This idea has been archived, contributions have been disabled 

Hi Lisa, thank you for your input! We have discussed this internally and decided that we should not change how it works right now. The reason is that we want the plan to behave in a predictable way and we do not know if the user wants the dependent activities to move or not when the change is made in the predecessor. This is also how other Gantt-planning tools work that we have investigated for benchmarking purposes. The best way to efficiently move the subsequent activities in the Plan today is to take the last activity and 'push it back' towards the first activity. I'm sorry that we are not able to meet your request but hope that you can find a way to work with the plan as it is.

Comments (8)

Hi Lisa!
Thanks for sharing your feedback! There is only support for finish to start dependencies and that is why the plan don´t support your case. However later this year we are planning to update our Plan tool and this idea can work as an input to that work effort.
Best regards
Silvija

There is only support for finish to start dependencies and right now we do not have any plans of adding more dependencies to the plan. However, by the end of this year we will be doing updates in Plan and then this idea can be added as an input to that work.

Anonymous
Anonymous

Anonymous

Level
0
Score
0

Not sure I am a fan unless PP accounts for slippage by some other means. If the duration is two weeks but it actually took five then visibility needs to be maintained. Being new to PP this might be a non-issue but on the face of it...

Hi!
Yes, I agree that this may not be a desired feature for everyone and that needs to be taken into consideration. I would say that this idea is more about adding more types of dependencies which would give other sorts of interactions instead of changing the behaviour of the type of dependency that we support right now.
Best regards
Silvija

Anonymous
Anonymous

Anonymous

Level
0
Score
0

Hi Silvija
I am not asking for other types of dependencies than finish to start as is already supported.
The thing is: When I have activities with dependencies and prolong the duration of an activity all dependent activities are postponed to a later date to reflect the change. This works as expected.
However when I shorten the duration of an activity the dependent activities can actually be started earlier, but the dates are not automatically changed to an earlier startdate as I would expect.
It is a time consuming job with a large risk of errors to change all dependent activities manually. Having to do that manually prevents me from using the Plan Tool to the extend I would have liked.

Hello Siliija, I am currently facing the same problem as mentioned in this discussion chain.. somewhere i read this issue would be resolved by late last year, what is the time frame when this will be fixed.

Hi Lisa, thank you for your input! We have discussed this internally and decided that we should not change how it works right now. The reason is that we want the plan to behave in a predictable way and we do not know if the user wants the dependent activities to move or not when the change is made in the predecessor. This is also how other Gantt-planning tools work that we have investigated for benchmarking purposes. The best way to efficiently move the subsequent activities in the Plan today is to take the last activity and 'push it back' towards the first activity. I'm sorry that we are not able to meet your request but hope that you can find a way to work with the plan as it is.

DIMELO - SocialCRM software editor