-3

Is it possible for a manager to allocate a resource to another project while he/she has plenty of dependency in the current project, the other project being a maintenance project where some issues have been raised by the client? Especially if the current project is a high-priority one and also crucial in terms of meeting the deadline? If it is possible, then what is the best way for a manager to handle such a situation?

Improve this question
8
  • 1
    You might want to start by treating people as human beings rather than calling them "resource" as though they are a commodity bought from a shop. And don't give me that c**p about how it is a "standard" term, even racism, sexism, and other isms were "standard" once.
    – Masked Man
    May 2, 2015 at 4:23
  • Easy man!!! I'm not a manager, but I continuously hear this term from managers and people from the top management around me. So, you can say I kinda picked this term up, and have grown a habit of using this word. Don't get me wrong, despite of this habit of mine I don't treat people like a mere "resource" rather than a human being. :)
    – Choudhury Saadmaan Mahmid
    May 2, 2015 at 8:42
  • @MaskedMan Easy. Resource manager, resource pool, and resource are common terms. What does that have to do with racism? Racism was never a standard. I want to eliminate racism I certainly don't want to eliminate resources.
    – paparazzo
    May 2, 2015 at 9:08
  • 3
    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because hypothetical questions have no real world answers. Hypothetical questions are speculative in nature and the answers can only be speculative. We are not into speculative answers.
    – Vietnhi Phuvan
    May 2, 2015 at 11:28
  • @Blam Here we go again, I asked not to give that as an excuse and you go ahead and do exactly that. I am not asking you to eliminate resources, just to stop using the term resources for humans. Few decades ago, when the guys in the US were asked to stop using the word "nigger", did that mean they were asked to eliminate blacks? Your (mis)understanding of my comment is of absurd proportions. Maybe if you had heard statements like "one resource took an unexpected maternity leave" or "one resource got a fractured arm so treat him as 0.5 resource for one month", you might have seen my point.
    – Masked Man
    May 2, 2015 at 13:11

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

By "resource" here, I assume you mean a person (rather than a machine or such).

Yes, of course it's possible to assign a person to another project while still important to another. It happens all the time.

Whether it makes sense or not depends a lot on

  • both projects
  • the capabilities of the individual
  • the individual's ability to split time effectively
  • and many other company-specific, and context-specific factors

Sometimes, these things must be done, even when we'd rather not. Sometimes it's very important to the company (or even critical).

Sometimes, it's just poor planning on someone's part.

Sometimes, that's just company culture.

then what is the best way for a manager to handle such a situation?

Again, "best" depends on a lot of contextual factors.

Sometimes the manager just needs to say "get it done" and a good employee understands and follows through. Other times more hand-holding is needed. Sometimes, comp time is given. Etc, etc.

Sometimes, the project which is losing part of this individual's time needs to be prepared to make adjustments - either other individuals to pick up the lost time, or a schedule change, or an expected quality change, etc, etc.

Improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .