| Course | MGT 474 Project Management |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 4 |
| Paper type | Schedule and critical path analysis |
| Length | About 1,062 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Aspen University |
| Program | Business Administration |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MGT 474 Module 4
One Hundred Six Weeks on the Critical Path: Scheduling a River Otter Exhibit With a Buffer for the Planning Fallacy
Student Name
Business Administration Program, Aspen University
MGT 474: Project Management
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
One Hundred Six Weeks on the Critical Path: Scheduling a River Otter Exhibit With a Buffer for the Planning Fallacy
With scope settled and 34 work packages defined, the otter exhibit at Meadowlark, a composite zoo in Wichita, Kansas, now needs a timetable. The next step is a schedule that shows whether the exhibit can open by Memorial Day 2026 and which activities control that date. Planning begins in February 2024, after the board approved the charter. This paper builds the schedule using the critical path method.
The Method
Kelley and Walker (1959) introduced the critical path method to plan and schedule large engineering projects. Their method treats a project as a network of activities joined by dependencies, each with a duration. A forward pass through the network yields every activity's earliest possible dates; a backward pass from the finish yields the latest dates that still protect the end date. Activities whose early and late dates are equal form the critical path, and any delay to them delays the project. Other activities have float.
Activities, Durations and Float
Durations are in weeks, estimated by the project manager with the designer, contractor and animal care staff. Counting starts at zero on February 1, 2024.
| Activity | Weeks | Predecessors | Early start | Late start | Float |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A Concept design | 12 | None | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| B Site survey | 6 | None | 0 | 6 | 6 |
| C Final design | 24 | A, B | 12 | 12 | 0 |
| D Permits | 16 | C | 36 | 36 | 0 |
| E Contractor bid and award | 12 | C | 36 | 40 | 4 |
| F Site preparation and drainage | 8 | D, E | 52 | 52 | 0 |
| G Pool shell | 16 | F | 60 | 60 | 0 |
| H Life support installation | 12 | G | 76 | 76 | 0 |
| I Holding building | 18 | F | 60 | 76 | 16 |
| J Viewing window | 6 | G | 76 | 82 | 6 |
| K Rockwork and plantings | 8 | H, J | 88 | 94 | 6 |
| L Graphics design and fabrication | 20 | C | 36 | 82 | 46 |
| M Graphics installation | 2 | K, L | 96 | 102 | 6 |
| N Water testing | 6 | H, J | 88 | 88 | 0 |
| O Otter arrival, quarantine and training | 10 | N, I | 94 | 94 | 0 |
| P Opening preparation | 2 | O, M | 104 | 104 | 0 |
Building the Network
The activities come from the work breakdown structure's work packages, grouped where packages are always done together. Dependencies were checked with the contractor and keepers. Two were easy to miss: the viewing window must be set before rockwork surrounds it, and water testing cannot begin until both the life support and the window are in place, since the window forms part of the pool wall.
The Critical Path
The critical path runs A, C, D, F, G, H, N, O, P: concept design, final design, permits, site preparation, pool shell, life support, water testing, otter training and opening preparation, totaling 106 weeks. The project can finish in mid-February 2026 at the earliest. Graphics, with 46 weeks of float, can wait; the holding building has 16 weeks. Permits deserve special attention: they are on the critical path, and their duration depends on the city, not the zoo.
Why Estimates Run Short
Buehler et al. (1994) studied what they called the planning fallacy: people predict that their own tasks will be finished sooner than they are, even when they know that similar past tasks ran late. In their studies, students' predictions of when they would finish academic projects were markedly optimistic, and most finished later than their own predictions. People focus on plans for the task at hand and set aside the lessons of past experience. The lion exhibit's schedule showed the same pattern: every phase ran longer than planned.
Protecting the Deadline
Goldratt (1997) argued in his business novel on critical chain that individual estimates are usually padded for safety, yet projects still run late, because padding is consumed by delayed starts and work that expands to fill the time. He proposed estimating tasks without hidden padding and placing the protection in a shared project buffer at the end, with smaller feeding buffers where noncritical paths join the critical one. The otter exhibit's schedule finishes 15 weeks before Memorial Day 2026; those 15 weeks are the project buffer. The holding building's 16 weeks of float and the graphics' float act as feeding buffers.
Where the Estimates Came From
Each duration was estimated by the people who will do the work, then checked against the lion exhibit's actual durations. Final design was first estimated at 18 weeks; the lion exhibit's design took 27, so the estimate was raised to 24. Permits were estimated at 10 weeks by the designer but 16 by the zoo's city liaison, who remembered that the lion exhibit's permits required two rounds of review; the schedule uses 16. Using the zoo's own history in this way is a partial guard against the planning fallacy, since it puts past experience in front of the people estimating.
What Could Shorten the Path
Three options could shorten the critical path if needed. Permits could be split, with site preparation permitted before the full building permit. The holding building and pool shell could be bid together to save part of the contractor award time. And otter training could begin in temporary holding while water testing finishes, if the veterinarian agrees. Each option carries risks and costs and would be used only if the buffer runs low.
Resource Conflicts
The schedule assumes the zoo's life support technician can oversee filtration installation in weeks 76 to 88. That period overlaps with the annual maintenance shutdown of the aquarium building, which the technician also leads. The project manager has asked operations to move the shutdown to the following winter, a reminder that critical path schedules assume resources are available when the activities need them.
Monitoring the Schedule
The project manager will report monthly on critical path progress and on how much of the buffer has been used compared with how much of the work is complete. If more than a third of the buffer is used before construction starts, the sponsor will review options, such as applying for permits in phases.
Conclusion
The critical path method shows that the otter exhibit's length is set by a chain from design through permits, construction, life support, water testing and animal training. Research on the planning fallacy suggests the estimates are optimistic, and Goldratt's critical chain shows how to protect the opening with a visible 15-week buffer rather than hidden padding.
References
Buehler, R., Griffin, D., & Ross, M. (1994). Exploring the "planning fallacy": Why people underestimate their task completion times. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(3), 366-381. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.3.366
Goldratt, E. M. (1997). Critical chain. North River Press.
Kelley, J. E., Jr., & Walker, M. R. (1959). Critical-path planning and scheduling. In Papers presented at the December 1-3, 1959, Eastern Joint IRE-AIEE-ACM Computer Conference (pp. 160-173). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/1460299.1460318
Reading the MGT 474 Module 4 assignment instructions
Time is the subject of Module 4 in Aspen's MGT 474. Students turn work packages into a dated network, find the chain of activities that fixes the finish date and say how that date will be defended. Work from your classroom's Module 4 instructions; the example schedules the project scoped earlier. List activities with durations and dependencies, drawn from the work breakdown structure. Calculate early and late start and finish dates with a forward and backward pass. Identify the critical path and the float on other activities. Explain why duration estimates tend to be optimistic. Describe how the schedule will protect the deadline, for example with buffers, and say how progress against it will be tracked.
Inside the MGT 474 Module 4 example
Here the otter exhibit gets its timetable, starting February 2024. A table lists sixteen activities, such as final design at 24 weeks, permits at 16 and life support installation at 12, with their predecessors, early and late starts and float. The forward pass gives a project length of 106 weeks; the critical path runs through concept design, final design, permits, site preparation, pool shell, life support, water testing, animal training and opening preparation. Graphics have 46 weeks of float and the holding building 16. Kelley and Walker's paper on critical-path planning describes the method. Buehler, Griffin and Ross showed in a series of studies that people expect to finish their own tasks sooner than they do. Goldratt's book on critical chain proposes pooled buffers. The schedule finishes in February 2026, leaving a 15-week buffer before Memorial Day.
MGT 474 Module 4 rubric: what earns full marks
Scheduling papers are graded on correct forward and backward pass calculations, accurate identification of the critical path and float, attention to estimating bias and a sensible way to protect the deadline. This example shows every activity's dates and float in one table, so the calculations can be checked. The critical path is traced and explained in terms of the work. Buehler, Griffin and Ross's research supports the buffer, and Goldratt's critical chain explains why one shared buffer beats padding each task. Monitoring focuses on the critical path and buffer use.
Common MGT 474 Module 4 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Scheduling papers often present a Gantt chart without showing how the critical path was found. Show the forward and backward pass, even in a table. Another weakness is an activity list invented from scratch; activities should come straight from the work packages already defined. Check dependencies carefully, since one missing link changes the critical path. Calculate float and explain what it means for managers. Address estimating optimism with research. Protect the deadline with a visible buffer rather than hidden padding. Finally, describe how you will watch the critical path and buffer during the project. Check whether the people and equipment the schedule assumes will be free.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Aspen University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More MGT 474 and Business Administration sample papers
- MGT 474 Module 1: Projects, Life Cycles and Success
- MGT 474 Module 2: Project Selection and the Charter
- MGT 474 Module 3: Scope and the Work Breakdown Structure
- MGT 474 Module 5: Cost Estimating and Budgeting
- MGT 474 Module 6: Project Risk Management
- MGT 474 Module 7: Monitoring With Earned Value
- MGT 474 Module 8: Project Closing and Lessons Learned
- MGT 215 Module 5: Loyalty Programs and Retention
- BUS 225 Module 5: Business Crime and Liability
- BUS 495 Module 2: Culture and Business
- MGT 494 Module 2: External and Industry Analysis
MGT 474 Module 4 questions, answered
What does MGT 474 Module 4 usually ask for?
Aspen's MGT 474 covers scheduling in this module, so building a schedule, finding the critical path and discussing schedule risk is typical. Look at your classroom prompt.
What is the critical path?
The longest sequence of dependent activities through a project, which determines the shortest possible project duration; activities on it have zero float.
What is float?
The amount of time an activity can be delayed without delaying the project, found by comparing its early and late dates.
Where can I find a free MGT 474 Module 4 sample paper?
The example above schedules a zoo's river otter exhibit with sixteen activities, a 106-week critical path and a 15-week project buffer.
What is the planning fallacy?
The label Buehler, Griffin and Ross gave to a stubborn optimism about one's own deadlines, which persists even in people who remember past tasks running over.