Many organizations conduct repetitive processes, products, and projects with minimal changes in requirements, work breakdown structure (WBS), and task schedules from process, product, and project. The ability to specify a “template” for those processes, products, and projects with repetitive aspects is a cost, time, and reliability savings. A template simplifies the creation of the requirements, schedule, and WBS.

Commonality

Using a template for standard processes, product activities, or projects saves time and cost, and improves reliability. The template assures your team is following a proven method. Templates are created precisely as all other processes, products, and projects for requirements, schedules, and work breakdown structures.

One Template, Multiple Processes, Products, and Projects

Templates are for processes, products, and projects that have common attributes. When a Portfolio Manager creates a Template, they need to create a template for the WBS, requirements, and schedule. From then on, the Optimize product will know these entities as a particular template. Creating a template’s requirements, WBS, and schedule is the same as if you’re creating them for a new process, product, or project, except now portfolio managers can use them to create multiple copies that are nearly the same.

When an actual process, product, or project is executed with a template, a portfolio manager instantiates the template and provides a new process, product, or project name. Assume a company that builds oil refineries in the ocean has to build a hundred refineries. They would need to create requirements, schedules, and WBSs for each. That would total to 100 refineries times three instances (requirements, WBS, schedule), where each instance took a manager 150 hours, 100x3x150, or 45,000 hours.

Contrast this with templates, and you have 3x150, or 450 hours plus an average of 50 hours per refinery, or another 5,000 hours for a total of 5,450. Quite a saving when compared with 45,000 hours. In addition, using a near-identical set of requirements, WBS, and schedule would prove to be far more efficient in making each site using established requirements, WBS, and schedule for the success of each refinery.

It would be significant cost savings to create one template, then merely instantiate each of the hundred different refineries, and then make the unique changes needed for each refinery. The time, cost, and reliability saved would be enormous.