you could use the Group field on the Resource Sheet. There are a few different ways to get there depending on what you want to track.
Hope this helps.
John
Is it possible to "link" resources? No
When you say the certified worked is assigned but "available in a separate category", what exactly do you mean by "separate category"?
It doesn't matter what the resource's capability is, if that resource is assigned to two or more tasks that will exceed the resource's Max Unit level, then that resource will be overallocated
You also mention something about a resource "should only be removed from that one pool". What exactly does that mean? Do you have multiple resource pools? If you do have multiple resource pools, I strongly suggest you abandon that idea and have a single resource pool. By itself a resource pool is part of a linked structure (i.e. pool/sharer structure) and linked structures in Project are prone to corruption if not rigorously maintained. Having more than one pool will increase the risk.
If you are going to use a resource pool I suggest you put all resources in that pool. If you have more than one resource that is certified and it doesn't matter which of those certified individual resources is assigned to a task requiring a certified resource, then you could create a group resource (e.g. "Certified Welders") with a Max Unit value equal to the combined equivalent of those resources. For example, if you have 3 resources that are certified, the certified group resource Max Unit value would be 300%, assuming each of those is a full time employee. Or, if you want to keep individualized resources but need to identify those that are certified, you could use the Group field on the Resource Sheet. There are a few different ways to get there depending on what you want to track.
Hope this helps.
John
Thank you for the response,
When I said separate category, I should have used the wording "separate resource." You are correct that it doesn't matter about the resource's capabilities. In my case, it makes perfect sense with your advice to create two separate resources; all of this is happening in one resource pool.
In this case, if I started from a pool of ten welders, four of which are certified, I would have two resources: Six welders and then a separate resource of four certified welders when all of the certified resources have been assigned. I still show that I have welders, but I am over-allocated if I attempt a task requiring certification.
I realize now that I was attempting some partitioning of a resource, so in the pool, it would just be one resource which doesn't make much sense in hindsight.
Thank you so much for your insight, John!
When I said separate category, I should have used the wording "separate resource." You are correct that it doesn't matter about the resource's capabilities. In my case, it makes perfect sense with your advice to create two separate resources; all of this is happening in one resource pool.
In this case, if I started from a pool of ten welders, four of which are certified, I would have two resources: Six welders and then a separate resource of four certified welders when all of the certified resources have been assigned. I still show that I have welders, but I am over-allocated if I attempt a task requiring certification.
I realize now that I was attempting some partitioning of a resource, so in the pool, it would just be one resource which doesn't make much sense in hindsight.
Thank you so much for your insight, John!