|
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION OF RDCPM
STANDARD |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Historical Setting The Critical Path Method (CPM) of planning and scheduling, and related methodologies was developed in the mid to late 1950s. The earliest methodologies fell into two main camps. The first was initially called the Kelley-Walker Method, then the Critical Path Method (CPM) and yet later the Activity-On-Arrow Method (AOA) to distinguish from newer variants, and yet later still the Arrow Diagramming Method (ADM) or variant of CPM as a more easily remembered acronym. The second was Program Evaluation Review Technique (PERT.) In the late 1950s and early to mid 1960s a new variant of CPM was developed which was initially named the Arrow-On-Node Method (AON) and later renamed the Precedence Diagramming Method (PDM) or variant of CPM. A number of variants and extensions of the traditional or ADM variant of CPM and a somewhat larger number of variants or extensions of the PDM variant of CPM have been introduced over the years as well as several variations or extensions of the PERT methodology. These variations or extensions have the effect of allowing the same data input to the CPM or PERT methodology to have differing output or outcomes calculated by such slightly differing methodologies. The Relationship Diagramming Method (RDM) or variant of CPM was developed in 2005 by Fredric L. Plotnick of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania of the United States of America. In an effort to prevent a similar balkanization of variants of RDM, Mr. Plotnick has created a standard that will hopefully be embraced by all who desire to implement the RDM variant of CPM. While use of the standard is available to all, claims to be compliant with the standard and use of the RDCPM Certified Mark are restricted to those who have been given such permission by the holder of the Certification Mark.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARD This section discusses the minimum data fields required for full compliance with the RDCPM™ standard. Not all data fields are required to be certified as RDCPM Ready nor are all features discussed required to be certified RDCPM Compliance Certified. For further information contact RDCPM@fplotnick.com. The chart below specifies for each data file such information as:
a – numbered for convenience (Item number)
|