Practice Standard For Work Breakdown Structures Second Edition

Project Management Institute
Practice Standard
for Work
Breakdown Structures
Second Edition
92312$CHFM
09-07-06 11:49:03
Practice Standard for Work Breakdown StructuresSecond Edition

ISBN 10: 1-933890-13-4
ISBN 13: 978-1-933890-13-5
Published by: Project Management Institute, Inc.
Four Campus Boulevard
Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073-3299 USA.
Phone: 610-356-4600
Fax: 610-356-4647
E-mail: pmihq@pmi.org
Internet: www.pmi.org
2006 Project Management Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
PMI, the PMI logo, PMP, the PMP logo, PMBOK, Project Management Journal, PM Network, and the PMI Today logo are
registered marks of Project Management Institute, Inc. The Quarter Globe Design is a trademark of the Project Management Institute,
Inc. For a comprehensive list of PMI marks, contact the PMI Legal Department.
PMI Publications welcomes corrections and comments on its books. Please feel free to send comments on typographical, formatting, or
other errors. Simply make a copy of the relevant page of the book, mark the error, and send it to: Book Editor, PMI Publications, Four
Campus Boulevard, Newtown Square, PA 19073-3299 USA.
PMI books are available at special quantity discounts to use as premiums and sales promotions, or for use in corporate training
programs, as well as other educational programs. For more information, please write to Bookstore Administrator, PMI Publications,
Four Campus Boulevard, Newtown Square, PA 19073-3299 USA, or e-mail: booksonline@pmi.org. Or contact your local bookstore.
Printed in the United States of America. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic, manual, photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without prior written permission of
the publisher.
The paper used in this book complies with the Permanent Paper Standard issued by the National Information Standards Organization
(Z39.481984).
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
92312$CHFM
09-07-06 11:49:03
Notice
Th e Project Man agem en t In stitute, In c. (PMI) stan dards and gu idelin e pu blication s,
of which th e docu m en t con tain ed h erein is on e, are develop ed th rou gh a volu n tary
con sen sus stan dards developm en t p rocess. Th is process brin gs togeth er volu n teers
an d/ or seeks ou t the views of person s wh o have an in terest in the top ic covered by
th is pu blication . Wh ile PMI adm inisters the p rocess an d establish es rules to p rom ote
fairn ess in th e developm en t of con sen sus, it does n ot write th e docum en t an d it
does n ot in dep en den tly test, evaluate, or verify th e accu racy or com pleten ess of an y
in form ation or th e soun dn ess of an y judgm en ts con tain ed in its stan dards an d gu idelin e p u blication s.
PMI disclaim s liability for an y p erson al in ju ry, p rop erty or other dam ages of an y
n atu re whatsoever, whether sp ecial, in direct, con sequen tial or com pen satory, directly
or in directly resultin g from the pu blication , use of ap plication , or relian ce on this
docu m en t. PMI disclaim s an d m akes n o guaran ty or warranty, exp ressed or im plied,
as to the accuracy or com pleten ess of an y in form ation p ublished herein , an d disclaim s
an d m akes n o warran ty th at th e in form ation in th is docu m en t will fulfill an y of you r
particular pu rposes or n eeds. PMI does n ot u n dertake to guaran tee the p erform an ce
of an y individu al m an ufacturer or sellers p roducts or services by virtue of th is stan dard
or guide.
In p ublish in g an d m akin g th is docum en t available, PMI is not un dertakin g to ren der
profession al or oth er services for or on beh alf of an y p erson or en tity, n or is PMI
un dertakin g to p erform an y duty owed by an y p erson or en tity to som eon e else.
An yon e usin g this docu m en t sh ould rely on h is or h er own in dep en den t ju dgm en t
or, as ap p rop riate, seek th e advice of a com p eten t p rofession al in determ in in g the
exercise of reason able care in an y given circu m stan ces. In form ation an d other stan dards on th e top ic covered by th is pu blication m ay be available from other sou rces,
which th e user m ay wish to con sult for addition al views or in form ation n ot covered
by th is pu blication .
PMI h as n o power, n or does it un dertake to p olice or en force com p lian ce with th e
con ten ts of this docum en t. PMI does n ot certify, tests, or insp ect p roducts, design s,
or in stallation s for safety or h ealth pu rposes. An y certification or other statem en t of
com plian ce with an y health or safety-related in form ation in this docum en t sh all n ot
be attributable to PMI an d is solely th e respon sibility of th e certifier or m aker of th e
statem en t.
2006 Project Management Institute, Four Campus Boulevard, Newtown Square, PA 19073-3299 USA
92312$CHFM
09-07-06 11:49:03
iii
92312$CHFM
09-07-06 11:49:03
Contents
List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... vii
Preface t o the Second Edit ion ............................................................................................... ix
Chapter 1Int roduct ion to the Pract ice St andard for Work Breakdown St ructures
Second Edition ....................................................................................................1
1.1 Overview ............................................................................................................1
1.2 Concept .............................................................................................................1
1.3 Objectives ..........................................................................................................2
Chapter 2Defining the WBS ................................................................................................3
2.1 Overview ............................................................................................................3
2.2 Common Usage of Terms ....................................................................................3
2.3 Concept .............................................................................................................5
2.4 The 100% Rule ...................................................................................................8
2.5 WBS for Construction of a Bicycle ........................................................................8
2.6 Representations of the WBS .............................................................................11
2.7 Summary .........................................................................................................11
Chapter 3Importance of t he WBS .....................................................................................13
3.1 Overview ..........................................................................................................13
3.2 Integration with Project Management Processes .................................................14
3.3 Relationship to Other Tools ...............................................................................15
3.4 WBS Integration and Use by Other Standards .....................................................17
3.5 Summary .........................................................................................................18
Chapter 4Defining WBS Quality ........................................................................................19
4.1 Overview ..........................................................................................................19
4.2 WBS Quality Principle 1 .....................................................................................19
4.3 WBS Quality Principle 2 .....................................................................................22
4.4 Annotated Example of a High-Quality WBS ..........................................................22
4.5 Problem Diagnostic Checklist ............................................................................24
4.6 Summary .........................................................................................................25
Chapter 5Considerations While Creat ing a WBS ................................................................27
5.1 Overview ..........................................................................................................27
5.2 Preparing a WBS ..............................................................................................27
5.3 General Factors to Be Considered .....................................................................32
5.4 Essential Judgments .........................................................................................35
5.5 Evaluating WBS Quality .....................................................................................38
5.6 WBS Usage Continuum .....................................................................................39
5.7 WBS for Program and Portfolio Management ......................................................40
5.8 Summary .........................................................................................................40
Appendix AGuidelines for a Project Management Instit ut e Pract ice St andard ....................41
Appendix BEvolut ion of the Project Management Instit ute Pract ice Standard for
Work Breakdown St ruct ures ............................................................................43
Appendix CContributors and Reviewers of t he Pract ice Standard for Work Breakdown
St ruct uresSecond Edition ............................................................................47
Appendix DBicycle Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Example .........................................51
Appendix EOil, Gas, and Pet rochemical (OGP) Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Example 65
Appendix FEnvironment al Management Work Breakdown St ruct ure (WBS) Example ..........71
92312$CTOC
09-08-06 09:41:26
Appendix GProcess Improvement Work Breakdown St ructure (WBS) Example ...................73

Appendix HPharmaceut ical Work Breakdown St ructure (WBS) Example ............................77
Appendix IProcess Plant Construct ion Work Breakdown St ructure (WBS) Example ............81
Appendix JService Indust ry Outsourcing Work Breakdown St ruct ure (WBS) Example .........85
Appendix KWeb Design Work Breakdown St ruct ure (WBS) Example ..................................87
Appendix LTelecom WBS Example ....................................................................................91
Appendix MRefinery TurnAround WBS Example .................................................................95
Appendix NGovernment Design-Bid-Build WBS Example .....................................................97
Appendix OSoft ware Implement ation WBS Example ..........................................................99
Appendix PHorizontal Tree St ruct ure Format WBS Example .............................................101
References ........................................................................................................................103
Glossary ............................................................................................................................107
Index by Keyword ..............................................................................................................111
vi
92312$CTOC
09-08-06 09:41:26
List of Tables and Figures

Chapters 15:
Figure 2-1.
Figure 2-2.
Figure 2-3.
Figure 2-4.
Table 3-1.
Figure 4-1.
Table 5-1.
Figure 5-1.
Appendices:
Table D-1.
Table D-2.
Table D-3.
Figure D-1.
Figure D-2.
Figure D-3.
Figure D-4.
Figure D-5.
Figure D-6.
Table D-4.
Figure D-7.
Figure F-1.
Table G-1.
Figure K-1.
Figure K-2.
Figure L-1.
Figure O-1.
Figure P-1.
WBS Bicycle Example ...............................................................................8

Annotated Bicycle Example .......................................................................9
WBS Example ........................................................................................10
WBS Representations Comparison ..........................................................11
Project Management Processes ..............................................................14
Annotated Example of a High-Quality WBS ...............................................23
WBS Creation Methods ..........................................................................29
WBS Usage Continuum ...........................................................................39
Hierarchical Structure .............................................................................52
Tabular View 1 .......................................................................................53
Tabular View 2 .......................................................................................53
WBS Tree Structure View 1 .....................................................................54
WBS Horizontal Tree Structure View ........................................................57
WBS Centralized Tree Structure View 1 ...................................................58
WBS Centralized Tree Structure View 2 ...................................................59
WBS Dictionary ......................................................................................60
WBS Dictonary .......................................................................................62
Horizontal Tree Structure ........................................................................72
Process Improvement WBS Example .......................................................76
Horizontal Portrait View ..........................................................................89
Horizontal Landscape View .....................................................................90
Top-Down Tree Structure ........................................................................92
Software Implementation WBS Example ................................................100
Horizontal Tree Structure Format WBS Example .....................................102
92312$CTOC
09-14-06 10:49:35
vii
92312$CTOC
09-07-06 12:15:42
Preface to the Second Edition

Wh en the Work Breakdown Stru ctu re (WBS) Practice Stan dard Up date Team gath ered
in Ap ril of 2003, th e p rogression of th is stan dard to its curren t level of advan cem en t
could not h ave been an ticipated. To begin th e work, the team received th e ch arter
for the u p date p rocess, the original chapters an d ap pen dices from the first edition ,
as well as app roxim ately 450 com m en ts about th e con ten t of th e docum en t th at h ad
been received from readers an d project m an agem en t practition ers sin ce the tim e of
its p ublication .
Wh ile th e ch allen ge to up date the Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu res
in itially did n ot app ear p articu larly difficu lt, th e project team sp en t a great deal of
tim e plan n in g an d develop in g an app rop riate app roach. At the tim e th e u pdate was
bein g initiated, the Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu res h ad ach ieved
widespread p op u larity across th e project m an agem en t com m u n ity, an d had taken its
place beside th e A Gu ide to th e Project Ma n a gem en t Body of Kn owledge (PMBOK
Gu ide)Th ird Edition as a frequen tly requ ested p ublication available from PMI. An y
m odification s to this docu m en t, th erefore, h ad to be weigh ed carefu lly.
With this in m in d, th e Update Team set in m otion a series of discussion s, presen tation s, an d in terviews design ed to su rface an d accu rately illum in ate h ow th e WBS is
pu t in to p lay across a broad array of in du stries today. Th e resu ltin g con clu sion s
regarding WBS app lication an d practice have n ow been in corporated in to this stan dard
an d h ave been brough t togeth er as a wh ite paper th at accom p an ies th e p ublication
on the Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu resSecon d Edition CD-ROM.
From the tim e th e first edition of the Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu res was bein g develop ed a little m ore than five years ago, there h as been a vast
exp an sion in rap id electron ic access to in form ation th rou gh th e In tern et, CD-ROMS,
DVDs, in stan t m essagin g, an d wireless tech n ology. Kn owing th at th e WBS Pra ctice
Sta n da rd will be delivered in to this rapidly evolvin g com m u n ication s en viron m en t,
th e Update Team was com p elled to con sider h ow this stan dard wou ld be viewed an d
used by cu rren t an d future p roject m an agem en t practition ers.
Con siderin g these factors, the Update Team cam e to u n derstan d that wh at h ad at
first seem ed readily achievable was, in fact, con siderably m ore com p lex an d difficult.
Team leaders an d m em bers alike were con vin ced th e design for th e WBS Pra ctice
Sta n da rd wou ld n eed to reflect n ot on ly th e p rogressive app lication of the WBS in
practice today, but m u st in clude an d in corporate an awaren ess of th e n ew en viron m en t
in which it will be u sed. To en su re th is edition m et th ose requ irem en ts, the Pra ctice
Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu resSecon d Edition will n ow be delivered as a
hard cop y docum en t as well as a CD-ROM.
Specifically relatin g to the con ten t of the stan dard, m an y of th e com m en ts received
sin ce the first pu blication focused on the n eed for m ore detail an d a broader overall
persp ective. Man y com m en ts in cluded detailed requ ests for m ore an d varied exam ples,
ch ecklists, job aids, an d referen ce m aterial. The Update Team has taken p articular
92312$CPRE
10-03-06 08:53:26
ix
care to address th ese com m en ts, wh ile en surin g th at m aterial accu rately reflects th e
app lication of stan dard p ractice in th e in dustry. Through ou t th e stan dard, the reader
will fin d a d d ition al gu id an ce rega rd in g th e ch a ra cteristics th at m a ke u p a h igh quality WBS, as well as con siderably m ore discu ssion about th e u se of th e WBS in
real-life practical situ ation s. Addition ally, m an y of th e checklists, sets of question s,
an d section al exam p les have been extracted, reform atted, an d p laced in the ap p en dices as in dividual elem ents that can be used as job aids an d gu ides for develop in g
a WBS.
The Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu resSecon d Edition p rovides
guidan ce in th e in itial generation , su bsequ en t developm en t, an d ap p lication of th e
WBS. The Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu resSecon d Edition is n ot,
however, a textbook, an d it does n ot provide sp ecific h ow-to in struction s. The target
audien ce for th is stan dard in clu des p roject m an agers, p roject team m em bers, con tract
person n el, an d oth ers who p articip ate or have an in terest in an y asp ect of th e m an agem en t of projects or program s. In usin g th is practice stan dard, it m u st be recogn ized
that as projects vary, so can th e resu ltin g WBSs. There are, h owever, certain u n iversal
prin ciples that this p ractice stan dard addresses.
The Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu resSecon d Edition is con sisten t
with the PMBOK Gu ideTh ird Edition . Th e Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown
Stru ctu resSecon d Edition also in cludes in form ation derived from accepted project
m an agem en t in du stry sou rces. The Project Man agem en t In stitutes stan dards p rogram
will p eriodically u p date the Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu res as p art
of the p lan n ed evolution of its stan dards. Your com m en ts are in vited.
The Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru cturesSecon d Edition is organ ized
as follows:
Ch ap ter 1
In troduction to
th e Work Breakdown Stru cture
In trodu ces th e WBS concept.
Ch ap ter 2
Defin ing th e WBS
Defin es the WBS an d its ch aracteristics.

Defin es the ben efits derived from usin g
a WBS.
Ch ap ter 3
Im p ortan ce of th e
WBS
How th e WBS fits with other project

m an agem en t p ractices.
Ch ap ter 4
Defin ing WBS

Qu ality
Docum en ts the characteristics of a

high-quality WBS. Presen ts guidelin es
for determ inin g if th e WBS is sufficien t
for subsequen t p lan nin g an d con trol.
Ch ap ter 5
Con siderations
while Creatin g a
WBS
Provides guidance an d presen ts

qu estion s th at can be asked du rin g th e
developm en t of a WBS to h elp ensure
that th e fin ish ed product m eets all th e
needs of the p roject it will serve.
App en dices
AD
Provides backgroun d inform ation on

the PMI Stan dards Program an d the
Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown
Stru ctu resSecon d Edition project.
92312$CPRE
10-03-06 08:53:26
Ap p en dices
EP
Provides docum en ted in du stry

exam p les to aid the reader in furth er
un derstandin g, creatin g, an d u sin g
WBSs. Each app en dix rep resen ts an
approach tailored to a sp ecific pu rpose,
application , or in dustry. Exam ples are
in differen t stages of com pletion an d
rep resen t th e evolu tion ary developm en t
of a WBS. Non e of the exam ples shou ld
be taken as the on ly su itable WBS for
th at typ e of project.
Notes
Glossary
Provides clarification of key term s th at

exist in the p roject m an agem en t
profession , includin g those that have
subtle or variable m ean in gs depen din g
on the organ ization an d in dustry.
92312$CPRE
10-03-06 08:53:26
xi
92312$CPRE
10-03-06 08:53:26
Chapter 1
Introduction to t he Pract ice

St andard for Work Breakdown
St ructuresSecond Edit ion
1.1 Overview
Su ccessfu l p roject m an agem en t relies on thorou gh plan n in g. Th is begin s by defin in g
th e p roject objectives with sufficien tly detailed in form ation . The Work Breakdown
Structure (WBS) p rovides th e foun dation for defin in g work as it relates to project
objectives. The WBS also establish es th e fram ework for m an agin g th e work to its
com pletion . Th e rem ain in g section s of th is ch ap ter are as follows:
1.2 Con cep t
1.3 Objectives
1.2 Concept
Th e WBS is u sed in projects as follows:
To defin e th e p rojects scop e of work in term s of deliverables an d to further decom p ose th ese d eliverab les in to co m p on en ts. Dep en d in g u p on th e d ecom p o sition
m ethod used, th e WBS can also defin e th e p rojects life cycle as well as th e deliverables ap propriate to the project, program , or portfolio. Th is project scop e decom p osition balan ces m an agem en ts n eed for con trol with rep resen tation of an app rop riate
level of detail in the WBS.
To provide th e p roject m an agem en t team with a fram ework on wh ich to base
project status an d progress reports.
To facilit a t e co m m u n ica t io n b e t we en t h e p ro je ct m a n a ge r a n d st a ke h o ld e rs
th rough ou t the life of the p roject. Th e WBS can be u sed to com m un icate in form ation
regardin g th e p roject scope. In com bin ation with addition al data, the WBS is the
fram ework for com m u n icatin g in form ation th at in clu des, bu t is n ot lim ited to,
schedule, risk, p erform an ce, dep en den cies, an d bu dget.
As a key in p ut to other project m an agem en t p rocesses and deliverables.
Th e WBS articu lates th e p roject scop e. It is con sidered as critical in p ut to oth er
project m an agem en t p rocesses an d deliverables su ch as activity defin ition s, p roject
92312$$CH1
09-07-06 12:17:59
sch edu le n etwork diagram s, project an d program sch edules, p erform an ce rep orts, risk
an alysis an d respon se, control tools, or project organization . Moreover, although the
WBS is a key in p ut to th ese p roject m an agem en t p rocesses an d deliverables, the WBS
is n ot a substitute for an y of these on its own .
For the p urp oses of th is Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu resSecon d
Edition , a project can be defin ed as focused in tern ally, extern ally, or both . Addition ally,
deliverables for th ese p rojects can take th e form of products, services, achievem en t
of sp ecific objectives, or attain m en t of goals.
In tern ally focused p rojects can produce deliverables as in p u ts to oth er project
phases, other in dividu als, or oth er organ ization s within the organ ization sponsorin g
the p roject. Extern ally focu sed projects typ ically p rodu ce deliverables for p eop le or
organ ization s ou tside th e organ ization , such as custom ers or p roject sp on sors. Man y
projects p roduce both in tern ally an d extern ally focu sed deliverables. Regardless of th e
focu s of th e p roject, a WBS sh ou ld be prep ared in all cases.
Developin g a WBS is an essen tial step durin g the in itial project p hases; as soon as
the basic scop e has been iden tified, the in itial WBS can be created with lim ited scope
in form ation . As addition al scope in form ation is develop ed or m ade available by m ore
com p lete an alysis of th e project work to be p erform ed, th e WBS can be u pdated
through th e form al chan ge con trol processes. This up datin g process is kn own as
p rogressive elaboration .
This practice stan dard provides in sigh t in to th e WBS, its develop m en t an d its ap plication . It is exp ected that use of the p rin ciples foun d in th is stan dard will en able the
user to p rep are a valuable, h igh -qu ality WBS an d p ut it to work in the course of
m an agin g a project, program , or p ortfolio.
1.3 Object ives

The p rim ary objectives of the Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu res
Secon d Edition are (1) to provide a com m on grou n d for u n derstan din g the con cep ts
an d ben efits of the WBS an d (2) to p resen t a stan dard app lication of the WBS as a
project m an agem en t tool. Th e in ten t is to en courage con sisten cy in ap plyin g this tool
an d, as a resu lt, to im prove project plan n in g an d con trol. Th e Pra ctice Sta n dard for
Work Brea kdown Stru ctu resSecon d Edition provides guidan ce in WBS developm en t,
based on the PMBOK Gu ideTh ird Edition , an d is used by oth er PMI stan dards.
Fin ally, alth ou gh th e Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu resSecon d
Edition p rovides gu idan ce in WBS developm en t, it is n ot in ten ded to be a tutorial on
how to create a WBS.
92312$$CH1
09-07-06 12:17:59
Chapter 2
Defining t he WBS
2.1 Overview
A p roject is m ade m ore m an ageable by breakin g it down in to in dividu al com pon en ts
th at togeth er are kn own as a Work Breakdown Structure or WBS. Su ch a structu re
defin es u n iqu e work elem en ts th at can be arran ged an d com pleted in the order defin ed
by th e network diagram : sequen tially, in p arallel, or in th e specific order n ecessary to
accom plish p roject outcom es. It facilitates oth er project m anagem en t processes su ch
as estim atin g, schedu lin g, resource allocation , risk an alysis, an d m easurem en t an d
con trol of th e p roject. Th e WBS represen ts a clear description of th e p rojects deliverables and scope th e wh at of th e p roject. It is n ot a descrip tion of a p rocess or
sch edule that defin es how or when the deliverables will be produced, bu t rather is
sp ecifically lim ited to describin g an d detailin g th e p rojects ou tcom e or scop e. As
stated in the PMBOK Gu ideThird Edition , Th e WBS organ izes an d defin es the
total scop e of the p roject. Th e WBS subdivides th e p roject work in to sm aller, m ore
m an ageable pieces of work, with each descen din g level of th e WBS represen tin g an
in creasin gly detailed defin ition of the project work. Th e plan n ed work con tain ed in
th e lowest level WBS com pon en ts, wh ich are called work packages, can be schedu led,
cost estim ated, m on itored, an d con trolled.
Th is chapter will p rovide m ore in form ation regardin g WBS term s, con cep ts, the
100% Rule, an d an exam p le of a good WBS in action . Th e rem ain in g section s of th is
ch ap ter in clude:
2.2 Com m on Usage of Term s
2.3 Con cep t
2.4 Th e 100% Ru le
2.5 WBS for Con stru ction of a Bicycle
2.6 Rep resen tation s of th e WBS
2.7 Su m m ary
2.2 Common Usage of Terms

A WBS, as defin ed in the PMBOK Gu ideTh ird Edition , is: A deliverable-orien ted
hierarchical decom position of the work to be executed by the project team to accom plish the project objectives an d create th e required deliverables. It organ izes an d
defin es the total scope of th e p roject. Each descen din g level rep resen ts an in creasin gly
92312$$CH2
09-07-06 12:20:18
detailed defin ition of th e project work. . . . The followin g term s h elp clarify this diction ary defin ition :
Work. Sustain ed ph ysical or m en tal effort, exertion , or exercise of skill to overcom e
obstacles an d ach ieve an objective. Com m on ly u sed to refer to a specific activity,
du ty, fu n ction , or assign m en t often bein g a p art or ph ase of som e larger u n dertakin g;
som ethin g p rodu ced or accom plish ed by effort, exertion , or exercise of skill. In th is
con text, work refers to work products or deliverables th at are the resu lt of effort
an d n ot to the effort itself.
Breakdown . Division in to p arts or categories; separation in to sim pler substan ces;
decom p osition .
Stru ctu re. Som eth in g arran ged in a defin ite pattern of organ ization .
These diction ary defin ition s im ply th at a WBS h as the followin g characteristics:
Su pp orts th e defin ition of all work requ ired to ach ieve an objective, tan gible result.
Is con stru cted to illu strate an d defin e the hierarchy of deliverables. This hierarch y
is organ ized in to paren t-ch ild relation sh ips.
Has an objective or tan gible result th at is referred to as a deliverable. In a sen se,
th e WBS can be thought of as a deliverable breakdown structure.
Addition ally, as n oted above, th e WBS is a deliverable-orien ted h ierarch ical decom position of th e work to be execu ted by the p roject team . It can thu s be defin ed in th e
followin g term s:
Deliverable. An y un iqu e an d verifiable p rodu ct, result, or cap ability to perform a
service th at m u st be p rodu ced to com p lete a process, p hase, or p roject. Often used
m ore n arrowly in referen ce to an extern al deliverable, which is a deliverable that
is su bject to ap proval by the project sp on sor or custom er.
Orien ted . Align ed or p osition ed with resp ect to a poin t or fram e of referen ce; focu sed
toward th e con cern s an d in terests of a sp ecific group .
Hierarch ical. Classified accordin g to variou s criteria in to successive levels or layers.
Decom position . A p lan n ing tech n ique th at subdivides th e p roject scop e an d project
deliverables in to sm aller, m ore m an ageable com p on en ts, u n til th e p roject work
associated with accom plish in g th e p roject scop e an d p rovidin g the deliverables
is defin ed in sufficien t detail to su pp ort executing, m on itorin g, an d con trollin g
th e work.
These defin ition s work togeth er to defin e th e overall role of the WBS, that is, to
provide a foun dation for the develop m en t of p roject sch edules, com m u n ication s, risk
m an agem en t p lan s, as well as oth er key p roject elem en ts.
2.2.1 Definit ion of Terms

The followin g defin ition s rep resen t WBS-related term s as defin ed by the PMBOK
Gu ideThird Edition . Th ese term s an d oth ers listed in the Glossary of this stan dard
facilitate un derstan din g of th e in tegral role th e WBS p lays in p roject m an agem en t
practice. Term s are listed here in alp habetical order.
92312$$CH2
09-07-06 12:20:18
Activity. A com p on en t of work p erform ed du rin g the course of a p roject.

Ap p ortion ed Effort. Effort ap plied to p roject work that is n ot readily divisible in to
discrete efforts for that work, but which is related in direct proportion to m easu rable
discrete work efforts. Con trast with discrete effort.
Con trol Accou n t. A m an agem en t con trol p oin t wh ere scope, budget (resource plan s),
actual cost, an d sch edule are integrated an d com p ared to earn ed valu e for perform an ce m easurem en t. Con trol accou n ts are p laced at selected m an agem en t p oin ts
(sp ecific com p on en ts at selected levels) of th e work breakdown structure. Each
con trol accoun t m ay in clu de on e or m ore work packages, bu t each work p ackage
m ay be associated with on ly on e con trol accoun t. Each con trol accou n t is associated
with a sp ecific sin gle organ ization al com p on en t in the organ ization al breakdown
structu re (OBS). Previou sly called a cost accoun t. See also work pa cka ge.
Discrete Effort. Work effort that is separate, distin ct, an d related to the com p letion
of specific work breakdown structu re com pon en ts an d deliverables, an d th at can
be directly p lan n ed an d m easured. Con trast with a pportion ed effort.
Level of Effort (LOE). Su pp ort-typ e activity (e.g., seller or custom er liaison , project
cost accou n tin g, p roject m an agem en t, etc.), which does not p roduce defin itive en d
products. It is gen erally ch aracterized by a u n iform rate of work perform an ce over
a p eriod of tim e determ in ed by th e activities su pp orted.
Task. A term for work whose m ean in g an d p lacem en t within a structured p lan for
project work varies by th e ap plication area, in du stry, an d bran d of project m an agem en t software.
Work Breakdown Stru ctu re Com p on en t. An en try in the work breakdown stru ctu re
th at can be at an y level.
Work Package. A deliverable or project work com pon en t at the lowest level of each
bran ch of th e work breakdown stru cture. Th e work p ackage in cludes th e schedu le
activities an d schedu le m ileston es requ ired to com p lete th e work package deliverable or project work com pon ent. See also con trol a ccou n t.
The followin g defin ition is in clu ded to reflect com m on usage:
WBS Elem en t. An y sin gle work breakdown stru cture (WBS) com p on en t an d its associated WBS attribu tes con tain ed with in an in dividual work breakdown stru ctu re.
2.3 Concept
2.3.1 Overview
Th e WBS assists p roject leaders, participan ts, an d stakeh olders in the developm en t of
a clear vision of the en d p rodu cts or outcom es p roduced by the p roject. To be m ore
precise, th e WBS p rovides a clear vision of the work of th e project. The WBS divides
th e project scope in to hierarch ical, m an ageable, defin able packages of work that balan ce the con trol n eeds of m an agem en t with an app rop riate an d effective level of
detailed project data. Th e WBS provides th e fram ework for all deliverables across th e
project life cycle. Th e various levels of the WBS also p rovide su pp ort for focu sin g
92312$$CH2
09-07-06 12:20:18
com m un ication with stakeh olders an d aid in clearly iden tifyin g accoun tability to a
level of detail n ecessary for effectively m an agin g an d con trollin g th e p roject.
The up per levels of th e WBS typically reflect the m ajor deliverable work areas of
the project or m ajor p hases in th e p rojects life cycle. Th ese levels also p rovide logical
su m m a ry p o in ts fo r a ssessin g team an d in d ivid u a l p erfo rm an ce, com m u n icatin g
accom plish m en ts, an d m easurin g cost an d schedule perform an ce with respect to
in dividu al deliverables as well as th e overall p roject.
The con ten t of th e u pp er levels can vary, depen din g up on the type of p roject an d
the in dustry in volved. To avoid con fusion an d rework, it is often pru den t to defin e
the levels of th e WBS p rior to its con struction . The lower WBS elem en ts p rovide
app rop riate focu s for p roject m an agem en t p rocesses su ch as scop e an d schedule
develop m en t, cost estim atin g an d resou rce allocation , an d risk assessm en t.
When ever work is logically stru ctu red, easily iden tifiable, an d clearly within th e
cap abilities of in dividu als, p roject stakeh olders can con fiden tly exp ect that objectives
associated with th e work can an d will be achieved. The u se of a WBS h elps en su re
that th e p roject m eets th ese criteria.
2.3.2 Deliverables
The un derlyin g con cep t of a delivera ble is the core of a WBS. The PMBOK Guide
Third Edition defin es a deliverable as:
An y u n iqu e an d verifiable p roduct, resu lt, or capability to perform a service that
m ust be p rodu ced to com p lete a process, p hase, or p roject. Often u sed m ore
n arrowly in referen ce to an extern al deliverable, which is a deliverable th at is
subject to ap proval by the p roject sp on sor or cu stom er.
The WBS provides the foun dation for in tegratin g the work p ackage an d in term ediate
deliverables with all oth er aspects of p roject in itiation , p lan n in g, execution , m on itorin g
an d con trollin g, an d closin g.
A deliverable-orien ted WBS p rovides m an y ben efits to th e p roject, in cludin g th e
followin g:
Better com m un ication to project spon sors, stakeholders, an d team m em bers
More accurate estim ation of tasks, risks, tim elin es, an d costs
In creased con fiden ce that 100% of the work is iden tified an d in cluded
A foun dation for the con trol p rocesses within the p roject.
The deliverable con cept an d deliverable orien tation of th e WBS are in tegral to
un derstan din g the p rop er defin ition an d u se of the WBS an d th e ben efits it p rovides
within th e larger con text of all p roject m an agem en t processes.
2.3.3 Design
A well-design ed WBS that p resen ts in form ation at the app rop riate level of detail an d
in form ats an d structu res m ean in gful to th ose perform in g th e work is an in valu able
tool in p roject m an agem en t. It provides a graph ical rep resen tation or textu al outlin e
of th e p roject scop e. Here are som e roles the WBS p lays in su pp ortin g clarity for
project defin ition :
Decom p oses (or disassem bles) th e overall project scope in to deliverables an d sup p orts the defin ition of the work effort required for effective m an agem en t
92312$$CH2
09-07-06 12:20:18
Clearly an d com preh en sively defin es the scop e of th e p roject in term s of deliverables
th at the project participan ts an d stakeh olders can u n derstan d
Sup ports docum en tation of the accoun tability an d respon sibility for th e variou s
deliverables by havin g a direct relation ship am on g the WBS elem en ts related to th e
Organ ization al Breakdown Structure (OBS) iden tified throu gh the Resp on sibility
Assign m en t Matrix (RAM)
Provides a structure for organ izin g in form ation regardin g the p rojects p rogress,
periodic statu s, an d p rojected perform an ce for which a p roject m an ager is resp on sible
Sup ports trackin g of risks to assist the project m an ager in iden tifyin g an d im p lem en tin g resp on ses n ecessary to achieve desired ou tcom es.
2.3.4 Management
Th e WBS su pp orts effective p roject m an agem en t in several ways durin g th e life of a
project by:
Sep aratin g p roject deliverables in to com p on en t p arts to en sure th e p roject p lan
m atches th e app roved p roject scope an d will fulfill th e overall objectives of th e
project
Sup portin g th e decom position of project scop e in to sim pler com p on en ts, providin g
on e of the p rim ary m ethods for m an agin g com p lex p rojects
Providin g a fram ework for sp ecifyin g p erform an ce objectives
Providin g th e basis for in tegratin g an d assessin g schedule an d cost p erform an ce
Sup portin g th e p lan n in g an d assign m en t of resp on sibilities
Assistin g in determ in in g resou rce requirem en ts such as techn ical skills, exp erien ce
an d kn owledge
Facilitatin g the rep ortin g an d analysis of p roject p rogress an d status data, in cludin g
resource allocation s, cost estim ates, expen ditu res, an d p erform an ce.
2.3.5 Organizat ional Perspect ive

Th e WBS p rovides th e fou n dation for assign in g work to the app rop riate organ ization al
un its, su bcon tractors, or in dividuals. As the work an d organ ization al resp on sibilities
b ecom e m ore clearly d efin ed , in d ivid u als, in clu d in g su b con tracto rs, are assign ed
respon sibility for accom p lishin g specific WBS elem en ts with in defin ed budgets an d
sch edules.
2.3.6 WBS Levels

Th e WBS in clu des all work to be don e by th e p roject leaders, stakeh olders, an d both
in tern al an d extern al participan ts, su ch as team m em bers an d su bcon tractors. Th e
WBS p rovides a clear statem en t of th e objectives an d deliverables of th e work to be
perform ed. The dep th of a WBS is depen den t u p on the size an d com p lexity of the
project an d the level of detail n eeded to p lan an d m an age it. Most work breakdown
stru ctu res con sist of a m u lti-level h ierarch y describin g the en tire scop e to be accom plish ed by the p erform in g organ ization ; however, th e sp ecific n um ber of levels sh ou ld
be app rop riate for effectively m anagin g th e p roject in question .
92312$$CH2
09-07-06 12:20:18
2.4 The 100% Rule

The 100% ru le (Hau gan , 2002, p 17) is a core ch aracteristic of th e WBS. This ru le states
that the WBS in cludes 100% of th e work defin ed by the project scope an d captures
ALL deliverablesin tern al, extern al, an d in terim in term s of work to be com pleted,
in clu din g p roject m an agem en t. The 100% ru le is on e of th e m ost im p ortan t prin cip les
guidin g th e developm en t, decom p osition an d evalu ation of the WBS. Th e ru le app lies
at all levels with in th e h ierarch y: th e su m of the work at th e child level m ust equal
100% of the work rep resented by th e paren t an d the WBS should n ot in clude an y
work th at falls outside th e actual scop e of the p roject, th at is, it can n ot in clu de m ore
than 100% of the work.
It is im p ortan t to rem em ber that th e 100% ru le also ap plies at th e activity level.
The work rep resen ted by the activities in each work package m ust add up to 100% of
the work n ecessary to com plete th e work package.
2.5 WBS for Const ruct ion of a Bicycle

The scope of a project can be decom p osed in m u ltip le ways. Regardless of th e m an n er
of decom position , th e sum of th e work packages for each differen t decom position
sh ou ld add u p to the sam e scop e of work. The followin g sam p le WBS illu strates key
con cep ts th at will be discussed through ou t the rem ain in g chapters of this stan dard.
Figure 2-1. WBS Bicycle Example
92312$$CH2
09-07-06 12:20:18
Figure 2-1 is a sam p le WBS design ed to captu re the scope of work requ ired to
con struct a cu stom bicycle. To keep the graph ic sim p le, this p articular WBS does n ot
differentiate am on g th e m an y types of bicycles that can be built from sim ilar WBS
con structs, for exam p le, a road bicycle, m ou n tain bicycle, racin g bicycle, or an y oth er
bicycle, bu t assu m es that detailed requirem en ts for a sp ecific typ e of bicycle would
be p rovided as furth er decom p osition s of th e illu strated WBS elem en ts.
Th is p articu lar exam p le was selected for its sim p licity to en able th e reader to focu s
on th e WBS itself, rather than th e m u ltitude of altern atives, op tion s, an d com p on en ts
required to defin e a com plex, u n iqu e, an d perh ap s esoteric product. The bicycle is a
fam iliar an d com m on p rodu ct, an exam p le th at easily suggests the processes required
to p rodu ce the en d result.
This illustration shows how concepts and guidance described in later chapters work
together to produce a com pleted bicycle that m eets the quality, tim eliness, features, and
functionality requirem ents of the project sponsor, which in this case is the purchaser.
Specifically, th is WBS illustrates the various levels of a WBS, the n u m berin g schem e,
n am in g con ven tion , relation sh ip of paren t an d child WBS elem en ts, an d the represen tation of each of these ch aracteristics an d p rin cip les workin g together to form a
com plete WBS. Th is illustration represen ts on e exam ple of the possible decom position
of th e testin g elem en ts. It is n ot in ten ded to be com preh ensive or defin itive.
Th e bicycle WBS h elps to com m u n icate an d rein force som e of th e con cep ts p resen ted. Th e an n otated illu stration (Figu re 2-2) im m ediately followin g sh ows th at all
Figure 2-2. Annotated Bicycle Example
92312$$CH2
09-07-06 12:20:18
WBS elem en ts are n ot decom p osed to th e sam e extent. For exam ple, th is hypothetical
bicycle WBS does n ot decom pose each Level 2 WBS com p on en t further in to subelem en ts. While it can be h elpfu l to decom p ose th e en tire WBS to th e sam e level for
som e p rojects, th ere are no h ard an d fast ru les dictatin g th at each WBS elem en t is
decom p osed to the sam e level. Decom position is a use-related characteristic th at is
defin ed by th e con text of th e p roject the WBS is develop ed to su pp ort. Th is con cept
is p resen ted in detail in Chap ter 4, Section 4.2.
Addition ally, this exam ple com m un icates WBS concep ts th at reflect ap p lication in
a broad array of in du stries. The con stru ction of th e WBS can rem ain the sam e, such
as the relation ship of th e WBS elem en ts, th e decom p osition level, an d th e relation sh ip
to other WBS elem en ts. The con ten t can be m odified to reflect the ap plication of the
con cep t in altern ate term s for oth er in dustries, projects, or program s. This is illustrated
in the decom posed elem en ts th at are iden tified below the Level 2 WBS elem en t for
In tegra tion (1.6). In Figu re 2-2, elem en ts 1.6.4.11.6.4.3 are called Com pon ent Test,
Produ ct Test an d Cu stom er Test, resp ectively. In the n ext exam p le, Figu re 2-3, these
Figure 2-3. WBS Example

sam e elem en ts are en titled Un it Test, System Test, and Accepta n ce Test, showing how
the con cep t of testin g is rep resen ted in variou s ways usin g basic WBS elem en ts.
Fin ally, throughout the stan dard, th e bicycle WBS is rep eatedly u sed as a referen ce
poin t to clarify an d illustrate con cep ts. To illum in ate th e con cept bein g discussed,
parts of th e WBS are extracted, elem en ts are sin gled out, or sets of decom p osed
elem en ts are h ighlighted by p lacin g dotted lin es aroun d th em . For clarity, these WBS
elem en ts are frequ en tly shown in a n um ber of differen t represen tation s.
10
92312$$CH2
09-07-06 12:20:18
2.6 Represent at ions of t he WBS

Th e WBS can be rep resen ted in a variety of ways in clu din g grap hical, textu al, or tabu lar
views. Regardless of th e represen tation used, the WBS en ables the p roject team to
predict an d forecast costs, schedu les, resou rce requirem en ts, an d allocation s m ore
accu rately. Two com m on m eth ods are th e hierarch y diagram an d the outlin e or tabular
view as sh own in Figu re 2-4.
Figure 2-4. WBS Representations Comparison
2.7 Summary
In su m m ary, th e WBS:
Defin es th e h ierarchy of deliverables
Sup ports th e defin ition of all work requ ired to achieve an en d objective or deliverable(s)
Provides a grap hical represen tation or textu al ou tlin e of the p roject scop e
92312$$CH2
09-07-06 12:20:18
11
Provides th e fram ework for all deliverables across th e p roject life cycle
Provides a vehicle for in tegratin g an d assessin g sch edule an d cost perform an ce
Facilitates assign m en t of resources
Facilitates th e rep ortin g an d an alysis of progress an d status data
Provides a fram ework for sp ecifyin g perform an ce objectives.
12
92312$$CH2
09-07-06 12:20:18
Chapter 3
Importance of t he WBS
3.1 Overview
A WBS can n ot alon e en su re p roject su ccess, but con sider that the WBS does the
followin g:
Defin es all th e work of th e project, an d on ly the work of th e project, th ereby clarifyin g
th e project scope
Reflects the in p ut from all team m em bers to en su re bu y-in
Provides the baselin e for su bsequ en t ch an ge con trol
Is a prim ary in pu t to other project m an agem en t processesfor exam ple, resou rce
plan n in g, cost estim atin g, sch edu le developm en t, an d risk iden tification
Provides the fram ework for p roject con trol, p erform an ce m on itorin g, an d the fou n dation for com m un ication with all stakeholders
En sures the work of th e p roject correlates ap p ropriately with th e Resp on sibility
Assign m en t Matrix (RAM) an d th e Organ ization al Breakdown Stru cture (OBS)
Is referen ced in other PMI stan dards, for exam p le, the PMBOK Gu ideTh ird
Edition an d Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Ea rn ed Va lu e Ma n a gem en t (EVM), as an essen tial
plan n in g deliverable su pp orting key project m an agem en t fu n ction s.
Experien ced p roject m an agers kn ow th at th ere are m an y thin gs th at can go wron g
in p rojects regardless of h ow su ccessful the p roject m an agers are in th e p lan n in g an d
execution of their work. Project failu res, however, can often be traced back to a p oorly
developed or n on existen t WBS.
A poorly con structed WBS can resu lt, am on g other th in gs, in th e followin g p roject
stum blin g blocks an d adverse project ou tcom es:
In com p lete p roject defin ition leadin g to on goin g p roject exten sion s
Un clear work assign m en ts, goals, objectives, or deliverables
Scope creep or u n m an ageable, frequ en tly ch an gin g scope
Bu dget overru n
Missed deadlin es on sch eduled deliverables, or tim elin e slip p age
Un usable n ew product or feature
Failure to deliver on som e elem en ts of project scop e.
Th e rem ain der of this chapter high lights in m ore detail the im p ortan t role th e WBS
plays in p roject an d p rogram m anagem en t p lan n in g:
92312$$CH3
09-07-06 12:23:31
13
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
In tegration with Project Man agem en t Processes

Relation sh ip to Oth er Tools
WBS In tegration an d Use by Oth er Stan dards
Su m m ary
3.2 Integration wit h Project Management Processes

The WBS is created in the Create WBS Plan n in g Process (PMBOK Gu ideTh ird
Edition ). The WBS also p lays an in tegral role in other p roject m an agem en t processes.
Typ ical (th ou gh n ot exh au stive) exam p les are sh own in Table 3-1. Referen ces in Table
3-1 are to section s in the PMBOK Gu ideTh ird Edition .
Process Group
Import ance of WBS in Process
Initiating
Develop Preliminary Project Scope Statement (Section 4.2)

Historical WBS elements can contribute in determining the scope and
viability of projects.
Planning
Scope Planning (Section 5.1)

The Scope Planning process documents how the WBS will be created
and defined.
Scope Definition (Section 5.2)
The WBS further defines the entire scope of the project.
Activity Definition (Section 6.1)
The WBS is an input source to this process, and is a key component of
a project plan.
Cost Estimating (Section 7.1)
The WBS is an input to this process.
Cost Budgeting (Section 7.2)
The WBS identifies project deliverables to which costs will be allocated.
Human Resource Planning (Section 9.1)
The WBS is an input source to this process, and is a key component of
a project plan.
Risk Identification (Section 11.2)
The WBS identifies project deliverables that must be evaluated for risk
events.
Risk Response Planning (Section 11.4)
The WBS might be updated to include work and deliverables required for
risk management.
Plan Purchases and Acquisitions (Section 12.1)
Executing
Information Distribution (Section 10.2)

The WBS provides the basis for developing the communications plan and
the level of granularity at which project information can be distributed.
The WBS helps determine what level of project detail is appropriate to
communicate to different stakeholder groups.
Monitoring and Controlling
Scope Verification (Section 5.4)

The WBS facilitates the process of formally accepting completed
deliverables.
Scope Control (Section 5.5)
The WBS is an input source to this process, which is a key component
of a project plan.
It is important to adjust the WBS if project scope is changed so that
future changes will be based on an updated, agreed-upon project baseline.
A WBS enhances the project managers ability to assess the impact of
scope changes.
Cost Control (Section 7.3)
The creation of the WBS reveals the best point in the hierarchy of
deliverables at which to implement cost control.
Table 3-1. Project Management Processes
14
92312$$CH3
09-07-06 12:23:31
3.3 Relat ionship t o Ot her Tools

3.3.1 Project Management Tools
Th e pu rp ose of the WBS, as a p roject m an agem en t tool, is to organ ize the scope of a
project. WBS defin ition for program s an d portfolios can use sim ilar tech n iques to
organ ize scope. Th ere are m an y p roject m an agem en t tools that use the WBS or its
com ponen ts as in p ut (see Section 5.3 of PMBOK Gu ideThird Edition ).
.1 Project Ch arter.
The WBS takes th e p roject charter as its startin g p oin t. Th e h igh est level elem en t
in the WBS sh ou ld rep resen t the p rojects overall en d-poin t p roduct(s), service(s), or outcom es as described in the p roject charter. If the p rojects m ajor
produ cts can n ot be described durin g the creation of the WBS, th en th e p roject
m an agem en t team should exam in e th e ch arter to determ in e if it has been
sufficien tly defin ed.
.2 Project Scop e Statem en t.
The scop e statem en t for th e p roject is in ten ded to clearly an d succin ctly describe
wh at th e p roject is an d is n ot in ten ded to accom plish. Th e h igh-level elem en ts
in th e WBS should m atch , word-for-word, the n ou n s u sed to describe th e outcom es of the p roject in th e scop e statem en t. If the project m an agem en t team
has difficu lty iden tifyin g the objects in the scope statem en t an d app lyin g th em
to the high-level WBS elem en ts, the team sh ou ld carefu lly exam in e th e scop e
statem en t to determ in e if it sufficien tly captures all p roject outcom es an d deliverables. The WBS Diction ary can also be u sed to fu rther docu m en t an d clarify
each deliverable (see 3.3.1.6).
.3 Program an d Portfolio WBS.
The WBS can be u sed to defin e scop e for p rojects, program s, an d p ortfolios.
For exam ple, p rogram offices are typically establish ed to sh are tools, tech n iqu es,
m eth odologies, an d resou rces in m an agin g on e or m ore collection s of related
projects as p rogram (s). Th e project WBS m u st illustrate a clear u n derstan din g
of th e relation sh ip am on g highly decom p osed work p ackages within in dividual
projects an d p rogram (or high er order) scop e defin itions. If strategic ch an ges are
m ade, the im pact on p rojects, resources, an d bu dgets can be easily calculated,
assu m in g the project WBS h as been con stru cted correctly in con sideration of
these h igh er order factors.
.4 RBS.
The Resource Breakdown Stru cture (RBS) describes the projects resource organ ization an d can be u sed in con jun ction with th e WBS to defin e work package
assign m en ts. Th e lin k between work p ackages an d th e RBS can be used to verify
that all m em bers of the project team have been ap prop riately assign ed work
packages, an d that all work p ackages h ave own ers.
.5 OBS.
The Organ ization al Breakdown Structure (OBS) is loosely related to th e WBS.
The OBS dep icts the organ ization h ierarch y, allowin g the p rojects work packages
to be related to th e p erform in g organ ization al u n its. This tool rein forces th e
guidelin e that each work package sh ou ld h ave a sin gle poin t of respon sibility.
92312$$CH3
09-07-06 12:23:31
15
Th e OBS can be a u seful tool for p roject m an agers in that it clearly dem on strates
the hierarchy of p eop le or group s, whereas th e WBS is strictly organ ized by
deliverables.
.6 WBS Diction ary:
Th e WBS diction ary is a key docum en t th at accom p an ies th e WBS an d carries
critical p roject in form ation . Th e WBS diction ary defin es, details, an d clarifies
the variou s elem en ts of th e WBS to en sure that each com p on en t of th e WBS is
accurately articu lated an d can be com m un icated to an yon e referen cin g the
WBS. The develop m en t of the WBS diction ary often un covers am bigu ity or other
errors in the WBS itself, an d results in revision s to the WBS. Th e WBS diction ary
con tain s in form ation a b ou t e ach elem en t o f th e WBS, in clu d in g a d eta iled
descrip tion of th e work, deliverables, activities, an d m ileston es associated with
each elem en t. Th e WBS diction ary m igh t also in clu de an in dication of the type
an d n um ber of resou rces required an d con tract con trol in form ation , such as
a ch arge n um ber or other sim ilar data. Often , a WBS diction ary will include
traceability m atrices lin kin g the WBS to other scop e con trol docu m en ts su ch
as statem en ts of work or requirem en ts docum en ts.
.7 Project Sch edu le Network Diagram :
Th e n etwork diagram is a sequen tial arran gem en t of th e work defin ed by th e
WBS, an d is essen tial to un coverin g p roject dep en den cies an d risks. The activities
within the WBS work packages are arran ged to sh ow p receden ce an d order.
Develop in g the n etwork diagram often un covers p roblem s in the WBS, such as
in com p lete decom position , the assign m en t of too m uch work in an elem en t,
or th e assign m en t of m ore th an on e person for an in dividual WBS elem ent, thu s
resultin g in n eeded revision s.
.8 Project Sch edu le:
Th e various elem en ts of th e WBS are used as startin g poin ts for defin ing th e
a ctivitie s in clu d e d in t h e p ro je ct sch e d u le . Im p lie d d e p e n d e n c ie s ca n b e
recorded in the WBS Diction ary, an d th e activities as described in the WBS
Diction ary are then in clu ded as detail in the schedu le.
3.3.2 Int errelat ionships Among Project Management Tools

Because of in terrelation ship s am on g the WBS an d other project m an agem en t tools,
it is im p ortan t to n ote th at an y ch an ge in th e WBS requ ires an associated ch an ge in
the related tools.
Su ch in terrelation ship s am on g th e WBS an d other Project Man agem en t p rocesses
are described th rou gh out the PMBOK Gu ideThird Edition . As an exam ple of these
in terdepen den cies, con sider th e relation ship between th e WBS an d th e activity list
used for the project sch edu le as described in Section 6.1.2 of the PMBOK Guide
Third Edition (Activity Defin ition : Tools an d Tech niques). Specifically, item 6.1.2.1
(Decom p osition ) reads:
The techn iqu e of decom p osition , as it is ap p lied to activity defin ition , in volves
subdividin g th e p roject work p ackages in to sm aller, m ore m an ageable com pon en ts called schedule activities. Th e Activity Defin ition p rocess defin es the fin al
outp uts as sch edule activities rather than as deliverables, as is don e in th e Create
WBS process (Section 5.3).
16
92312$$CH3
09-07-06 12:23:31
Th e activity list, WBS, an d WBS diction ary can be developed eith er sequen tially
or con curren tly, with th e WBS an d WBS diction ary bein g the basis for developm en t of the fin al activity list. Each work p ackage within the WBS is decom posed
in to the sch edu le activities required to produce th e work package deliverables.
Th is activity defin ition is often perform ed by the p roject team m em bers resp on sible for the work package.
Section 6.2 of th e PMBOK Gu ide (Activity Sequ en cin g) furth er states:
Activity sequ en cin g in volves iden tifyin g an d docu m en tin g the logical preceden ce relation ship s am on g schedu le activities. Schedu le activities can be logically sequen ced with proper preceden ce relation sh ips, as well as leads an d lags
to sup p ort later develop m en t of a realistic an d ach ievable sch edule.
Th is discussion briefly describes h ow m an y p roject m an agem en t tools are in terrelated, all based u p on th e fou n dation of th e WBS. The Work Breakdown Structu re plays
a p ivotal role in p roject an d p rogram m an agem en t in each of th e p rocess grou ps:
In itiating, Plan n in g, Execu tin g, Mon itorin g & Con trollin g an d Closin g for which it
en su res a con sisten t defin ition of th e scop e of the work to be un dertaken .
3.3.3 WBS Development Tools

Th ere are a n um ber of p roject m an agem en t tools th at can be used to assist a p roject
m an ager with the develop m en t of a WBS. Th ese tools in clude outlin es an d organ ization
ch arts, fish bon e an d brain storm ing techn iques, an d top down an d bottom up develop m en t strategies. Th ere are m an y WBS tem p lates available, an d corporate stan dards
can be referen ced or copied for quick-startin g WBS develop m en t. Wh en usin g gen eric
or corporate WBS tem p lates, it will be im p ortan t to en su re that th e tem plate chosen
for the project closely m atch es the p roject typ e (su ch as a Constru ction WBS tem plate,
an IT Software Develop m en t WBS tem p late, a com m ercial p rodu ct WBS tem p late,
etc.) and is used as a guide or basic stru ctu re that is th en custom ized to fit the n eeds
of th e sp ecific project bein g plann ed. (More in form ation about these tools can be
foun d in Ch apter 5 of this stan dard.)
Th ere are m an y ben efits to u sing tools to develop a WBS. For exam p le, tools often
prom ote con sisten cy an d rep eatability in th e develop m en t of a WBS, esp ecially en terprise produ ctivity tools. WBS tools can also p rom ote an d en force the prin cip les of the
WBS stan dard an d can sign ifican tly redu ce th e develop m en t effort, sim p lifyin g the
WBS p rocess, an d even p rom otin g reusable WBS products.
3.4 WBS Int egrat ion and Use by Other Standards

Scop e m an agem en t is in tegral to oth er PMI stan dards. These in clu de but are n ot
lim ited to: the PMBOK Gu ideTh ird Edition ; Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Ea rn ed Va lu e
Ma n a gem en t (EVM), a n d Or ga n iza t ion a l Pr oject Ma n a gem en t Ma t u r it y Mod el
(OPM3 ). The developm en t of a qu ality WBS is critical to the successful execution of
project m an agem en t p rocesses, as described in th e PMBOK Gu ideTh ird Edition ,
as well as in th e oth er aforem en tion ed stan dards.
Stan dards th at take advan tage of th e WBS typ ically fall into on e of two categories.
Th e first category focu ses on usin g th e con ten t outpu t of th e WBS as an in p u t. PMIs
Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Ea rn ed Va lu e Ma n a gem en t (EVM) an d up com in g Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Schedu lin g fall in to th is category. Sin ce th e con ten t outp ut from a WBS is
92312$$CH3
09-07-06 12:23:31
17
predictable an d well un derstood, su ch stan dards can build u p on or leverage th e Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu resSecon d Edition .
Other stan dards in corp orate the WBS (as defin ed by this practice stan dard) as th e
preferred tool to develop the scop e defin ition for their role. For exam ple, th e PMBOK
Gu ideThird Edition uses the Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctures
Secon d Edition to develop th e project scope, an d OPM3 iden tifies the WBS as a tool
that can be used to develop a p rogram WBS. These stan dards recogn ize the Pra ctice
Sta n d a rd for Work Brea kd own Stru ctu resSeco n d Ed itio n a s rep resen tin g go o d
practice.
The WBS is develop ed to defin e carefully what is in the p roject scope and, by
im p lication , what is ou t of scop e. Th e Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Sch edu lin g (cu rren tly in
developm en t) is based, in p art, on an assum p tion that a h igh-quality WBS h as been
develop ed u sin g good p ractice, correctly defin in g project scop e. When th e project
sch edu le is develop ed, each h igh-level (sum m ary) task m u st corresp on d to a WBS
elem en t. If an activity or task does n ot h ave a relation sh ip to a work p ackage within
the WBS, th en either th e WBS does n ot fully en com pass th e p roject scope, or th e
activity or task is u n n ecessary.
EVM is a m an agem en t m eth odology for in tegratin g scop e, schedu le, an d resources,
an d for objectively m easurin g project p erform an ce an d p rogress. Th e data used in
EVM are dep en den t u pon WBS elem en ts h avin g been developed u sin g good p ractice.
If WBS elem en ts are n ot well defin ed, are too large in scope, are too len gthy in duration ,
or are in som e other m an ner n ot ap propriately decom p osed or developed, it will be
difficu lt to m easure th e p rojects earn ed valu e. The Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Ea rn ed Va lu e
Ma n a gem en t relies u p on a h igh -qu ality WBS as a key in pu t.
The PMBOK Gu ideThird Edition , PMIs p roject m an agem en t stan dard, discu sses
project m an agem en t practice as a wh ole. A core elem en t of project m an agem en t is
scop e m an agem en t, an d the PMBOK Gu ide discu sses the ben efits of usin g the WBS
as a tech n iqu e to m an age an d con trol a projects scop e.
The Sta n da rd for Progra m Ma n a gem en t describes how collection s of related projects
are best m an aged. This stan dard assum es that the WBS for each relevan t project is
develop ed accordin g to good p ractice an d accurately describes th e scop e for the
project.
The Sta n da rd for Portfolio Ma n a gem en t describes how collection s of p rojects or
program s are best m an aged. Th is stan dard assu m es th at th e WBS for each relevan t
project/ p rogram is developed accordin g to good p ractice an d accurately describes th e
scop e for th e p roject.
PMIs OPM3 is an exam p le of a m atu rity m odel th at can be used to m easu re an d
detail an organ ization s m atu rity level, as well as provide a clear path to high er levels
of m atu rity. The WBS is im p ortan t to OPM3 , sin ce OPM3 relies on the ben efits of
processes aim ed at scope m an agem en t. Th is stan dard relies on the developm en t of
a quality WBS as a foun dation for effective project m an agem en t.
3.5 Summary
The WBS is an im portan t tool used in th e p lan n in g an d execution of a su ccessfu l
project. Man y p roject cost, schedule, an d quality failures can be traced directly to
flaws in th e developm en t of the p rojects WBS. It is less likely th at a p roject will be
su ccessful without the existen ce of a qu ality WBS. In con trast, develop in g an d app lyin g
a h igh quality WBS will significan tly in crease the likelih ood of su ccessfu l p roject com pletion . Ch ap ter 4 will provide in sigh t in to th e ch aracteristics an d com p on en ts th at
m ake u p a h igh-quality WBS.
18
92312$$CH3
09-08-06 09:42:54
Chapter 4
Defining WBS Qualit y

4.1 Overview
Wh at is a quality WBS? Th e PMBOK Gu ideThird Edition (Ch ap ter 8) con siders
quality to in volve th e the degree to wh ich a set of in heren t characteristics fu lfills
requirem en ts. This in clu des th e ideas of con form an ce to requirem en ts an d fitn ess
for u se; th at is, the ability to satisfy th e p urp ose for wh ich the item (in th is case, a
WBS) was in ten ded. (See Chap ter 3 of this WBS Pra ctice Sta n da rd for th e uses, p urp ose,
an d im portan ce of the WBS.) To state th at a p articu lar WBS is of h igh quality, on e
m ust agree th at th e WBS h as been created so th at it satisfies the p urp ose for which
it was created.
Th ere are two basic prin cip les th at govern th e quality of a WBS. Th is ch ap ter will
describe th ese prin cip les an d iden tify th e characteristics of a high -quality WBS th at
flows from each p rin cip le. It will illu strate the n egative effects of a poorly con structed
WBS and it will p rovide tools for p roject m an agers to u se in evaluatin g an y sp ecific
WBS that is bein g develop ed. Th e rem ain in g section s of th is ch ap ter are as follows:
4.2 WBS Qu ality Prin ciple 1
4.3 WBS Qu ality Prin ciple 2
4.4 An n otated Exam p le of a High -Qu ality WBS
4.5 Problem Diagn ostic Ch ecklist
4.6 Su m m ary
4.2 WBS Quality Principle 1

A qu a lity WBS is a WBS con stru cted in su ch a wa y th a t it sa tisfies a ll of the requ irem en ts
for its use in a project.
Th ere are two sub-p rin ciples that p ertain to satisfyin g requ irem en ts for use of a
WBS. These describe core ch aracteristics of every WBS an d use-related ch aracteristics
th at describe a p articu lar WBS based on its in dividu al setting an d use.
4.2.1 WBS Qualit y Sub-Principle 1Core Charact erist ics

Th ere is a set of core ch aracteristics that m u st be presen t in every WBS, as these
ch aracteristics en able th e WBS to satisfy p roject n eeds th at are presen t in every project.
92312$$CH4
09-07-06 12:25:47
19
With resp ect to core characteristics, a WBS either has th em or it does n ot, an d, as
su ch, th ese characteristics rep resen t the m in im u m set of sp ecific attributes a WBS
m u st con tain . When evalu atin g or developin g a WBS, the absen ce or presen ce of th ese
core characteristics will dictate wh ether or n ot it is a quality WBS. A WBS with the
followin g core qu ality ch aracteristics can be said to have core quality:
Is a deliverable-orien ted group in g of p roject elem en ts
Defin es the scop e of th e p roject
Clarifies th e work an d com m un icates p roject scope to all stakeholders
Con tain s 100% of th e work defin ed by th e scope
Cap tu res in tern al, extern al, an d in terim deliverables in term s of work to be com p leted, in cludin g project m an agem en t
Is con stru cted so that each level of decom p osition con tain s 100% of the work in
th e p aren t level
Con tain s work p ackages th at clearly sup port th e iden tification of the tasks th at
m ust be p erform ed in order to deliver th e work package
Provides a grap h ical, textual, or tabu lar breakdown of th e p roject scop e
Con tain s elem en ts th at are defin ed u sin g n ou n s an d adjectivesn ot verbs
Arran ges all m ajor an d m in or deliverables in a h ierarchical structu re
Em p loys a codin g sch em e for each elem en t that clearly iden tifies its hierarch ical
n ature wh en viewed in an y form at such as a ch art or ou tlin e
Has at least two levels with at least on e level of decom p osition
Is created by th ose who will be perform in g the work
Is con stru cted with tech n ical in p ut from kn owledgeable subject m atter exp erts
(SMEs) an d oth er p roject stakeh olders, su ch as finan cial an d bu sin ess m an agers
Iteratively evolves alon g with the p rogressive elaboration of project scop e, u p to
th e p oin t the scop e h as been baselin ed
Is u pdated in accordan ce with project ch an ge con trol, thereby allowin g for contin u al
im p rovem en t, after the project scop e h as been baselin ed.
4.2.2 WBS Qualit y Sub-Principle 2Use-Relat ed Charact erist ics

There is an addition al set of u se-related ch aracteristics th at m ay vary from on e WBS
to an oth er. These characteristics en able the WBS to be used for pu rposes that are
un iqu e to a specific project, in dustry or en viron m en t, or are ap plied in a particu lar
way to in dividual p rojects.
With respect to use-related ch aracteristics, the quality of a WBS depen ds on how
well the specific con ten t an d type of WBS elem en ts m eet all th e n eeds for which th e
WBS h as been develop ed. This statem en t im plies that the m ore project n eeds are m et
by the WBS, th e h igh er its qu ality. A high-quality WBS is con stru cted so th at it can
be used to m eet all project requ irem en ts, even if a given p roject does n ot take advan tage
of all of th e characteristics presen t.
Use-related ch aracteristics su p port the ap p lication of WBS practice in situation al
con texts. Th ese can in clude, an d are n ot lim ited to th e followin g:
Ach ieves a su fficien t level of decom position . A WBS is broken down to a level of
detail sufficien t for m anagin g th e work. The ap propriate level of detail to en able
effective m an agem en t can differ from organ ization to organ ization or project to
p roject.
Th e dep th of th e WBS correlates with th e size and com p lexity of the project an d
th e level of detail n eeded to plan an d m an age it.
All deliverables are lim ited in size an d defin ition for effective con trol. However,
th ey sh ou ld n eith er be so sm all that th e cost of con trol is excessive, n or should
20
92312$$CH4
09-07-06 12:25:47
they be so large that th e item is un m an ageable or th e associated risks can n ot

be iden tified.
Provides su fficien t d etail for com m u n icatin g all work. AWBS facilitates con ceptu alization an d defin ition of th e p roduct, service, or result (deliverable) details. But the
degree of WBS detail n ecessary for con ceptu alization of p roject detail can vary. For
exam p le, existin g m odu les can be satisfactorily described by a product n u m ber,
while to-be-design ed com pon en ts m igh t n eed to be described in greater detail. To
en sure clarity of com m u n ication regardin g th e in ten t of an y WBS elem en t, an en try
detailin g sp ecific in form ation about th e WBS elem en t should be placed in th e WBS
Diction ary. Th is will m in im ize m isun derstan din g of the WBS an d, in tu rn , the
project scop e.
Is approp riate for trackin g, as requ ired by th e sp ecific p roject or organ ization .
Som e p rojects or organ ization s can requ ire highly detailed p erform an ce rep ortin g
at th e work p ackage level, wh ile oth ers m ight require on ly su m m ary level rep ortin g
at a WBS rollu p level.
The WBS h as logical su m m ary p oin ts th at assist in trackin g th e evalu ation of
perform an ce accom p lish m ents, resou rce allocation s, costs, an d schedu le perform an ce.
Suitable m an agem en t con trol poin ts are iden tified in the WBS that can be used to
facilitate com m u n ication an d to con trol scope, quality, an d tech n ical sou n dn ess.
In su m m ary, the WBS provides a feasible m echan ism to assess p erform an ce
an d p rogress.
Is app rop riate for con trol activities. A WBS balan ces th e con trol n eeds of m an agem en t with an effective level of p roject detail. It p rovides a good balan ce between
com plexity, risk, an d the project m an agers n eed for con trol.
Shorter, less com p lex p rojects m ay requ ire on ly a few perform an ce assessm en ts
at h igher WBS levels, wh ereas larger, m ore com plex p rojects m ay require m an y
in term ediate reviews at the work package level.
Elem en ts are detailed en ough to m eet p erform an ce m easu rem en ts an d accou n tability objectives, th ereby facilitatin g effective plan n in g, m on itorin g, an d con trol.
Can con tain sp ecific kin ds of WBS elem en ts, as n eeded for each p roject. Som e
projects m ight n eed to in clu de a m ajority of th e followin g typ es of WBS elem en ts,
while other p rojects n eed on ly on e or two:
Som e p roject WBSs can in clu de elem en ts for in tegration , procu rem en t, su pp ly
chain m an agem en t, in form ation / com m u n ication , adm in istration , docum en tation , train in g, an d software develop m en t.
WBS elem en ts rep resen tin g subcon tracted or extern ally com m itted deliverables
shou ld directly corresp on d to m atchin g elem en ts in the subcon tractors WBS.
A WBS m ight in clude level-of-effort WBS elem en ts.
Deliverables from the develop m en t life cycle stages, such as plan n in g, an alysis,
design , assem bly, testin g, an d im p lem en tation , can be reflected in the WBS,
where ap p rop riate.
WBS elem en ts can reflect the deliverables with in the produ ct develop m en t life
cycle, wh ere ap p rop riate, such as in th e IT in dustry.
En ables assign m en t of accou n tability at th e app rop riate level. Som e p rojects or
organization s can require assign m en t of accou n tability at a very detailed, work
package level, wh ile others m ight be satisfied with accoun tability assign ed at a
sum m ary rollup level.
Each WBS elem en t can be assign ed to an accoun table in dividu al, su bcon tractor,
or organ ization al un it.
92312$$CH4
09-07-06 12:25:47
21
Th e WBS can serve as th e m echan ism for docum en tin g the accou n tability an d
respon sibility for th e variou s deliverables by h avin g a direct relation ship am on g
th e WBS elem en ts related to the Organ ization al Breakdown Structu re (OBS) iden tified through the Resp on sibility Assign m en t Matrix (RAM).
WBS elem en ts clearly iden tify accoun tability to th e level of detail requ ired for
m an agin g an d con trollin g the p roject.
Has a su ccin ct, clear, an d logically organ ized structu re to m eet p roject m an agem en t an d oversigh t requ irem en ts. Th e logic of the h ierarchical decom p osition of
a project can vary in resp on se to a variety of project an d organ ization al factors.
Th e WBS decom p osition level balan ces the project defin ition with data collectin g
an d reportin g requirem en ts.
WBS elem en ts a re com p a tib le with releva n t orga n izat io n a l a n d a cco u n tin g
stru ctu res.
4.3 WBS Qualit y Principle 2

WBS qu a lity ch a ra cteristics a pply a t a ll levels of scope defin ition .
Th ere is n o con ceptual differen ce between a p roject WBS, a p rogram WBS, an d a
portfolio WBS. A high -quality WBS develop ed at an y of th ese broader levels possess
precisely th e sam e ch aracteristics an d attribu tes as a high -qu ality WBS developed at
the in dividual p roject level. Th ese differ on ly in the breadth of th e con ten t an d scop e.
4.4 Annotated Example of a High-Qualit y WBS

This WBS exam p le is based on a h yp oth etical organ ization th at bu ilds bicycles to an
in dividu al custom ers sp ecification s. The an n otation s refer to sp ecific characteristics
of a h igh -qu ality WBS. Figure 4-1 illu strates a sim p lified WBS as it p ertain s to a sam p le
project. The project is th e design an d bu ildin g of a bicycle an d is an exam p le of a
WBS to en com pass the work for th is sam ple p roject.
4.4.1 Level 1
This level com prises th e full scope of work n ecessary to produce th e bicycle. It in clu des
all direct an d in direct work. Level 1 is th e overall p roduct, always a sin gle WBS elem en t.
In th is exam p le, th e top level is represen ted by both a n am e an d a WBS iden tifier to
differen tiate it from oth er WBSs in a program or p ortfolio of wh ich it is a m em ber.
This m ay n ot always be the case. If th e p roject stan ds alon e, th e top level or Level 1
iden tifier m ay n ot be requ ired. Wh en th e top level identifier is n ot in clu ded, n u m berin g
for the rem ain in g WBS levels will also chan ge accordin gly.
4.4.2 Level 2
This is th e first level of decom p osition . This level is the h igh -level breakdown of the
m ajor areas in the scope of work. It h olds th e basic com p on en ts of the produ ct, alon g
with in tegration an d p roject m an agem en t. Th e fra m e set is basically the parts you sit
on , steer with, an d to wh ich you attach wh eels an d oth er p arts. Th e cra n k set in cludes
the p edals, bearin gs, cran k arm s, an d sp rocket. The bra kin g system in clu des th e brake
pads an d related m ech an ism s for the wheels, cables, an d levers. The sh iftin g system
22
92312$$CH4
09-07-06 12:25:47
Figure 4-1. Annotated Example of a High-Quality WBS

in cludes th e fron t an d rear sh ift m ech an ism , cables, an d levers. Th is level is n u m bered
as #.#for exam p le, fram e set is 1.1.
4.4.3 Level 3
Th is level decom p oses each m ajor area from Level 2 in to its con stituen t parts. It is
im portan t to n ote th at the 100% Rule is always adh ered to in the develop m en t of a
WBS. Th is level would ten d to start targetin g sp ecific, tangible deliverables of th e
project effort. Here, in tegra tion is decom posed in to in terim deliverables based on th e
project life cycle chosen for this p roject. This level is n u m bered as #.#.#for exam p le,
rear wheel is 1.3.2.
4.4.4 Level 4
In the sam e m an n er, each exclusive area in Level 3 would be decom p osed furth er, if
ap plicable. Again , the com p lexity of the work will drive the depth an d n um ber of
levels of the WBS decom position . Note th at testin g is furth er decom p osed in to th ree
elem en ts: com pon en t test is pre-assem bly testin g; produ ct test is quality con trol an d
92312$$CH4
09-07-06 12:25:47
23
pre-cu stom er test; an d cu stom er test is custom er delivery, fin al adju stm en ts, and custom er acceptan ce. Th is level is n um bered as #.#.#.#for exam p le, Product Test is
1.6.4.2.
4.5 Problem Diagnost ic Checklist

The followin g are rep resentative exam ples of m ajor p roject problem s resu ltin g from
key WBS defects.
There are frequen tly m issed deadlin es an d an exten ded sch edule
Have all m ajor an d m in or deliverables been in cluded? Failure to in clude all
deliverables with in the in itial WBS can in crease p roject sch edules when m issed
deliverables are iden tified.
Have deliverables been defin ed sp ecifically en ough to allow for app rop riate work
p ackages to be develop ed?
Does th e WBS facilitate the use of earn ed valu e m an agem en t tech n iqu es?
Project is over bu dget
Does th e WBS p rovide logical sum m ary p oin ts for assessin g accom plishm en ts,
as well as for m easurin g costs an d sch edu le p erform an ce?
Does th e WBS facilitate the use of Earn ed Value Man agem en t techn iques?
In dividuals are un able to u se th e n ew produ ct or feature
Are deliverables decom posed in to sm aller, m ore sp ecific deliverables? For exam p le, a deliverable of train in g m igh t n ot be decom p osed thoroughly en ough to
cover all of the p eople wh o n eed train in g to u se the n ew p rodu ct, p rocess,
or service.
Are th e WBS elem en ts deliverable-focused?
Were a p p ro p riate a ssem b ly or in tegra tion d elivera b les an d testin g activities
p resen t?
Were train in g an d im plem en tation deliverables defin ed?
The p roject scop e h as ch an ged an d is un m an ageable
Has a WBS been created for th e p roject?
Does th e WBS decom pose th e overall p roject scop e in to deliverables?
Does th e WBS provide a level of flexibility for ch an ge?
Has th e WBS been u pdated when n ecessary ch an ges are ap proved by the chan ge
con trol process?
Has the WBS been p laced u n der ch an ge con trol?
The p roject has becom e an on goin g p roject with no en d in sight
Has a m ain ten an ce plan been develop ed for p ost im plem en tation if n eeded?
Does th e p roject h ave a specific en d poin t?
Does th e WBS in clude a closeou t p hase or plan?
Is th e en deavor actually a p roject or is it an on goin g op eration ?
Project team m em bers are con fused abou t their in dividual resp on sibilities
Do th e WBS elem en ts defin e overlap p in g respon sibilities for th e creation of a
deliverable?
Is the in form ation within the WBS at th e ap prop riate level of detail, an d in
form ats an d structures m ean in gful to those perform in g th e work? If so, were clear
com m un ication p rocesses an d decision authorities agreed up on beforehan d?
Do th e WBS elem en ts reflect work with sp ecific, tan gible deliverables?
Have all key stakeh olders, in cludin g subject m atter exp erts, con tribu ted to th e
creation an d validation of the WBS?
24
92312$$CH4
09-07-06 12:25:47
Som e plan n ed work does n ot get don e

Has all requ ired work been in clu ded in the WBS?
Are the WBS elem en ts deliverable-focu sed?
Has th e WBS organ ized aroun d deliverables rather th an process step s?
Was decom p osition com pleted before depen den cies an d du ration s were defin ed?
4.6 Summary
Th ere are several ch aracteristics th at n eed to be presen t to p roduce a qu ality WBS
deliverable. For a WBS to be con sidered as h igh qu ality, it should con form to its
origin al requ irem en ts an d be fit for use by the p roject. More sim ply stated, it sh ou ld
satisfy the p urp ose for which it was origin ally in ten ded.
In sum m ary, a high-quality WBS:
Is con stru cted in a con sisten t fash ion , varyin g on ly in its level of focus based up on
its in ten ded use
Satisfies th e n eeds of th e p roject
Con tain s all of th e key elem en ts n ecessary to rep resen t the fu ll scope of work
Is u sable by p roject m an agers with a broad base of exp erien ce to m an age th e varyin g
degrees of scope, budget, schedu le, an d risk
Avoids th e com m on p itfalls associated with WBS con struction .
92312$$CH4
09-07-06 12:25:47
25
92312$$CH4
09-07-06 12:25:47
Chapter 5
Considerat ions While Creat ing

a WBS
5.1 Overview
Th ere are m an y ways to create a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS). It can be develop ed
en tirely as a n ew docu m en t, can reu se com pon en ts from existin g WBSs, can be based
on a tem p late, or can follow p re-defin ed WBS stan dards. Wh en reusin g existin g com p on en ts, WBS elem en ts can be drawn from sim ilar projects or from stan dard p roject
tem p lates that th e organ ization has determ in ed su pp ort accep ted good practices.
Th is chap ter discu sses th e m ethods u sed to create a WBS, as well as som e con sideration s that should be taken in to accou n t du rin g WBS developm en t. The section s of
th is ch ap ter are p resen ted as gu ides for u se durin g th e WBS develop m en t process,
while som e section s can be used as checklists for the develop m en t an d refin em en t of
th e WBS. Th e rem ain in g section s of th is ch ap ter are as follows:
5.2 Preparin g a WBS
5.3 Gen eral Factors to be Con sidered
5.4 Essen tial Ju d gm en ts
5.5 Evalu atin g WBS Qu ality
5.6 WBS Usage Con tin u u m
5.7 WBS for Program an d Portfolio Man agem en t
5.8 Su m m ary
All p roject, p rogram , or portfolio requirem en ts n eed to be con sidered du rin g develop m en t of the WBS. A critical factor for su ccess at an y level is the creation of a highquality Work Breakdown Structure.
5.2 Preparing a WBS

Th e WBS evolves th rough an iterative con sideration of the p rojects p urp ose an d
objectives (both busin ess an d techn ical), fu n ction al an d p erform an ce design criteria,
project scop e, tech n ical p erform an ce requirem en ts, an d other tech n ical attributes. A
high -level WBS can often be develop ed early in th e con ceptual stage of the p roject.
On ce the project is defin ed an d specification s are p repared, a m ore detailed WBS can
th en be develop ed. It sh ou ld be cu stom ized to th e specific n eeds an d requ irem en ts
92312$$CH5
09-07-06 12:27:12
27
of the project. All n on -requ ired work an d deliverables sh ou ld be listed an d rem oved
so th e WBS represen ts on ly the projects scop e. The end result is a WBS that rep resen ts
the com plete list of deliverables for the p roject. A n um ber of authors h ave provided
useful guidan ce on p reparin g a WBS (Haugan , 2002; Pritch ard, 1998; Uyttewaal, 2005).
The WBS can assist the project m an ager an d stakeholders in com m u n icatin g a clear
vision of the en d p rodu ct(s) of the p roject, an d of th e overall p rocess by wh ich those
produ cts will be created. It h elps com m un icate th e work to be accom p lished as well
as th e in terim an d en d-p oin t deliverables to be com p leted. With this in m ind, th e
followin g list of qu estion s sh ould stim ulate thou gh t when develop in g a WBS to m an age
a p roject:
Is th e p roject charter defin ed an d issu ed?
Is th e p roject scop e statem en t defin ed an d issued?
Have th e project m an ager an d th e team form u lated a vision of th e fin al p rodu ct(s),
services, or results?
Have person n el who will do the work been assign ed to develop th e WBS?
What are the p rojects com p on en t parts?
How do th e pieces work togeth er?
What n eeds to be don e?
Have th e p rojects in tended bu sin ess objectives been defin ed? Wh at is required to
ach ieve th e bu sin ess valu e?
Has the en tire p roject been th ou ght th rou gh ? Have the high-level deliverables been
p rogressively decom p osed?
Have all deliverables, both in terim an d fin al, been iden tified? Wh at is to be p rovided?
What is requ ired?
Has the relation ship of each com p on en t to th e en d p rodu ct been defin ed? How
will this com p on en t con tribu te to the fin ish ed deliverables?
Has the process for p rodu ction of the deliverables been defin ed? Wh at m eth ods
will be em p loyed? What sp ecial p rocesses will be n eeded? What are the qu ality
requirem en ts? Wh at kin ds of in sp ection s n eed to be don e?
Have the activities th at are n eeded to sup port th e deliverables been iden tified,
in clu din g those th at directly or in directly facilitate their creation ?
H as tech n ica l in p u t fro m kn o wled gea b le Su b ject Ma t te r Exp erts (SMEs) b e en
obtain ed, an d is th at techn ical in p ut com m u n icated to an d validated by other key
SMEs assign ed to th e p roject?
Does the p roject require an y extern al sou rces to con tribute to the p roject an d h ave
th ey been iden tified?
Has all work associated with risk m an agem en t been iden tified? Have risks associated
with p roject assu m p tions been iden tified?
These though ts an d qu estion s are in ten ded to h elp th e p roject m an ager develop a
clear statem en t of wh at the p rodu ct(s) of th e p roject are. Th ey sh ou ld be iteratively
reviewed u n til all question s h ave been com p letely addressed an d all in form ation is
kn own to th e exten t p ossible. On ce com p leted, all of the work p ackages (i.e., the
lowest-level WBS elem en ts) sh ou ld together com prise th e com plete list of deliverables
for the p roject. Th ey depict the p rojects scop e.
5.2.1 Preparat ion Met hods

A n um ber of m eth ods an d tools can be em p loyed to create a WBS in cludin g outlin es,
organ ization charts, fishbon e diagram s, brain storm in g tech n iques, an d top -down an d
28
92312$$CH5
09-07-06 12:27:12
bottom -u p developm en t strategies. WBS tem plates, as well as corp orate guidelin es or
stan dards can be referen ced or cop ied for quick-startin g WBS develop m en t.
Th ere are m an y ben efits to u sing tools to develop a WBS. For exam p le, tools often
prom ote con sisten cy an d rep eatability in th e developm en t of a WBS, especially if it
is an enterprise produ ctivity tool. WBS tools can also prom ote an d en force the prin ciples of the organ ization s WBS guidelin es or stan dards, an d can sign ifican tly redu ce
th e develop m en t effort, sim plify th e WBS p rocess, an d even p rom ote reuse of WBS
elem en ts.
Som e of th e m ore popu lar m ethods em p loyed to create a WBS in clu de a top -down
ap proach, a bottom -u p ap p roach , the use of organ ization -specific WBS guidelin es or
stan dards, an d th e u se of WBS tem p lates. The ch oice of ap prop riate m ethod sh ou ld
be based on the sp ecific p roject objectives, requ irem en ts, assu m p tion s, an d con stra in ts. Tab le 5-1 h igh ligh t s som e a d va n ta ges a n d ch a lle n ges o f th e a fo re m e n tion ed m eth ods.
WBS Creat ion
Met hod
Advant ages
Challenges
Top-Down
Structures project conveniently for

status reporting
Helps ensure projects are logically
structured
Is valuable when brainstorming/
discovering project deliverables
Can accommodate additional
deliverables as they are uncovered
Requires constant attention that no

work packages are overlooked
WBS needs to be elaborated to
sufficiently detailed level to permit
management oversight and control
Bottom-Up
Starts with all deliverables and works

backwards into a project
Confirms that all work packages are
included
Identifying all deliverables before

producing the WBS
Making sure work packages are
logically grouped
Can lose focus on big picture
WBS Standards
Formats are predefined

Enhances cross-project WBS
consistency
Making a project fit the standard

Can lead to inclusion of unnecessary
deliverables or failure to include
project-specific deliverables
Not all projects fit into a highly
structured set of WBS standards
WBS Templates
Provides a starting point for WBS

creation
May help determine appropriate level
of detail required
Enhances cross-project WBS
consistency
Requires a project fit the standard

Can lead to inclusion of unnecessary
deliverables or failure to include
project-specific deliverables
Not all projects fit into a highly
structured set of WBS templates
Table 5-1. WBS Creation Methods
.1 Top -Down
The followin g step s describe th e gen eral top -down process for develop in g a WBS:
Step 1. Iden tify th e fin al products of the p roject wh at m u st be delivered
to achieve p roject success. A th orough review of h igh-level p roject scop e
d o cu m en ts (su ch as St atem en t o f Work a n d Te ch n ica l Req u irem en t s) is
re co m m en d e d to e n su re co n sist en cy b e twe e n th e WBS a n d th e p ro je ct
requ irem en ts.
Step 2. Defin e th e projects m ajor deliverables, wh ich are often in terim deliverables n ecessary for the project, bu t wh ich in th em selves do n ot satisfy a
bu sin ess n eed (su ch as a design sp ecification ).
92312$$CH5
09-07-06 12:27:12
29
Step 3. Decom p ose m ajor deliverables to a level of detail ap propriate for

m an agem en t an d in tegrated con trol. These WBS elem en ts are n orm ally tied
to clear an d discrete iden tification of stan d-alon e deliverable p rodu cts. The
su m of the elem ents at each level shou ld rep resen t 100% of the work in th e
elem en t above it, as n oted in the 100% Rule. Each work p ackage of the WBS
sh ou ld con tain on ly on e deliverable.
Step 4. Review an d refin e the WBS u n til p roject stakeholders agree th at project
plan n in g can be successfully com p leted, an d that execution an d con trol will
su ccessfu lly produce the desired deliverables an d results.
.2 Bottom -Up
Th e followin g step s describe the gen eral bottom -up process for developin g
a WBS:
Step 1. Iden tify all of the deliverables (or work packages) in volved in th e
project. If p articipan ts propose activities, then the associated deliverables,
but n ot the activities, should be in cluded (i.e., tran slate suggested activities
in to associated deliverables). This will en com p ass th e en tire ou tp ut of th e
effort. Each work package should con tain only on e deliverable.
Step 2. Logically grou p related work p ackages (or deliverables) togeth er.
Step 3. Aggregate deliverables to th e n ext level, for in stan ce, th e paren t level.
Th e su m of th e elem en ts at each level sh ou ld rep resen t 100% of th e work
below it, as n oted in th e 100% Ru le.
Step 4. On ce a given grou p of related tasks has been aggregated to a paren t,
an alyze th e subset again to en su re that all of the work h as been en com passed.
Step 5. Repeat u ntil all su belem en ts have been aggregated to a sin gle paren t
represen tin g the project. En sure that the com p leted stru ctu re in clu des all of
th e project scope.
Step 6. Review an d refin e the WBS u n til p roject stakeholders agree th at project
plan n in g can be successfully com p leted, an d th at execution an d con trol will
su ccessfu lly produce the desired deliverables an d results.
.3 WBS (Organ ization al) Stan dards
An organ ization al WBS stan dard is a set of prin cip les for con structin g a WBS
an d m ight in clude a form at, n um berin g sch em e, n am in g con ven tion , or required
elem en ts. WBS stan dards are com m on in m any organ ization s with a h igh level
of p roject m an agem en t m aturity. These stan dards help en su re con sisten cy an d
com p leten ess in WBSs throughout th e organ ization . Exam p les of WBS standards
in clude th e followin g:
Project m an agem en t m u st be a Level 2 WBS elem en t
Grap hical an d textual WBS views m ust be developed an d m ain tain ed.
.4 WBS Tem p lates
A WBS tem p late is a sam p le WBS, with h ierarchical elem en ts filled in to som e
level of detail, or a gen eric WBS con tain er that is cu stom ized (i.e., filled) with
project-sp ecific in form ation . An organ ization can have tem plates for differen t
types of p rojects an d differen t life cycles.
Th e u se of WBS stan dards an d WBS tem p lates help s p rom ote con sisten cy
th rou gh reuse of WBSs or WBS com p on en ts. When reusin g existin g com p on en ts,
be sure to custom ize the WBS to th e specific n eeds an d requirem en ts of the
project. An y n on -required work or deliverables sh ou ld be rem oved so that the
WBS is align ed with th e project scop e. In addition , the question s defin ed in
30
92312$$CH5
09-07-06 12:27:12
Section 5.2 sh ou ld again be iteratively reviewed for th ese two m ethods. The use
of stan dards an d tem p lates in th e creation of WBSs help s p rom ote qu ality
assu ran ce through the app lication of successfully ap plied WBS good p ractices.
The use of WBS stan dards an d WBS tem plates differs from top -down an d
bottom -up m eth odology in th at top-down an d bottom -up are m ethods of creatin g n ew WBSs, while stan dards an d tem plates in volve th e reu se of existin g
WBS m aterials.
5.2.2 Guidance in Choosing a Met hod for Preparing a WBS

In develop in g a WBS, the project m an agem en t team n eeds to decide first wh ich
developm en t m eth od to u se. Th e ch oice between a top-down or a bottom -u p app roach
is som ewhat person al, an d can depen d on th e h abits an d th inkin g styles of th e project
team , as well as on organ ization al practices. Aside from th ose con sideration s, som e
guidelines an d exp lan ation s for which app roach m ight be m ore app rop riate are as
follows:
.1 Top -Down
Use the top-down app roach in th ese situ ation s:
The p roject m an ager an d project m an agem en t team h ave little to n o exp erien ce in d evelop in g Work Breakd o wn Stru ctu res. Top -d own d evelop m en t
allows for p rogressive u nderstan din g an d elaboration of the WBS.
The n atu re of th e p rojects products or services is not well un derstood. Th e
d e ve lo p m e n t o f a WBS jo in tly wit h a ll sta keh old e rs u sin g t h e to p -d o wn
app roach is u seful in gainin g un derstan din g an d con sen sus when th e scope
an d n atu re of th e p roject is un clear.
The n atu re of the project life cycle is n ot fam iliar or well kn own . Top-down
develop m en t of th e WBS m ore easily un covers life cycle issu es an d ch aracteristics.
No ap p ropriate WBS tem p lates are available. Wh en developin g a WBS from
scratch, it is far easier to start with the overall p roject deliverable, su ch as
bu ildin g a bicycle, an d then iteratively determ in e subelem en ts.
.2 Bottom -Up
Use the bottom -u p ap p roach in th ese situ ation s:
The n ature of th e p rojects products or services is well un derstood. For exam p le, if th e organ ization has developed very sim ilar p rodu cts or services on
p reviou s projects, th e p roject team m igh t already have a very good un derstan din g of all in terim deliverables requ ired for the n ew p roject.
The n ature of th e p roject life cycle is well kn own . If th e organ ization always
u ses the sam e project life cycle, the in terim deliverables for that life cycle are
well kn own an d can be used to begin bottom -u p WBS developm en t.
App rop riate WBS tem p lates are available. If th e organ ization h as WBSs from
p rojects with sim ilar p roducts or services, an d th ese can be reu sed, a bottom u p app roach en han ces the team s ability to cu stom ize the WBS tem p late.
.3 WBS Stan d ards an d Tem plates
In gen eral, if WBS stan dards or WBS tem plates are available, th ey should be
used, with the caveats exp ressed in Figu re 5-1. Th ere are plen ty of sam ple WBSs
available in the literature, but the choice to use sam p le WBSs as tem p lates m ust
be m ade carefu lly. Th e organ ization can h ave WBS tem plates for very sim ilar
92312$$CH5
09-07-06 12:27:12
31
projects, an d th e use of these tem plates is h ighly en cou raged. However, if th e

project sign ifican tly differs from oth er projects in th e organ ization , and n o
te m p la t e se e m s to a p p ly, d e ve lo p th e WBS fro m scra tch with a t o p -d o wn
ap p roach .
.4 Iteration s
Con struction of th e WBS is an iterative process an d m ay rely on m ore than on e
m ethod to p rodu ce th e fin al h igh quality WBS. For exam ple, a WBS tem p late
an d the top -down app roach m ay be u sed in itially to determ in e the overall
structu re of th e WBS, wh ile it m ight be m ore ap p rop riate to u se the bottom up m eth od to verify that all the elem en ts are presen t to ach ieve a p articular
deliverable.
Regardless of wh at m ethod is ch osen to p repare the WBS, the resu ltin g WBS m ust
have all th e core ch aracteristics of a high -qu ality WBS. Th e WBS m ust describe 100%
of th e work on th e p roject, m ust be orien ted toward deliverables rath er th an activities,
an d m ust be h ierarchically arran ged. For addition al details on WBS qu ality p rin cip les,
please see Ch apter 4, an d sp ecifically Section 4.2 for a discu ssion of WBS core quality
characteristics.
5.3 General Fact ors t o Be Considered

In developin g a WBS, the followin g basic ten ets should be con sidered:
Each WBS elem en t rep resen ts a sin gle tan gible or in tan gible deliverable.
Deliverables in clu de both fin al an d in terim deliverables that are requ ired to create
th e fin al results.
Deliverables in clu de in tan gible item s, such as in form ation / com m un ication , integration , adm in istration , train in g, process m an agem en t, an d procu rem en t.
All deliverables are exp licitly in cluded in the WBS.
Deliverables are u n ique an d distin ct.
All sign ifican t reportin g m ech an ism s, su ch as review m eetin gs, m on thly reports
an d test rep orts are in clu ded an d iden tified in th e WBS.
Clearly defin in g the p roject deliverables, so th at each is u n iqu e, en su res there will
be n o dup lication in the ou tcom es of the p roject or of th e work p erform ed to
p rodu ce the en d-p roducts.
Accou n tability for each work p ackage can be assign ed to a sin gle p roject team
m em ber or subcon tractor. If th is is n ot p ossible, th en recon sider whether or n ot
th e work package can be fu rth er decom p osed.
Each elem en t in th e WBS rep resen tin g subcon tracted or extern ally com m itted deliverables directly corresp on ds to m atch in g elem en ts in th e su bcon tractors WBS.
The deliverables are logically decom posed to the level th at rep resen ts how they will
be p rodu ced an d m an aged (e.g., design ed, pu rch ased, su bcon tracted, or fabricated).
All WBS elem en ts are com p atible with organ ization al an d accou n tin g structures.
Th e followin g basic guidelin es sh ould be con sidered wh en organ izin g WBS elem en ts
in to th e WBS h ierarchy:
Each WBS elem en t belon gs to on ly on e p aren t WBS elem en t.
The set of ch ild elem en ts in to wh ich a p aren t elem en t is decom posed in cludes all
of th e work con tain ed in the p aren t, su ch th at th e 100% Rule ap plies.
32
92312$$CH5
09-07-06 12:27:12
A codin g sch em e is used for WBS elem en ts th at clearly represen ts the h ierarchical
structu re wh en viewed in text form at.
All legs of the WBS n eed n ot be to th e sam e depth . Som e areas of th e WBS will
n eed to show m ore detail than oth ers.
Th ere is n o n eed to h ave all work p ackages at the sam e level.
Th e WBS develop m en t process shou ld:
Be iterative
Be reviewed an d revised as th e rest of the project plan n in g p rocess progresses
Provide a veh icle for flexibility, p articu larly wh en th e scope of the project effort
m ight chan ge.
A well-m an aged p roject, however, will in corporate a rigorous chan ge con trol process
to docum en t an d m an age scop e chan ges. Wh en work scope ch an ges do take place,
th e WBS m ust be up dated. An y chan ge in the WBS requ ires an associated chan ge in
related p roject m an agem en t tools, such as th e WBS Diction ary, n etwork diagram ,
an d schedu le.
5.3.1 Project Management Knowledge Area Considerations

In th e iterative WBS developm ent p rocess, th e followin g guidelin es an d qu estion s
should be con sidered as they relate to each Project Man agem en t Kn owledge Area in
th e PMBOK Gu ideThird Edition :
.1 Project In tegration Man agem en t
In clu de work in th e WBS for th e in tegration of com p on en ts. Place the WBS
elem en t for com pon en t in tegration at th e sam e level as the com pon en ts bein g
in tegrated.
In clu de work in th e WBS for the n ecessary com m un ication s an d m eetin gs
requ ired for effective in tegration m an agem en t.
Is th e work defin ed by th e WBS group ed in a logical m an n er? Have all rep ortin g
an d con trol m echan ism s been addressed?
.2 Project Scop e Man agem en t
WBS develop m en t is critical to scop e m an agem en t. Revisit the WBS often
an d exp ect to iterate WBS develop m en t.
Are requ irem en ts defin ed an d ap p roved?
Is there a statem en t of work, a set of con tract requirem en ts, or other docu m en ted requirem en ts? Be sure th at each WBS elem en t can be traced to th ese
requ irem en ts. In clu de only th ose activities th at are con sidered in scop e an d
can be traced to con tractual or other requirem en ts.
As the WBS is defin ed, keep a list of activities an d efforts th at are con sidered
to be out of scope. Con firm scop e with stakeh olders often by reviewin g th e
WBS an d the ou t of scope list.
Are all deliverables exp licitly iden tified in the WBS?
Will h orizon or rollin g wave p lan n in g be ap plied to develop or further decom p ose the scop e p rogressively over tim e?
Have h istorical data, risk registries, ch ecklists, an d lesson s learn ed been con su lted to en su re iden tification of all work?
92312$$CH5
09-07-06 12:27:12
33
.3 Project Tim e Man agem en t

Deliverables sh ould be decom p osed to the level of detail n eeded to estim ate
th e effort requ ired to obtain or create th em .
How will the status of work in p rogress be determ in ed?
.4 Project Cost Man agem en t
Deliverables should be lim ited in size an d defin ition for effective control
n ot so sm all as to m ake cost of con trol excessive, an d n ot so large as to m ake
th e item un m an ageable or the risk un acceptable.
How will budgets be establish ed?
Will it be possible to relate the budget to the p rop osed work assign m en ts?
Is the level of detail in the WBS app rop riate for effective p lan n in g an d con trol?
.5 Project Qu ality Man agem en t
Will the quality of th e work be evalu ated th rou gh efforts su ch as testin g an d
in sp ection ?
Are there quality requirem en ts for the p roject? If so, be su re to in clude WBS
elem en ts to docum en t the p eriodic review of qu ality requ irem en ts, qu ality
m an agem en t activities, qu ality au dits, an d qu ality reviews.
Are there requ irem en ts to sh ow com p lian ce with ANSI, ISO or other stan dards?
If so, in clu de WBS elem en ts for ou tside au ditin g of the p roject for com p lian ce.
Are th ere qu ality requ irem en ts defin ed for the deliverables ou tlin ed in th e
WBS?
Have m etrics been defin ed for how th e deliverables will be m easu red?
.6 Project Hu m an Resou rce Man agem en t
En su re th at each WBS elem en t has a sin gle poin t of accoun tability. If a WBS
elem en t m igh t in volve m ore th an on e accoun table p erson , con sider decom posin g th e WBS elem en t.
Is all the work p lan n ed to a degree of detail n ecessary to m ake an d keep
com m itm en ts?
En su re th at the rep ortin g structure in dicated by th is WBS sup ports establishin g an d m an agin g in dividu al work assign m en ts.
Can work assign m en ts be established from a progressive exp an sion of th e
WBS?
How will work generally be assign ed an d con trolled?
Will it be possible to recon cile in dividual work assign m en ts to th e form al
schedu lin g system ?
Is m ore th an on e organ ization in volved, requirin g validation of the WBS with
others before doing detailed resou rce plan n in g?
.7 Project Com m u n ication s Man agem en t
Have all com m u nication n eeds been accou nted for?
Are th ere lon g distan ce, Region al, Nation al an d In tern ation al com m un ication s requ ired?
Are th ere an y sp ecial deliverables requ ired for in tern ation al com m un ication s,
su ch as tran slation s an d oth er cou n try-specific requirem en ts?
Are th ere special com m un ication n eeds for an y deliverables ou tlin ed in the
WBS?
34
92312$$CH5
09-07-06 12:27:12
.8 Project Risk Man agem en t

For areas of th e WBS that are con sidered h igh-risk, con sider decom posin g
the WBS to a m ore detailed level. This will allow better defin ition of assum p tion s an d exp ectation s, and will allow for m ore accu rate plan n in g, thu s reducin g risk.
Are th e deliverables com pletely an d clearly defin ed?
What is the likelih ood of chan ge?
Is th e tech n ology ch an ging faster than the project can be accom plish ed?
Have m an power, facilities cap ability, availability of in tern al resources, an d
p oten tial su pp liers been ch ecked?
Has a form al ch an ge p rocess been defin ed an d im plem en ted?
Have m etrics been defin ed for h ow the deliverables will be m easured?
Have resou rce requ irem en ts been iden tified for develop m en t of the p roject
deliverables?
Have oth er risks been iden tified, in clu din g stakeh older buy-in , pu blic relation s, m an agem en t ap proval, team un derstan din g, an d p roject opp osition ?
Has both an in tern al an d extern al com m un ication p lan been defin ed an d
im p lem en ted?
Are th ird-p arty dep en dencies u n derstood an d m onitored for chan ge?
Have altern ate su pp liers of requ ired p rodu cts, supplies, or exp ertise been
iden tified?
Have h istorical data, risk registries, ch ecklists, an d lesson s learn ed been con su lted to en sure iden tification of all risks?
Has risk m an agem en t and con tin gen cy work been in cluded?
.9 Project Procu rem en t Man agem en t
Is exten sive su bcon tractin g expected?
Is th ere a WBS elem en t for each p rocured deliverable?
Are in tan gible deliverables required for m an agin g th e p rocurem en t p rocess?
Will p rocurem en t be m an aged by th e p roject team or by an existin g procu rem en t organ ization ?
5.4 Essential Judgment s

Effective ap plication of u se-related characteristics relies on exp erien ce an d ju dgm en t.
Th is section exam in es th at con cept in a bit m ore detail. Factors th at can vary from
on e p roject or app lication to an oth er, dep en din g u pon the p urp ose for wh ich th e
WBS is in ten ded, in clude, but are n ot lim ited to, the level of detail n eeded in th e
decom position of th e deliverables, th e selection of th e type of WBS elem en t to be
in cluded, an d structurin g th e logic of the decom position .
5.4.1 Det ermining Appropriat e WBS Level of Det ail

Th e WBS develop m en t process has been described as proceedin g to su ccessive levels
of in creasin g detail, cu lm in atin g in a level of detail that captures all elem en ts of th e
scop e of th e p roject. This p rocess also provides n eeded in sigh t for clear com m un ication s and effective project m an agem en t. Th e level of detail in a WBS is a fu n ction of
th e size of the p roject, an d reflects a balan ce between com plexity, risk, an d the p roject
m an agers n eed for con trol. The level of detail can also vary du rin g the evolution of
a p roject. A top-down an d bottom -up an alysis of th e WBS can clarify whether th e
WBS is both com p lete an d defin ed at the proper level of detail.
92312$$CH5
09-07-06 12:27:12
35
Sh ort-duration projects can len d them selves to decom position to a high degree
(exten sive level) of detail at th e ou tset, wh ile projects of lon ger du ration an d high er
com p lexity can preclude decom p osition of all deliverables un til m ore is kn own about
the p roject. Again , this m ean s that on an y given project, som e portion s of the WBS
can h ave differen t levels of decom p osition . This is esp ecially true when doin g rollin g
wave p lan n in g, wh ere the plan is detailed on ly for the im m ediately up com in g work,
an d work far in the future is defin ed at a h igh level un til later in th e p roject life cycle.
When proceedin g to su ccessive levels of in creasing detail, the 100% rule m ust still
app ly. Th is ru le states th at th e ch ildren n odes of a paren tal n ode m ust m ake u p 100%
of the work of th at p aren tal n ode. Addition ally, n ot all legs of the WBS m ust be
sym m etrical in term s of th e n um ber of levels develop ed. Th ere is n o n eed to decom pose
all legs of th e WBS if the need is on ly p resen t in on e area.
Sh ou ld th e WBS be decom p osed fu rth er? Th e followin g question s p rovide gu idan ce
for determ in in g the n eed for fu rth er decom position of the WBS. If the an swer to an y
of these qu estion s is yes, then fu rther decom position sh ou ld be con sidered. The greater
the n u m ber of p ositive answers, the stron ger th e ju stification for fu rth er division of
som e or all of the WBS.
.1 Scop e an d Work Package Detail
Are clear, objective criteria m issin g for m easu rin g th e p rogress for th e WBS
elem en t?
Does the WBS elem en t con tain m ore th an on e deliverable?
Do p rerequisites differ am on g in tern al deliverables with in the WBS elem en t?
Can a p ortion of the work to be p erform ed with in th e WBS elem en t be scheduled as a u n it?
Are th ere a ccep tan ce criteria a p p lica b le b efo re co m p letion of th e en tire
WBS elem en t?
Is th e WBS elem en t clearly an d com pletely un derstood to th e satisfaction
of th e project m an ager, p roject team m em bers, an d oth er stakeh olders
in cludin g th e custom er?
Are th ere relation sh ips between in tern al WBS elem en t deliverables an d other
extern al WBS elem en ts?
Is th ere a stakeholder in terested in an alyzin g statu s an d p erform an ce of on ly
a p ortion of the work covered by the WBS elem en t?
Can progress of the work be assessed as n eeded?
.2 Resou rces an d Risks
Can the work elem en t be assign ed to a sin gle accou n table in dividu al? While
th ere m igh t be a variety of resou rces assign ed to a given WBS elem en t, th ere
sh ou ld u ltim a tely b e on ly o n e in d ivid u a l accou n ta b le for d elivery o f th e
work p ackage.
Are there sp ecific risks that requ ire focu sed atten tion to a p ortion of th e
WBS elem en t?
Can action able risks be iden tified for each WBS elem en t?
.3 Costs an d Tim in g
Are th ere sign ifican t tim e gaps in th e execution of th e work p rocesses intern al
to th e WBS elem en t?
Is there a n eed to im prove th e accu racy of th e cost an d duration estim ates
of th e WBS elem en t?
Is th ere a n eed to sep arately defin e th e cost of work processes or deliverables
in tern al to the WBS elem en t?
Is there a n eed to precisely kn ow an d report the tim in g of deliverables intern al
to th e WBS elem en t?
36
92312$$CH5
09-07-06 12:27:12
5.4.2 Select ion of t he Type of WBS Element t o be Included

A WBS organ izes an d defin es th e total work scop e of th e p roject. Not every WBS,
however, n eeds to in clude all types of work. Rather, th e kinds of work in clu ded in a
WBS shou ld be dictated by th e scope an d n ature of th e p roject for wh ich the WBS is
bein g develop ed. Som e exam ples of this are p resen ted h ere.
Som e p rojects requ ire certain typ es of WBS elem en ts that are n ot n ecessary for
other p rojects. For exam p le, in a p roject th at in volves p rodu ction of several differen t
com pon en ts that n eed to be assem bled in to a fin ish ed product, it would be n ecessary
to in clu de an in tegration or assem bly WBS elem en t so that th e assem bly work can
be iden tified, resourced, tracked, an d reported. In con trast, a p roject to develop a
busin ess process m igh t n ot requ ire su ch an assem bly elem en t.
All projects requ ire a project m an agem en t WBS elem en t at Level 2, in order to
en sure that th e work of plan n in g, trackin g, an d rep ortin g is adequately cap tu red
an d m an aged. A p articu lar organ ization , however, m igh t require u se of a stan dardized WBS tem p late th at does n ot in clude certain kin ds of p roject m an agem en t
WBS elem en ts (for exam ple, adm in istration , docum en tation , or rep ortin g elem en ts)
because th e n eed for th ese is adequately addressed by other busin ess p rocesses
esta b lish ed b y th at o rga n iza tion . In su ch cases, t h e se elem en ts wo u ld n ot b e
required.
Qu a lity a ssu ra n ce is a p p lica b le to a ll p ro jects. Som e orga n iza tion s cou ld h a ve
requirem en ts for com plian ce with sp ecific qu ality stan dards. In su ch cases, the
WBS m u st in clude elem en ts, such as docu m en tation an d audits, to accoun t for
com plian ce with th e specified procedu res.
5.4.3 St ruct uring t he Logic of the Decomposit ion

An essen tial featu re of a WBS is that it clearly an d com preh en sively defin es th e scop e
of the project work throu gh decom p osition of deliverables into a h ierarch y of sim p ler
com ponen ts, thereby providin g on e of the p rim ary m eth ods for m an agin g com p lex
projects. The way that the project m an ager decom p oses the p roject (i.e., the logic
used for decom p osin g th e work) can vary dep en din g on th e n eeds an d requirem en ts
of th e perform in g organ ization an d th e u se to wh ich th e WBS will be p ut. This is
illustrated by th e followin g exam ples:
On e organ ization m igh t be structu red alon g very strict fu n ction al lin es, with few
busin ess p rocesses that facilitate com m u n ication am on g the sep arate su bun its. In
such a case, it can m ake sen se to stru ctu re th e decom p osition in term s of th e work
an d su b-deliverables that each fun ction in depen den tly con tribu tes. In con trast, in
a p rojectized organ ization without fu n ction al division s, the sam e deliverable m igh t
m ore effectively be decom p osed in to a h ierarchy of su bassem blies.
Wh ere n ew p roduct develop m en t p roceeds in sequen tial stage-like p hases with
later work con tin gen t on the outcom e of earlier work, it wou ld m ake sen se to
organize th e WBS in term s of th e product developm en t life cycle, rather than in
term s of p h ysical com p on en ts of th e p rodu ct.
A food-service en terp rise with region al offices m ight fin d it p articularly valu able to
structu re the WBS for a p rogram to create a n ew chain of restau ran ts as a series
of geograph ic subp rojects, while a cen tralized en terp rise that su b-con tracts, for
in stan ce, buildin g develop m ent, food sourcin g, or m arketin g, would fin d it m ore
useful to decom p ose the n ew restau ran t p rogram in term s of sub-system s.
In all cases, it is im p ortan t that the WBS rem ain deliverable-orien ted, rather th an
process-orien ted, an d explicitly con tain all in term ediate deliverables.
92312$$CH5
09-07-06 12:27:12
37
5.5 Evaluat ing WBS Quality

There are several poin ts th at are con sidered essen tial wh en creatin g a WBS. As detailed
in Ch apter 4, th ere is a set of core ch aracteristics that every WBS m u st have, which
en able it to satisfy p roject n eeds. Failu re to address these con sideration s can lead to
failure of th e p roject, becau se th ere would be a h igh risk of n ot iden tifyin g all of th e
requ ired work.
5.5.1 Core Charact erist ics

The WBS structu re is n ot based on tim in g or sequen ce dep en den cies am on g com p on en ts. Tim in g, sequ en cin g, an d dep en den cies are project schedule con cern s.
The WBS is n ot stru ctu red strictly by p rocess or organ ization .
The WBS defin es th e logical relation sh ips am on g all th e com pon en ts of the project.
All WBS elem en ts are deliverable-orien ted.
Project activities are n ot listed, as th ese are com pon en ts of th e project schedule,
n ot th e WBS.
All elem en t n am es are n ou n s. Verbs are n ot u sed to iden tify WBS elem en ts.
The WBS in cludes on ly su fficien t an d n ecessary deliverables. All deliverables are
n ecessary com pon en ts of the p rojects p roduct, service, or en d result, and are
defin ed in th e projects scop e.
All project deliverables in cludin g regulatory p erm its, packagin g, distribution , or
m arketin g, as well as prelim in ary, in terim , in tern al, extern al, or fin al deliverables,
are iden tified an d detailed.
There are n o WBS elem en ts with overlapp in g respon sibilities. Each WBS elem en t
m ust have on e p erson wh o is clearly accoun table for its com p letion .
Also, as discussed in Chap ter 4, th ere is an additional set of u se-related ch aracteristics that m igh t vary from on e WBS to an other. Th ese ch aracteristics en able the u se
of the WBS for pu rposes that can be un iqu e to a sp ecific p roject, in dustry, or environ m en t, or are app lied in a particular way on in dividual p rojects. With respect to u serelated ch aracteristics, th e qu ality of th e WBS depen ds on h ow well the sp ecific con ten t
an d type of WBS elem en ts m eet th e u se for which the WBS was in ten ded.
5.5.2 Use-Relat ed Charact erist ics

Iden tify key project m an agem en t (n on p rodu ct) work such as:
In itiatin g, p lan n in g, execu tin g, m on itorin g an d con trollin g, an d closin g
Process m an agem en t
Services an d p rovision in g
In form ation / com m un ication
Adm in istrative docum en tation , train in g, an d software.
These should be defin ed as level-of-effort WBS elem en ts in th ose cases where they
can be in terim deliverables, do n ot them selves gen erate discrete deliverables, an d
m ight n ot be in clu ded in the delivery of th e fin al product.
In clu de cross-p roject WBS elem en ts, su ch as those represen tin g op en in g an d closin g
stages, for exam p le, plann in g, assem bly, in tegration , an d testin g.
Balan ce th e project defin ition asp ects of th e WBS with the data collectin g an d
rep ortin g requirem en ts. The p rim ary p urp ose of the WBS is to defin e th e projects
scope th rou gh th e decom p osition of deliverables.
Decom p ose th e WBS to th e ap propriate level of detail by achievin g a balan ce
between project com plexity, risk, an d the project m an agers n eed for m on itorin g
an d con trol.
Do n ot decom pose th e WBS too far. Each WBS is a tool design ed to assist the project
m an ager with decom position of the project on ly to th e levels n ecessary to m eet
38
92312$$CH5
09-07-06 12:27:12
th e needs of th e project, the n ature of th e work, an d th e con fiden ce of the team .

Excessive WBS levels can requ ire u n realistic levels of m ain ten an ce an d rep ortin g.
Do not om it WBS developm en t, su ch as Gan tt ch art, CPM schedu le or p receden ce
diagram before proceedin g to the n etwork diagram . Om ittin g th e developm en t an d
refin em en t of th e WBS can lead to un foreseen an d u n exp ected difficulty, in cludin g
project delays, cost over-ru n s, or outright project failu re.
5.6 WBS Usage Cont inuum

Th e ability of a WBS to m eet th e n eeds of a p roject is directly related to th e level of
project m an agem en t com peten cy available with in the project m an agem en t team .
An experien ced p roject m an agem en t team will be able to iden tify a greater ran ge
of stated an d im plied p roject n eeds that the WBS can address. A m ore experien ced
project m an agem en t team will ensure th e WBS is em p loyed in a greater variety of
project roles, an d will u se the WBS in m ore efficien t an d sophisticated ways th an will
a n ovice or in exp erien ced p roject m an agem en t team . A WBS can be of h igh quality
even if it is n ot bein g u sed to its full cap acity by th e p roject m an agem en t team .
Th e project m an agem en t team s develop m en t an d u se of the WBS as an effective
plan n in g an d con trol tool rep resen ts its p osition on the WBS usage con tin u um . In
other words, on ce th e p roject m an agem en t team begin s usin g a WBS within th e p roject
con text, th eir ability to m ake the WBS p lay an im portan t defin in g an d con trollin g role
for scope, budget, an d risk follows a growth con tin u um sim ilar to that of an y oth er
project m an agem en t m eth odology or tool. The followin g is an exp erien ce con tin uum
for WBS develop m en t an d u se:
Figure 5-1. WBS Usage Continuum
92312$$CH5
09-07-06 12:27:12
39
5.7 WBS for Program and Port folio Management

Accordin g to th e PMBOK Gu ideThird Edition , projects, program s an d p ortfolios
are defin ed as follows:
Project. A tem porary en deavor u n dertaken to create a u n iqu e product, service, or
resu lt.
Program . A group of related p rojects m an aged in a coordin ated way to obtain ben efits
an d con trol n ot available from m an agin g th em in dividu ally. Program s m ay include
elem en ts of related work ou tside of th e scop e of th e discrete p rojects in th e p rogram .
Portfolio. Acollection of p rojects or p rogram s an d oth er work that are grou ped togeth er
to facilitate effective m anagem en t of th at work to m eet strategic busin ess objectives.
The projects or program s of th e p ortfolio m ay n ot n ecessarily be in terdep en den t
or directly related.
Work Breakdown Structures are usefu l n ot on ly for p rojects, but for program s an d
portfolios as well. Use of the WBS at these levels is a growin g p ractice. There is n o
con cep tu al differen ce am on g a project WBS, a p rogram WBS, or a p ortfolio WBS. A
high -qu ality WBS developed at an y of th ese broader levels possesses precisely the
sam e characteristics an d attributes as a h igh -qu ality WBS develop ed at the in dividu al
project level. Th ese differ on ly in th e breadth of th e con ten t (scop e).
All of th e prin cipals defin ed in Section 4 th at app ly to a p roject WBS also app ly to
a p rogram or p ortfolio WBS. Great care sh ou ld be taken , h owever, wh en working with
WBSs beyon d the p rogram level. The difficu lty in verifyin g th at all work an d deliverables
are defin ed in creases sign ifican tly as th e scop e in creases.
5.8 Summary
This ch ap ter has shown that th ere are m an y ways in wh ich a WBS can be created. It
can be developed as an en tirely n ew docu m en t, can reuse com pon en ts from existin g
WBSs, can be based on a tem plate, or can follow p redefin ed WBS stan dards. Regardless
of th e m ethod used to con struct it, th e WBS evolves through an iterative con sideration
of the projects scop e, in clu din g th e p rojects pu rpose an d objectives (both busin ess
an d tech n ical), fu n ction al an d perform an ce design criteria, tech n ical p erform an ce
requ irem en ts, an d oth er techn ical attributes.
This ch ap ter h as presen ted several gu idelin es an d ch ecklists to assist in the p reparation of a WBS. All other Project Man agem en t Kn owledge Areas (su ch as Project Tim e
Man agem en t, Project Cost Man agem en t, an d Project Qu ality Man agem en t) are highly
dep en den t u pon the resultin g WBS. In th e en d, a h igh -qu ality WBS p rovides a stron g
fou n dation up on which to build a su ccessfu l p roject.
40
92312$$CH5
09-07-06 12:27:12
Appendix A
Guidelines for a Project

Management Inst itute Practice
St andard
Each p ractice stan dard p rovides gu idelin es on the m ech an ics (e.g., n u ts an d bolts,
basics, fun dam en tals, step-by-step usage gu ide, h ow it op erates, how to do it) of
som e sign ifican t p rocess (in put, tool, tech n iqu e, or outpu t) th at is relevan t to a
project m an ager.
A p ractice stan dard does n ot n ecessarily m irror th e life-cycle p h ases of m an y p rojects. But, an in dividu al practice stan dard m ay be ap plicable to th e com p letion of
on e or m ore p hases within a project.
A p ractice stan dard does n ot n ecessarily m irror th e kn owledge areas within A Gu ide
to th e Project Ma n a gem en t Bod y of Kn owledge/Th ird Ed ition (PMBOK Gu ide),
although an in dividual p ractice stan dard will p rovide sufficien t detail an d backgrou nd for on e or m ore of the inp uts, tools an d techn iqu es, an d/ or outpu ts. Th erefore, p ractice stan dards are n ot requ ired to u se th e n am e of an y kn owledge area.
Each p ractice stan dard should in clu de in form ation on wha t the sign ifican t p rocess
is and does, why it is sign ificant, h ow to p erform it, wh en it sh ou ld be p erform ed
an d, if n ecessary for fu rth er clarification , who should perform it.
Each p ractice stan dard sh ou ld in clude in form ation that is accep ted an d ap plicable
for m ost p rojects m ost of th e tim e within th e p roject m an agem en t com m un ity.
Processes th at are gen erally restricted or app licable to on e in du stry, coun try, or
com pan ion p rofession (i.e., an ap plication area) m ay be in clu ded as an ap pen dix
for inform ation al p urp ose, rather than p art of the p ractice stan dard. With stron g
sup port an d eviden ce, an ap p lication area-sp ecific process m ay be con sidered as
an exten sion p ractice stan dard, in th e sam e m an n er as exten sion s to th e PMBOK
Gu ideTh ird Edition are con sidered.
Each practice stan dard will ben efit from the in clusion of exam p les an d tem plates.
It is best when an exam p le or tem p late in clu des a discussion of its stren gth s an d
weakn esses. A backgrou n d description m ay be n ecessary to p ut th is discu ssion in
th e app rop riate con text. The exam p les should be align ed with the relevan t in form ation in th e stan dard or its app en dix an d p laced in p roxim ity to th at in form ation .
All practice stan dards will be written in the sam e gen eral style an d form at.
92312$$CH6
09-08-06 04:30:35
41
Each p ractice stan dard project will assess th e n eed to align with or referen ce oth er
p ractice stan dards.
Each p ractice stan dard will be con sisten t with th e PMBOK Gu ideTh ird Edition .
Ea ch p ractice stan d a rd is in ten d ed to b e m ore p rescrip tive t h a n t h e PMBOK
Gu ideTh ird Edition .
42
92312$$CH6
09-08-06 04:30:35
Appendix B
Evolution of t he Project
Management Inst itute Practice
St andard for Work Breakdown
St ructures
B.1 Init ial Development: 19992001
Du rin g the develop m en t an d subsequen t p ublication by th e Project Man agem en t
In stitute (PMI ) of A Gu ide to the Project Ma n a gem en t Body of Kn owledge (PMBOK
Gu ide), it was recogn ized that p roject m an agem en t practitioners an d oth er stakeh olders would be aided by m ore in -dep th treatm en t of th e listed in pu ts, tools an d tech n iqu es, an d outp uts. Con sequen tly, in early 1998, PMI asked for volu n teers to develop
th e first su ch practice stan dard, specifically on the Work Breakdown Stru ctu re (WBS).
A volu nteer team was assem bled an d durin g the year worked throu gh a n u m ber of
drafts an d revision cycles.
In early 1999, PMI Project Man agem en t Stan dards Program Team reviewed the
draft and recom m en ded the com pletion of th e Pra ctice Sta n da rd. In late sp rin g 1999,
Kim Colen so was ap p roved as th e n ew project m an ager for th e Pra ctice Sta n da rd. He
was tasked to form a n ew team to m ake m in or m odification s to th e curren t draft, an d
add exam ple WBSs. The p lan was to p ublish the Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown
Stru ctu res in an Exp osure Draft to th e PMI m em bership an d other affected parties by
th e sum m er of 2000, an d a fin al docum en t would be pu blish ed as a PMI Stan dard
in 2001.
A team was assem bled du rin g the su m m er an d fall of 1999 th rough solicitation of
participation from the PMI Sp ecific In terest Group s an d other volu n teer sou rces.
Du rin g th is p eriod, a con troversy develop ed within the p roject team as to wh ether or
n ot an activity was or sh ou ld be part of th e WBS. Through fu rth er discu ssion am on g
th e p roject team an d am on g th e PMI Project Man agem en t Stan dards Program Mem ber
Advisory Group , th e issue was resolved, an d an article describin g th e ou tcom e was
pu blished in the PM Network in Ap ril 2000 (see Referen ces).
Th e p roject team im p lem en ted a form al ch an ge-con trol p rocedure to gu ide an d
con trol th e evolution of th e practice stan dard. This p rocedure requ ired all p rop osed
92312$$CH7
09-08-06 04:33:22
43
chan ges to be docu m en ted an d app roved by the project team . As a resu lt of th is
process, the followin g events occu rred:
The team judged th e stru cture of th e sp ecific workin g draft su pp lied by the PMI
Pro je ct Ma n a gem en t St a n d a rd s Pro gram Te am to b e u n sa tisfa cto ry. With th e
app roval of th e PMI Project Man agem en t Stan dards Program Team , that draft
was replaced with the earlier Novem ber 1998 draft, to which all fu rth er chan ges
were ap p lied.
Ove r fo rty fo rm a l ch a n ge re q u ests were su b m itted an d a p p ro ved b y t h e tea m
between October 1999 an d Ap ril 2000. An other six were disap p roved, as the argum en ts were deem ed u np ersu asive.
Twelve WBS exam p les were ap proved an d in corporated as Ap p en dices D throu gh
N of this p ractice stan dard.
The revised draft was su bm itted to th e PMI Project Man agem en t Stan dards Program
Team in May 2000 for consideration as th e exposure draft to be circu lated am on g
PMI m em bersh ip an d other affected p arties. Followin g ap proval by the PMI Project
Man agem en t Stan dards Program Team , th e p roposed exposu re draft was subm itted
for form al review to six other kn owledge exp erts. The team evaluated the com m en ts
from th ese six reviewers and the PMI Project Man agem en t Stan dards Program Team .
A fin al draft was th en subm itted to th e PMI Project Man agem en t Stan dards Program
Team an d ap proved for the exp osu re draft.
The exp osu re draft was su bm itted for p ublic review on 29 Sep tem ber 2000, with
an exposu re closure on 30 Novem ber 2000. Du rin g th is period, 488 com m en ts were
received. All com m en ts that th e p roject team accepted for the curren t version h ave
been in corp orated.
When we look at th e PMBOK Gu ideTh ird Edition , it is a rem arkable ach ievem en t.
It h as gon e through an evolu tion ary process for fou rteen years. Each edition h as
im p roved u pon th e p revious version . After several edition s, th e resu lt is an extrem ely
refin ed an d p owerful docum en t. Th e sam e will be tru e for th e Pra ctice Sta n dard for
Work Brea kdown Stru ctu res. It h as gon e th rough its in itial develop m en t. Now it is
ready to begin its jou rn ey through th e refin em en t p rocess.
B.2 Second Edition: 20032006

In Ap ril of 2003, the Practice Stan dard for Work Breakdown Stru ctures u pdate team
received its charter from the PMI Stan dards MAG (Mem bersh ip Advisory Group) an d
began th e u pdate to the first p ractice stan dard p ublish ed by PMI. Followin g gu idan ce
received from th e Stan dards Man ager an d MAG regardin g app roach , strategy, objectives, con ten t, size, an d structure, the team exam in ed th e existin g p ractice stan dard
as well as com m en ts an d recom m en dation s received durin g th e p reviou s review an d
publication cycles. Th e u p date team also con ducted su rveys of p roject m an agers from
a cross section of in dustries.
This an alysis, wh ich span n ed a n u m ber of m on th s, revealed th e n eed for sign ifican t
chan ge to th e p ractice stan dard to clarify the gu idan ce it p rovides an d im p rove its
relevan ce. To su m m arize, th e u pdate team fou n d there was a n eed to:
En sure th e p ractice standard p rovides a con sisten t app roach to WBS developm en t
th roughout th e body of th e docu m en t
Up date th e con ten t to brin g gu idan ce in lin e with curren t p ractice an d WBS app lication
Use exam p les an d figures throu gh ou t to clarify guidan ce p rovided
44
92312$$CH7
09-08-06 04:33:22
Provide n ew m aterial with in the p ractice stan dard to clearly explain differen ces
between p oorly an d well-con structed work breakdown structures
En sure the ap p en dices reflect the gu idan ce provided in th e p ractice stan dard an d
provide a greater n um ber of varied exam p les
Provide a breakdown (WBS exam p le) of th e project m an agem en t work defin ed by
th e PMBOK Gu ideThird Edition
Add tem plates (WBS exam p les) that can be extracted an d m odified by p ractition ers
who p u rch ase the practice standard
Provide a detailed p ersp ective of the historic evolu tion of th e con cep ts relatin g to
work breakdown structu res
Syn chron ize th e WBS p ractice stan dard with th e latest release of the PMBOK
Gu ideTh ird Edition
Lim it th e con ten t to WBS-related top ics on ly, rem ovin g con ten t related to schedulin g, Earn ed Value Man agem ent an d other n on -WBS item s.
With these item s as an outlin e for th e desired ou tcom e an d the an alysis described
above as the startin g p oin t, th e u pdate team began fram in g the secon d edition of the
practice stan dard. By u sin g an iterative developm en t p rocess, in tern al team com m en t
review cycles, as well as SME (Subject Matter Exp ert) reviews an d in terviews, the team
developed th e latest up dates to the p ractice stan dard con ten t. Th e team addition ally
worked closely with PMIs stan dards organ ization to design th e app rop riate con text
for p u blication of th e n ew stan dard reflectin g latest tech n ology an d the n eeds of the
project m an agem en t com m un ity at large.
As a result, th e up dated stan dard, Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu resSecon d Edition , n ow con tain s th e followin g ch an ges an d im provem en ts:
Material in each of th e origin al ch ap ters h as been rewritten for clarity
A n ew chapter on WBS Qu ality was added
Th e origin al ap pen dices were revised to reflect cu rren t p ractice an d qu ality attribu tes
Ap p en dices have been added to illum in ate various m ethods for rep resen tin g th e
WBS
A CD-ROM is in cluded with th e p ractice stan dard an d will con tain th e body of th e
practice stan dard, the ap p en dices, an d th e white p ap er
All of the exam ples fou n d in the app en dices will be extractable from the CD-Rom
as tem p lates for use in WBS developm en t
Most im p ortan tly, th e u pdate team worked to en sure synchron ization am on g the
latest release of th e Practice Stan dard for Work Breakdown Structu res, the PMBOK
Gu ideTh ird Edition , th e curren t Earn ed Valu e Man agem ent Practice Stan dard, an d
th e latest release of PMIs Lexicon for Project Man agem en t, while at the sam e tim e
partn erin g with th e Practice Stan dard for Sch edu lin g Team an d an ticip atin g the release
of a n ew Practice Stan dard for Sch edulin g.
To supp ort th e n eeds of project m an agers in todays environ m en t, th is u p dated
practice stan dard provides th e reader with n ew guidan ce regardin g WBS con struction
an d qu ality attribu tes. Beyon d this, th e u pdate to th e p ractice stan dard will be pu blished as a h ardcop y docu m en t an d will in clu de a CD-ROM to p rovide th e reader
with the ability to scan an d search the en tire docu m en t for sp ecific words or con ten t.
Th e CD-ROM will also carry cop ies of each of th e app en dices fou n d in the practice
stan dard. Th e electron ic version s of the app en dices will be presen ted as tem p lates
th at can be, extracted, cop ied an d m odified by p roject m an agers for use in th eir own
projects an d p rogram s.
92312$$CH7
09-14-06 11:03:17
45
We believe the latest release of th e Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu res
reflects the ou tstan din g ach ievem en t of th e team that created the first edition an d
con tin ues the tradition of exten din g an d en h an cin g th e docu m en t wh ile setting the
stage for th e con tin ued evolu tion of th e practice stan dard.
46
92312$$CH7
09-08-06 04:33:22
Appendix C
Cont ribut ors and Reviewers of

t he Pract ice St andard for Work
Breakdown St ructuresSecond
Edit ion
Th is appen dix lists, alph abetically within group in gs, th ose individu als wh o have con tributed to th e develop m en t an d produ ction of th e Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu resSecon d Edition . No sim p le list or even m ultiple lists can adequ ately
portray all th e con tribu tion s of those who h ave volun teered to develop th e Pra ctice
Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Structu resSecon d Edition . Ap p en dix B describes sp ecific con tribution s of m an y of th e in dividu als listed below an d sh ould be con sulted
for fu rther in form ation about in dividual con tribu tion s to the project.
Th e Project Man agem en t In stitute is grateful to all of these in dividu als for th eir
sup p ort an d ackn owledges th eir con tribution s to the p roject m an agem en t profession .
C.1 Practice St andard for Work Breakdown St ruct uresSecond

Edit ion Project Core Team
Th e followin g in dividuals served as m em bers, were con tributors of text or con cepts,
an d served as leaders with in th e Project Core Team (PCT):
Eric S. Norm an , PMP, Project Man ager
Sh elly A. Brotherton , PMP, MPM,
Dep uty Project Man ager
Jim Christie, PMP
Robert T. Fried, PMP

Maggie Godbold, PMP, CQM
George A. Ksan der, PMP
Giu sepp e A. Sarrica, PMP
C.2 Significant Contributors

Sign ifican t con tribu tors su pp orted key activities for th e u pdate to th e Practice Stan dard
in cluding editin g an d sub-team p articip ation in p roject efforts su ch as Con ten t, Au th or-
92312$$CH8
09-22-06 10:36:50
47
in g, Qu ality, Com m u n ication s an d Research sub-team s. Th e u p date projects sign ifican t con tributors offered depth of kn owledge an d insight as Subject Matter Experts
(SME) in th eir fields of practice. In addition to the m em bers of the Project Core Team ,
the followin g in dividu als provided sign ifican t su p port, in p ut or con cepts:
Thom as L. Barn ett, PMP
An drea Macias
Tom Malicki
Lin da H. Nelm s, PMP
Roy D. Pollack, PMP

Han s (Ron ) Ron h ovde, PMP
Eric Uyttewaal, PMP
Ju lizvar Wu, MM, PMP
C.3 Pract ice Standard for Work Breakdown St ructuresSecond

Edition Project Team Members
In addition to those listed above, th e followin g Practice Stan dard for Work Breakdown
Structu resSecon d Edition Team Mem bers p rovided in p u t to an d recom m en dation s
on drafts of th e Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu resSecon d Edition :
Syam a Adhibh atta, PMP
Vivek Agarwal
Arch Alejan dro Arellan o
Bon ita A. Best, MBA, TM
Rajat Bh atn agar, PMP
Thom as S. Brin ks, PMP
Din o Butorac, PMP
Lloyd A. Case
Naga San kar Chin n akotla
Bhaskar Chowdhu ry, PMP
Billy Cotton e
Richard D. Cu rtin , PMP
Satish Dave, PMP
Rap hael M. Dua, FAICD, MACS
Robert C. En derle, PMP
Felix Kayode Eretan
Olatu n ji Faton a, PMP
Scott Graffius, PMP
Mah n az Hajireza
Holly Hickm an
Edm un d N. Hu don , PMP
Kh alid Ish aque
Sh ally Iyer
M. Aam ir Jelan i
Praveen Jon n alagadda, Ph.D., PMP
William J. Kan field, PMP
Sh aron Kin n ey-Rom eo, PMP
Abhilash Ku zh ikat, PMP, ITIL
Mushu an g Liu
Levi Ma
Adil Marsam an e
Lito O. Matados, PE
Dan iel H. Miralles, PMP
Bogdan Moldovean u , PMP
48
Priu m vada Agarwal, PMP

Nagy V. An dras Peter
Sum an Batra
Gayathri Bh ashyam
Subbarao Bop pan a, PMP
Paul R. Bu ckthal, PMP
San geeta Carter
Mark Cassorla
Ash wini Chouthai, PMP
Ken Christian sen , PMP
Fabienn e Coutard
Doaa K. Darwish, PMP, CCT
Pram od Dhu m al, PMP
Lisa L. Doyle
Bill En gel, PMP
Adrian Alberto Fajardo-Brou
John H. Glan der
Hu ipin g Gu o, PMP
Matthew Han di, PMP
Ken t A. Hop kin s, MBA, PMP
Patrick F. In fan te, PMP
Ko Ito, PMP
Valerie A. Jach im owicz Esq., PMP
Ram p rasad Jillala, PMP
Atu l Josh i
Sam in ia Karim , PMP
Maria Kon toyian n i, Ph.D.
John son Liu
Hrvoje Loren cin
Krish n a Mohan Malladi, PMP
Tracey Alin a Martin
David McKen n a, MSc., PMP
An n a Mlyn ski, PMP
Marion Mon tgom ery, PMP
92312$$CH8
09-22-06 10:36:50
Michael Morton
Pia Nielsen Wagn er
David Oleski
Ram esh Palan iyan di, Msc, ISP
Kath ryn H. Perito, MBA, PMP
Elen a Pop ova
Deep esh Rastogi
Jen n ifer Read, PMP
Jam es Clayton Redm on d
Don ald G. Ritch ie, MBA, PMP
Vin ay R. Shah, PMP, P.En g.
Tim othy Sheridan , PMP
Patricia Sm ith
Joh n E. Spaeth, PMP
Elfreda Strydom
Nagla Tom a
Margaret Tu m m in ia
Eduardo Newton O. Viera
Kevin R. Wegryn , PMP, CPM
Mari William s
Doug Win ters, PMP, SSBB
Kashif Zu bair
Kerry Mu lloy, PMP

Iren e Norm an
Cagla Oz
Ken n eth Pao, PMP
Earl Vin cen t Pin eda, MSC
Catherin e Proch aska
Kastu riran gan Rajagop alan
Vedhavalli Reddy, PMP
William Rin i, PMP
Colin Roberts, PMP
An ku r Sh arm a
Elizabeth Sm ith
An ton io Jose Soares, PMP
Jam es C. Steele
Mariko Su gi, PMP
Un m esh L. Trivedi
Bren da Vern o
Clau de A. Walz, PMP
Lan ce William s, MS/ MIS, PMP
Marc Lee Winn ig
Yin g Kai Won g
C.4 Final Exposure Draft reviewers and contributors

In addition to team m em bers, th e followin g in dividuals p rovided recom m en dation s
for im provin g th e Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu resSecon d Edition :
Ran dall P. Ash, PMP
Hussain Ali Al-An sari, Eu r In g, C En g.
Moham m ed Abdulla Al-Kuwari, PMP, C Eng.
Moham m ed Safi Batley, MIM
Alex S. Brown , PMP
Lorri Clin e, MBA, PMP
Joh n E. Corm ier, PMP
Julia A. Cun n in gham , PMP
Wan da Cu rlee, PMP
Roy C. Green ia, PMP
Ken n eth P. Katz, PMP

Th om as M. Kurihara
Edward Logan , CBM, MSPM
Glen Maxfield, PMP
Tim oth y A. MacFadyen , MPM, PMP
Kazuh iko Okubo, PMP, PE
Han s (Ron ) Ron hovde, PMP
Larry Sieck
Carol Steuer, PMP
Ed Th om son , PMP
C.5 PMI Project Management Standards Program Member Advisory

Group
Th e followin g in dividu als served as m em bers of the PMI Stan dards Program Mem ber
Advisory Grou p du rin g developm en t of the Pra ctice Sta n dard for Work Brea kdown
Stru ctu resSecon d Edition :
Julia M. Bedn ar, PMP
Carol Holliday, PMP
Th om as Ku rih ara
Debbie OBray
Asbjorn Rolstadas, Ph .D.

Cyn di Stackp ole, PMP
Bobbye Un derwood, PMP
Dave Violette, MPM, PMP
92312$$CH8
09-22-06 10:36:50
49
C.6 Product ion Staff

Sp ecial m en tion is due to th e followin g em ployees of PMI:
Ruth An ne Guerrero,
PMP, Stan dards Man ager
Kristin L. Vitello,
Stan dards Project Specialist
Nan Wolfslayer,
Stan dards Project Specialist
Don n Green berg,
Man ager, Pu blication s
Dan Goldfischer,
Editor-in -Ch ief
Barbara Walsh , CAPM,
Pu blication s Plan n er
50
92312$$CH8
09-22-06 10:36:50
Appendix D
Bicycle Work Breakdown

St ructure (WBS) Example
D.1 Overview
In Chapter 3, Work Breakdown Structu re (WBS) u se-related ch aracteristics were
described. Th ese are WBS ch aracteristics that vary from on e p roject to an oth er so that
th e WBS better satisfies th e requirem en ts of a specific project, in dustry or en viron m en t.
Con sisten t with th is p rin cip le, a WBS can be represen ted in a variety of ways in
order to ach ieve a sp ecific pu rpose in a sp ecific situation . A sin gle WBS m ay also be
rep resen ted in m ore than on e way in variou s situation s on a given project. This
ap pen dix illu strates a n um ber of form ats th at are fou n d in com m on practice today.
All of these rep resen tation s, as well as others n ot in cluded here, m ay be u sed to detail
th e scope of a sp ecific p roject. To allow th e reader to focu s on th e differen ces am on g
th e variou s represen tation s, a sin gle WBS will be u sed to illu strate each form at.
To h elp sim p lify the com parison of these WBS form ats, we have chosen th e bicycle
project exam p le described in the text of th e p ractice stan dard.
D.2 Outline View

A very com m on represen tation of th e WBS is th e Ou tlin e View in wh ich each level of
th e WBS is shown by the level of inden tation an d is accom p an ied by an alp han u m eric
outlin e code, or n um berin g schem e. Ou tlin e views are readily develop ed usin g a
n um ber of com m on tools, in cludin g word p rocessors an d sp readsheets
1 Bicycle
1.1 Fram e Set
1.1.1 Fram e
1.1.2 Han dlebar
1.1.3 Fork
1.1.4 Seat
1.2 Cran k Set
1.3 Wh eels
1.3.1 Fron t Wh eel
1.3.2 Rear Wheel
1.4 Brakin g System
92312$$CH9
09-22-06 10:39:17
51
1.5 Sh iftin g System

1.6 In tegration
1.6.1 Con cep t
1.6.2 Design
1.6.3 Assem bly
1.6.4 Testin g
1.6.4.1 Com p on en t Test
1.6.4.2 Product Test
1.6.4.3 Custom er Test
1.7 Project Man agem en t
For som e pu rposes, th e ou tlin e view m igh t n ot u se in den tation , but sim p ly sh ow the hierarchical stru cture th rou gh th e n um berin g sch em e:
Level
WBS
Code
Element Name
Bicycle WBS
1.1
Frame Set
1.1.1
Frame
1.1.2
Handlebar
1.1.3
Fork
1.1.4
Seat
1.2
Crank Set
1.3
Wheels
1.3.1
Front Wheel
1.3.2
Rear Wheel
1.4
Braking System
1.5
Shifting System
1.6
Integration
1.6.1
Concept
1.6.2
Design
1.6.3
Assembly
1.6.4
Testing
1.6.4.1
Component Test
1.6.4.2
Product Test
1.6.4.3
Customer Test
1.7
Project Management
Table D-1. Hierarchical Structure

Elim in atin g in den tation m ay m ake th e WBS less in tuitive for th e reader, but m ay save
sp ace in certain docu m en ts.
D.3 Tabular View

An oth er com m on rep resentation of a WBS is the Ta bula r View in which th e h ierarch ical
stru cture is rep resen ted throu gh colu m n s in a table. Tabu lar views are com m on in
52
92312$$CH9
09-22-06 10:39:17
situ ation s where it m ay be difficu lt to u se a m ore graph ical form at, such as text
docu m en t with lim ited form attin g capability.
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
1 Bicycle WBS
1.1 Frame Set
1.1.1
1.1.2
1.1.3
1.1.4
Frame
Handlebar
Fork
Seat
1.2 Crank Set

1.3 Wheels
1.3.1 Front Wheel
1.3.2 Rear Wheel
1.4 Braking System
1.5 Shifting System
1.6 Integration
1.6.1
1.6.2
1.6.3
1.6.4
Concept
Design
Assembly
Testing
1.6.4.1 Component Test
1.6.4.1 Customer Test
1.7 Project Management

Table D-2. Tabular View 1
A differen t type of tabular structure is som etim es en coun tered in govern m en t p ublication s. Su ch displays often in clude addition al in form ation su ch as cost accoun tin g
codes, organ ization al elem en ts respon sible for the WBS elem en t, etc. It m ay be difficu lt
to disp lay m ore th an a few levels of a WBS usin g this form at.
Bicycle WBS 1
1.1 Frame Set
1.1.1 Frame
1.1.2 Handlebar
1.1.3 Fork
1.1.4 Seat
1.2 Crank Set

1.3 Wheels
1.3.1 Front Wheel
1.3.2 Rear Wheel
1.4 Braking Syst em
1.5 Shifting System
1.6 Integration
1.6.1 Concept
1.6.2 Design
1.6.3 Assembly
1.6.4 Testing
--------------------------------------------------1.6.4.1 Component Test
1.6.4.3 Customer Test
1.7 Project Management

Table D-3. Tabular View 2
92312$$CH9
09-22-06 10:39:17
53
D.4 Tree Structure View

On e of th e m ost com m on ways to rep resen t a WBS is the grap hic Tree Stru ctu re, or
Organ ization al Chart stru ctu re in which each child elem en t is shown as a box
with a lin e con n ectin g it to the p aren t elem en t of which it is a com p on en t. This
rep resen tation m akes very explicit th e way in which the p roject an d the su bordin ate
com p on en ts are h ierarch ically decom posed in to sm aller an d sm aller elem en ts. Th e
m ost com m on version of th e tree structu re places th e p roject at the top level with
su ccessive levels of decom p osition below.
Figure D-1. WBS Tree Structure View 1
54
92312$$CH9
09-22-06 10:39:17
Altern atively, th e orien tation of th e WBS Tree Structu re view m ay be m odified. In

th ese cases, th e p roject m ay be p laced on th e left with lower levels of decom p osition
m ovin g to the righ t. For som e pu rposes a lan dscap e orien tation m ay be u sefu l. Below
are two sim ilar exam p les of this.
92312$$CH9
09-22-06 10:39:17
55
56
92312$$CH9
09-22-06 10:39:17
Or in oth er cases, a horizon tal portrait orien tation m ay be m ore u seful.
Figure D-4. WBS Horizontal Tree Structure View
92312$$CH9
09-22-06 10:39:17
57
An in creasin gly p opu lar form at is the Cen tra lized Tree Stru ctu re. Th is typ e of form at
is p roduced by software that is used for facilitatin g developm en t of th e WBS through
real tim e grou p in teraction s. Below are two exam p les of the cen tralized tree structure WBS.
Figure D-5. WBS Centralized Tree Structure View 1
58
92312$$CH9
09-22-06 10:39:17
Figure D-6. WBS Centralized Tree Structure View 2
92312$$CH9
09-22-06 10:39:17
59
D.5 Enhanced Uses of t he WBS

By in cludin g in form ation in th e WBS in addition to the core WBS Elem en t Nam e an d
WBS Code, th e WBS can becom e the exp licit m ean s for in tegratin g other project
m an agem en t p rocesses with scop e.
On e exam ple of su ch en han ced u se is th e WBS Diction ary wh ich adds a detailed
defin ition of each WBS Elem en t. Th e WBS Diction ary m ay also in clude key cost con trol
an d resource assign m en t inform ation , as in the followin g exam p le. Note that the cost
con trol n um ber colu m n is left blan k, which can be a placeholder for the in form ation
on ce it is m ade available when th e order is taken .
Level
WBS
Code
Element
Name
Definition
Cost
Control
Number
Responsible
Organization
Bicycle WBS All components and subassemblies

required to specify design, assembly
and testing of a custom bicycle.
Customer Sales and

Support
1.1
Frame Set
The individual components that

together constitute the frame once
assembled
Customer Sales and

Support
1.1.1
Frame
The unit tubular steel structure to

which other components are attached.
Provides basic design and strength.
Customer Sales and

Support
1.1.2
Handlebar
Used by rider to steer bicycle. Also

serves as point of attachment for
hand brakes, lights, and other
accessories. Style to be selected by
customer.
Customer Sales and

Support
1.1.3
Fork
Attaches wheel(s) to frame. Must be

selected to match frame.
Customer Sales and

Support
1.1.4
Seat
Padded saddle attached to frame for

rider to sit on. Style to be selected
by customer.
Customer Sales and

Support
1.2
Crank Set
Mechanical linkage for converting

riders pedaling action into rotation
of rear wheel to provide propulsion.
Part selection is determined by
customers performance
specifications and compatibility with
other mechanical components.
Customer Sales and

Support
1.3
Wheels
Interface with ground. Customer may

select among several options with
respect to materials, weight, and
aerodynamic styling.
Customer Sales and

Support
1.3.1
Front Wheel
Front wheel is specialized for steering

through attachment of handlebars.
Customer Sales and

Support
1.3.2
Rear Wheel
Rear wheel is specialized for

propulsion.
Customer Sales and

Support
1.4
Braking
System
Mechanical system for converting

hand pressure into friction on the
wheel rim to control speed.
Customer Sales and

Support
60
92312$$CH9
09-22-06 10:39:17
Level
WBS
Code
Element
Name
Definit ion
Cost
Cont rol
Number
Responsible
Organizat ion
1.5
Shifting
System
Mechanical linkage system for changing

position of chain on rear wheel
sprocket to adjust leverage and gear
ratio to match riding conditions.
Customer Sales and

Support
1.6
Integration
The complete design, assembly and

testing of the bicycle.
Customer Sales and

Support
1.6.1
Concept
High level vision of finished bicycle

desired by customer. Usually
communicated to sales to serve as the
basis for the bicycle design.
Customer
1.6.2
Design
The complete set of specifications that

defines the finished bicycle. Developed
by engineering department to satisfy
customers concept of the bicycle.
Engineering Dept.
1.6.3
Assembly
The series of sub-assemblies that

together result in creation of the
finished bicycle.
Manufacturing Shop
1.6.4
Testing
The series of inspection and

measurements performed to determine
whether the individual components and
finished bicycle meet the design
specifications and customers vision of
the finished bicycle appearance and
performance.
Quality Control
Organization
1.6.4.1
Component
Test

whether the individual components
meet the design specifications.
Quality Control
Organization
1.6.4.2
Product Test

whether the sub-assemblies and
finished bicycle meet the design
specifications.
Quality Control
Organization
1.6.4.3
Customer
Test

measurements performed by the
customer to determine if the finished
bicycle matches the expectations of the
finished bicycle appearance and
performance.
Customer
1.7
Project
Management
The skills and processes used to

ensure that the bicycle is designed,
built, and delivered in accordance with
quality, cost, and schedule that were
agreed upon by the customer.
Project Management
Organization
Table D-4. WBS Dictionary

Th ere m ay also be occasion s when a WBS m ay con tain less in form ation th an is
stan dard u sage. For exam p le, for com m un ication of th e WBS to a n on -techn ical audien ce such as the cu stom er or sen ior m an agem en t, it m ay en han ce the com m u n ication
if th e code n um bers th at n orm ally accom p an y th e WBS elem en ts are su p pressed. This
is acceptable becau se it addresses th e n eeds of a specific situation .
92312$$CH9
09-22-06 10:39:17
61
Figure D-7. WBS Dictionary
D.6 WBS Code Numbers

In the exam p les above, th e WBS code uses a n um berin g schem e con sistin g of Arabic
n um bers sep arated by p eriods. Th is allows for easy an d system atic exp an sion of the
WBS as addition al elem en ts are added. In oth er cases, the WBS code m igh t u se a
differen t alp h an um eric system , for exam ple, a com bination of Rom an n um erals, letters
an d Arabic n um bers. Th is particular system does n ot len d itself to system atic exp an sion
as a p urely n um eric code. In som e cases, the n u m berin g schem e m ay be defin ed by
the organ ization in such away as to p erm it coordin ation across p rojects an d en able
program level cost con trol. Th e WBS Code serves as a un ique iden tification n um ber.
I Bicycle
I.A Fra m e Set
I.A.1 Fra m e
I.A.2 Ha n dleba r
I.A.3 Fork
I.A.4 Sea t
I.B Cra n k Set
I.C Wheel
I.C.1 Fron t Wh eel
I.C.2 Rea r Wheel
I.D Bra kin g System
I.E Sh iftin g System
I.F In tegra tion
62
92312$$CH9
09-22-06 10:39:17
I.F.1
I.F.2
I.F.3
I.F.4
Con cept
Design
Assem bly
Testin g
I.F.4.1 Com pon en t Test
I.F.4.2 Produ ct Test
I.F.4.3 Cu stom er Test
I.G Project Ma n a gem en t
Th e WBS exam p les in this ap p en dix are illu strative on ly an d are in ten ded to p rovide gu idan ce to the
read er. No claim of com p leten ess is m ade. All exam p les reflect th e qu ality p rin ciples exp ressed in th is
Practice Stan d ard. As exp ressed in the PMBOK Gu ideTh ird Edition the p roject m an agem en t team is
resp on sible for d eterm in in g wh at is ap p ropriate for an y given p roject (Project Man agem en t In stitute 2004).
92312$$CH9
09-22-06 10:39:17
63
92312$$CH9
09-22-06 10:39:17
Appendix E
Oil, Gas, and Petrochemical

(OGP) Work Breakdown Struct ure
(WBS) Example
Th is is an exam p le of a Work Breakdown Structu re (WBS), from th e own ers poin t of
view, for the detailed design , fabrication , an d in stallation of an offsh ore p rodu ction
platform . As th e detailed en gin eerin g, fabrication , an d in stallation are distin ct ph ases
of th e work, these are placed at Level 2 of th e WBS. Th is fits with th e p rogression of
th e work, but also with th e contractin g strategy; that is, differen t con tractors for
en gin eerin g, for fabrication , an d so on m ay be em p loyed or u sed. Th e logic of decom p osition at th e n ext level varies with the deliverable. Not all bran ches of the WBS are
decom posed to th e sam e level of detail. Th e WBS is gen eric an d as su ch serves as a
WBS tem plate wh ich wou ld be custom ized for specific projects. Perh ap s certain WBS
elem en ts will be decom posed to a greater level of detail as those details for a sp ecific
project becom e kn own (for exam ple, 1.3.4.3 All Oth er Con tractor Su pp lied Equ ip m en t).
It is also possible th at certain WBS elem en ts will be decom posed by a su b-con tractor.
1 WBS for Production Platform Project
1.2 En gin eerin g
1.2.1 Gen eral
1.2.1.1 Prelim in ary En gin eerin g Acceptan ce
1.2.1.2 Prelim in ary En gin eerin g Acceptan ce
1.2.1.3 Design Basis an d Specification s
1.2.1.4 Calcu lation s an d En gin eerin g Data Books
1.2.1.5 Sum m ary Rep orts
1.2.1.6 Platform Equ ipm en t Man uals
1.2.2 Jacket
1.2.2.1 Stru ctu ral En gin eerin g an d Draftin g
1.2.2.1.1 Jacket In -Service An alyses
1.2.2.1.2 Jacket Pre-Service An alyses
1.2.2.1.3 Jacket Design Details
1.2.2.1.4 Jacket Cath odic Protection
92312$CH10
09-08-06 04:45:28
65
1.2.2.1.5 Jacket Weigh ts an d Material Takeoffs

1.2.2.1.6 Jacket Ap p roved for Con stru ction (AFC) Drawin gs
1.2.2.1.7 Jacket Detailed En gin eerin g an d Design Report
1.2.2.2 Mechan ical En gin eerin g & Draftin g
1.2.2.2.1 Flood an d Ven t System
1.2.2.2.2 Groutin g System
1.2.3 Pilin gStructu ral En gin eerin g an d Draftin g
1.2.3.1 Pilin g In -Service An alyses
1.2.3.2 Pilin g Pre-Service An alyses
1.2.3.3 Pilin g Design Details
1.2.3.4 Pilin g Weigh ts an d Material Takeoffs
1.2.3.5 Pilin g AFC Drawin gs
1.2.3.6 Pilin g Detailed En gin eerin g an d Design Report
1.2.4 Topsides
1.2.4.1 Structural En gin eerin g an d Draftin g
1.2.4.1.1 Deck In -Service An alyses
1.2.4.1.2 Deck Pre-Service Analyses
1.2.4.1.3 Deck Design Details
1.2.4.1.4 Deck Weights an d Material Takeoffs
1.2.4.1.5 Deck AFC Drawin gs
1.2.4.1.6 Deck Detailed En gineerin g an d Design Rep ort
1.2.4.2 Mechan ical/ Process En gin eerin g an d Draftin g
1.2.4.2.1 Process Sim ulation / Calcu lation s
1.2.4.2.2 Equip m en t Design / Sizin g
1.2.4.2.3 Pipe Stress An alysis
1.2.4.2.4 Hazard An alysis
1.2.4.2.5 Sp ecification s, Data Sh eets, an d Request for Quotation s
1.2.4.2.6 Ven dor Data Reviews
1.2.4.2.7 Weigh t, Material Takeoffs, Bill of Materials
1.2.4.2.8 AFC Drawin gs for:
1.2.4.2.8.1 P r o ce ss Flo w Dia gr a m s/ U t ilit y Flo w
Diagram s
1.2.4.2.8.2 Mechanical Flow Diagram s/ Pipin g an d
In strum en t Drawin gs
1.2.4.2.8.3 Eq u ip m e n t La yo u t s / Ar r a n ge m e n t s/
Skid Layou ts
1.2.4.2.8.4 Pip in g Su pp orts
1.2.4.2.8.5 Pip in g Ge n e ra l Arra n gem e n t s, Eleva tion s, an d Isom etrics
1.2.4.2.8.6 Other AFC Drawin gs
1.2.4.2.9 Data Books, Equip m en t Man u als, En gin eerin g an d
Design Rep ort
1.2.4.3 Electrical En gin eerin g & Draftin g
1.2.4.3.1 Electrical En gin eering an d Design
1.2.4.3.2 Electrical Specification s, Data Sh eets, an d Request
for Qu otation s
1.2.4.3.3 Electrical Load Study/ List
1.2.4.3.5 Weigh t, Material Takeoffs, Bill of Materials
1.2.4.3.6 AFC Drawin gs for:
66
92312$CH10
09-08-06 04:45:28
1.2.4.3.6.1
1.2.4.3.6.2
1.2.4.3.6.3
1.2.4.3.6.4
1.2.4.3.6.5
1.2.4.3.6.6
1.2.4.4
1.2.4.5
1.2.4.6
1.2.4.7
Area Classification s
Electrical Sym bol Legen d
Electrical On e-Lin e Drawin gs
Sch em atics/ Schedule/ Plan s
Bu ildin gs an d Equip m en t Layou ts
Electrical Arrangem en t an d Cable Tray
Rou tin g
1.2.4.3.6.7 Electrical In stallation Details
1.2.4.3.6.8 Oth er AFC Drawin gs
1.2.4.3.7 Data Books, Equ ipm en t Man uals, En gin eerin g an d
Design Rep ort
In stru m en t En gin eerin g & Draftin g
1.2.4.4.1 Instru m en t En gin eerin g & Design
1.2.4.4.2 Fire & Safety En gin eerin g & Design
1.2.4.4.3 Relief System s Sizin g Calculation s
1.2.4.4.4 Instru m en t Sp ecification , Data Sheets, an d Requ est
for Quotation s
1.2.4.4.5 Instru m en t In dex
Weigh t, Material Takeoffs, Bill of Materials
AFC Drawin gs for:
1.2.4.6.1 SAFE Ch arts/ PSFDs
1.2.4.6.2 Con trol Pan els
1.2.4.6.3 PLC System
1.2.4.6.4 Tubin g Tray Routin g
1.2.4.6.5 Loop Diagram s
1.2.4.6.6 Instru m en t In stallation Details
1.2.4.6.7 Fire an d Safety
1.2.4.6.8 Pressu re Relief System s
1.2.4.6.9 Oth er AFC Drawin gs
Da t a Bo o ks, Eq u ip m e n t Ma n u a ls, En gin e erin g a n d Design
Rep orts
1.3 Procurem en t
1.3.1 Gen eral
1.3.1.1 Procurem en t Procedures
1.3.1.2 Exp editin g an d In spection Procedures
1.3.2 Jacket
1.3.2.1 Own er Fu rnish ed Equ ipm en t (OFE)
1.3.2.2 Con tractor Furn ished Reim bu rsable Equip m en t (CFRE)
1.3.2.3 All Other Con tractor Sup p lied Equip m en t
1.3.2.4 Bu lk MaterialsCon tractor Su pp lied
1.3.2.4.1 Stru ctu ral
1.3.2.4.2 An odes
1.3.3 Pilin g
1.3.3.1 Bu lk MaterialsCon tractor Su pp lied
1.3.4 Top sides
1.3.4.1 Own er Fu rnish ed Equ ipm en t (OFE)
1.3.4.1.1 Rotatin g Equip m en t
1.3.4.1.2 Pressu re Vessels
1.3.4.1.3 Electrical Gen eration
92312$CH10
09-08-06 04:45:28
67
1.3.4.2 Contractor Fu rn ish ed Reim bursable Equ ipm en t (CFRE)

1.3.4.2.1 Rotatin g Equ ipm en t
1.3.4.2.2 Pressu re Vessels
1.3.4.2.3 Oth er CFRE
1.3.4.3 All Oth er Con tractor Su pp lied Equ ipm en t
1.3.4.4 Bulk MaterialsCon tractor Sup p lied
1.3.4.4.1 Stru ctural
1.3.4.4.2 Pipin g, Valves, an d Fittin gs
1.3.4.4.3 Electrical
1.3.4.4.4 In strum en t
1.4 Fabrication
1.4.1 Gen eral
1.4.1.1 Safety Man u al an d Plan
1.4.1.2 Yard an d Work-Force Mobilization
1.4.1.3 Qu alification of Weldin g Procedu res an d Welders
1.4.1.3.2 Pipin g
1.4.1.4 Sh op Drawin gs
1.4.1.4.2 Pipin g Isom etrics
1.4.1.4.3 Pipin g Sp ools
1.4.1.5 Receip t of Materials
1.4.1.6 QA/ QC, NDT, an d Dim en sional Con trol
1.4.1.7 Weigh t Con trol Reports
1.4.1.8 As-Built Drawin gs an d Certification Dossier
1.4.2 Jacket
1.4.2.1 Fram es
1.4.2.1.1 Fram e 1
1.4.2.1.2 Fram e 2
1.4.2.1.3 Fram e A
1.4.2.1.4 Fram e B
1.4.2.2 Horizon tal Levels
1.4.2.2.1 Level 1
1.4.2.2.2 Level 2
1.4.2.2.3 Level 3
1.4.2.2.4 Level 4
1.4.2.3 Ap pu rten an ces
1.4.2.3.1 Disposal Pile
1.4.2.3.2 Caisson s
1.4.2.3.3 Risers
1.4.2.3.4 Boat Lan din g
1.4.2.3.5 Corrosion Protection
1.4.2.3.6 Stairs, Walkways, and Lan din gs
1.4.2.4 In stallation Aids
1.4.2.5 Loadout an d Seafasten
1.4.3 Pilin g
1.4.3.1 Pile A1
1.4.3.2 Pile A2
1.4.3.3 Pile B1
1.4.3.4 Pile B2
68
92312$CH10
09-08-06 04:45:28
1.4.4 Top sides

1.4.4.1 Main Deck
1.4.4.1.1 Plate Girders
1.4.4.1.2 Deck Pan els
1.4.4.1.3 Tertiary Steel
1.4.4.2 Cellar Deck
1.4.4.2.1 Plate Girders
1.4.4.2.2 Deck Pan els
1.4.4.2.3 Tertiary Steel
1.4.4.3 Sub-Cellar Deck
1.4.4.4 Legs
1.4.4.5 Bracin g
1.4.4.6 Equip m en t In stallation
1.4.4.7 In tercon n ect Pip in g
1.4.4.8 Electrical
1.4.4.9 In stru m en tation
1.4.4.10 Precom m ission in g
1.4.4.11 Ap p urten ances
1.4.4.11.1 Flare Boom
1.4.4.11.2 Stairs, Walkways, & Lan din gs
1.4.4.11.3 Installation Aids
1.5 Tran sportation
1.5.1 Gen eral
1.5.1.1 Safety Manu al an d Plan
1.5.1.2 Seafasten ing Drawin gs
1.5.1.3 Marin e Warran ty Su rveyor Review an d Ap proval
1.5.2 Jacket
1.5.3 Pilin g
1.5.4 Top sides
1.6 In stallation , Hooku p, an d Com m ission in g
1.6.1 Gen eral
1.6.1.1 Safety Manu al an d Plan
1.6.1.2 In stallation Procedu res an d Drawin gs
1.6.1.3 Qualification of Weldin g Procedures an d Welders
1.6.1.3.2 Pip in g
1.6.1.4 As-In stalled Drawin gs
1.6.1.5 Mobilization
1.6.1.6 Dem obilization
1.6.2 Jacket
1.6.3 Pilin g
1.6.4 Top sides
1.6.4.1 Hookup
1.6.4.2 Com m ission in g
1.6.4.3 Startup
Th is WBS exam ple is illu strative on ly an d is in ten ded to p rovid e gu idan ce to th e rea der. No claim of
com p leten ess is m ade for an y sp ecific p roject, th e exam p le m ay b e com p lete or in com p lete. All exam p les
reflect the quality p rin cip les expressed in th is Practice Stan d ard. As expressed in th e PMBOK Gu ide
Th ird Edition the p roject m an agem en t team is resp on sib le for determ in in g wh at is app rop riate for an y
given p roject (Project Man agem en t In stitu te 2004).
92312$CH10
09-08-06 04:45:28
69
92312$CH10
09-08-06 04:45:28
Appendix F
Environment al Management Work

Breakdown St ructure (WBS)
Example
Th is Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) is organ ized according to th e p roject lifecycle
at Level 2 while sp ecific deliverables within each stage of th e lifecycle are in clu ded at
Level 3. Th is is a high level WBS tem plate wh ich can be custom ized at lower levels to
ap ply to a variety of specific projects.
1 WBS for En viron m en tal Man agem en t Project to Con duct a Bio-Ven tin g Test for
the Rem ediation of Hydrocarbon Im p acted Soils
1.1 System Design
1.1.1 In itial Design
1.1.2 Clien t Meetin g
1.1.3 Draft Design
1.1.4 Clien t an d Regulatory Agen cy Meetin g
1.1.5 Fin al Design
1.2 System In stallation
1.2.1 Facility Plan n in g Meetin g
1.2.2 Well In stallation
1.2.3 Electrical Power Drop In stallation
1.2.4 Blower an d Pip in g In stallation
1.3 Soil Perm eability Test
1.3.1 System Operation Check
1.3.2 Soil Perm eability Test
1.3.3 Test Rep ort
1.4 In itial In Situ Resp iration Test
1.4.1 In Situ Resp iration Test
1.4.2 Test Rep ort
1.5 Lon g-Term Bio-Ven tin g Test
1.5.1 Am bien t Air Mon itorin g
1.5.2 Op eration , Main ten an ce, an d Mon itorin g
1.5.3 Three-Mon th In Situ Respiration Test
1.5.4 Test Rep ort
92312$CH11
09-08-06 04:46:19
71
1.5.5 Six-m on th In Situ Respiration Test

1.5.6 Test Rep ort
1.6 Con firm ation Sam plin g
1.6.1 Soil Borin g an d Sam plin g
1.6.2 Data Validation
1.7 Report Preparation
1.7.1 Pre-Draft Report
1.7.2 Clien t Meetin g
1.7.3 Draft Report
1.7.4 Clien t an d Regu latory Agen cy Meetin g
1.7.5 Fin al Rep ort
A lan dscap e tree structure view of th is WBS is depicted in Figure F1.. Th is view of
the WBS sh ows th e top of the tree at th e left, with lower levels of decom position
m ovin g to the right. Like the ou tlin e view above, the p roject life cycle elem ents are
at level 2 while specific deliverables with in each stage of th e lifecycle are in clu ded at
level 3.
Figure F-1. Horizontal Tree Structure
Th is WBS exam p le is illu strative on ly an d is in ten ded to p rovide gu idan ce to th e reader. No claim of
com p leten ess is m ad e for an y sp ecific p roject, th e exam p le m ay be com p lete or in com p lete. All exam p les
reflect the qu ality p rin cip les expressed in th is Practice Stan dard. As exp ressed in th e PMBOK Gu ide
Th ird Edition th e p roject m an agem en t team is resp on sible for determ in in g wh at is ap p rop riate for an y
72
92312$CH11
09-08-06 04:46:19
Appendix G
Process Improvement Work

Example
Th is Work Breakdown Stru ctu re (WBS) exam ple is u sed with perm ission of the Californ ia Departm en t of Tran sp ortation . This is an exam ple of a WBS for a process im provem en t project. It is divided in to three ph ases:
1. Research to determ in e the best solution to the p roblem . This research in clu des th e
recom m en dation of a solution , or solu tion s, to the sp on sor.
2. Im plem en tation of th e app roved solu tion (s). If there were m ore th an on e app roved
solution , then th e Ph ase 2 WBS would be rep eated for each solu tion .
3. Evaluation to determ in e if th e solution works. This leads back to further research
an d con tin uous p rocess im p rovem en t.
Note that n ot all bran ches of the WBS are decom p osed to the sam e level of detail.
Also som e WBS elem en ts, e.g., 1.1.2 an d 1.2, are m odular tem plates which are rep eated
as often as n eeded.
1 WBS for Process Im provem en t Project
1.1 Ph ase 1: Research an d recom m en dation s
1.1.1 Ph ase 1 Ch arter
1.1.2 Project Man agem ent Plan s for Phase 1
1.1.3 Research
1.1.3.1 Docum en tation of the State of the Art
1.1.3.1.1 Docum en t Search
1.1.3.1.2 Con su ltation with Exp erts
1.1.3.1.3 Ben ch m arkin g
1.1.3.1.4 Produ ct an d Software Review
1.1.3.2 Docum en tation of the Curren t State in th e Su bject Organ ization
1.1.3.2.1 Interviews
1.1.3.2.2 Surveys
92312$CH12
09-08-06 04:50:55
73
1.1.3.2.3 Statistical An alysis

1.1.3.2.4 Flow Charts of Cu rren t Processes
1.1.4 Iden tification of Im p rovem en t Needs
1.1.4.1 Determ in ation of Desired State (Vision Statem en t)
1.1.4.2 Gap An alysis
1.1.4.3 Most Likely Solution s
1.1.4.3.1 Brain storm in g
1.1.4.3.2 Statistical An alysis
1.1.4.3.3 Flow Charts of Desired Processes
1.1.5 Recom m en dation s
1.1.5.1 Recom m en dation 1
1.1.5.1.1 Draft Ch arter
1.1.5.1.2 Estim ated Cost
1.1.5.3 Recom m en dation n
1.2 Phase 2: Im plem en tation of Ap p roved Recom m en dation x
(Th is portion of the WBS is rep eated for each ap p roved recom m en dation )
1.2.1 Recom m en dation x Charter (app roved an d am en ded version of th e draft
from 1.1.5)
1.2.2 Project Man agem en t Plan s for Ph ase 2 (seven plan s, as for Phase 1)
1.2.3 Process Docum en tation
1.2.3.1 Draft p rocess (p olicy, h an dbook, m an u al ch apter, etc.)
1.2.3.2 Review
1.2.3.3 Revision (1.2.3.2 an d 1.2.3.3 are iterative repeat un til there is
consen sus)
1.2.3.4 Publication
1.2.3.4.1 Hardcop y
1.2.3.4.2 In tern et or In tran et
1.2.3.4.3 Oth er
1.2.4 Tools (software, etc.)
1.2.4.1 Design
1.2.4.2 Build
1.2.4.3 Test
1.2.4.4 Revision (1.2.4.3 an d 1.2.4.4 are iterative rep eat u n til th e p roduct m eets its goals)
1.2.4.5 Im plem en tation
1.2.5 Train in g
1.2.5.1 In structors
1.2.5.1.1 Hirin g
1.2.5.1.2 Train in g (Train the Train ers)
1.2.5.2 Developm en t
1.2.5.2.1 Draft Train in g Materials
1.2.5.2.2 Review an d Pilot
1.2.5.2.3 Revision (1.2.5.2.2 and 1.2.5.2.3 are iterative rep eat
un til th e class m eets its goals)
1.2.5.3 Delivery
74
92312$CH12
09-08-06 04:50:55
1.3 Ph ase 3: Evaluation

1.3.1 Project Man agem ent Plan s for Phase 3 (seven p lan s, as for Ph ase 1)
1.3.2 Docu m en tation of th e New State in the Subject Organ ization
1.3.2.1 In terviews
1.3.2.2 Surveys
1.3.2.3 Statistical An alysis
1.3.2.4 Flow Charts of New Processes
1.3.3 Iden tification of Deficien cies
1.3.3.1 Flow Charts of Desired Processes (from 1.4.3.3)
1.3.3.2 Gap An alysis
1.3.4 Recom m en dation s for New Projects
1.3.4.1.1 Draft Charter
1.3.4.3 Recom m en dation n
92312$CH12
09-08-06 04:50:55
75
The followin g table is an oth er represen tation of Phase 1 of th is sam e WBS . . . an

outlin e view develop ed with a sp readsh eet ap p lication . Th ou gh th e en tire WBS can
be represen ted in this m an n er, on ly Phase 1 of th is WBS exam ple is sh own as an
illu stration .
WBS Level
WBS Code
WBS Element
WBS for Process Improvement Project
1.1
1.1.1
Phase 1 Charter
1.1.2
Project Management Plans for Phase 1
1.1.3
Research
1.1.3.1
1.1.3.1.1
Document Search
1.1.3.1.2
Consultation with Experts
1.1.3.1.3
Benchmarking
1.1.3.1.4
1.1.3.2
1.1.3.2.1
Interviews
1.1.3.2.2
Surveys
1.1.3.2.3
Statistical Analysis
1.1.3.2.4
1.1.4
1.1.4.1
Determination of Desired State (Vision Statement)
1.1.4.2
Gap Analysis
1.1.4.3
Most Likely Solutions
1.1.4.3.1
Brainstorming
1.1.4.3.2
Statistical Analysis
1.1.4.3.3
1.1.5
1.1.5.1
1.1.5.1.1
Draft Charter
1.1.5.1.2
Estimated Cost
1.1.5.2
1.1.5.2.1
1.1.5.2.2
1.1.5.3
1.1.5.3.1
1.1.5.3.2
1.2
Phase 1: Research and Recommendations
Documentation of the State of the Art
Product and Software Review

Documentation of the Current State in the Subject Organization
Flow Charts of Current Processes

Identification of Improvement Needs
Flow Charts of Desired Processes

Recommendations
Recommendation 1
Recommendation 2
Draft Charter
Estimated Cost
Recommendation 3
Draft Charter
Estimated Cost
Phase 2: Implementation of Approved Recommendation
Table G-1. Process Improvement WBS Example
Th is WBS exam p le is illu strative on ly an d is in ten ded to p rovide gu id an ce to th e reader. No claim of

com p leten ess is m ade for an y sp ecific p roject, th e exam ple m ay be com p lete or in com p lete. All exam p les
reflect th e qu ality p rin cip les expressed in th is Practice Stan dard. As exp ressed in th e PMBOK Gu ide
Th ird Ed ition th e p roject m an agem en t team is resp on sible for determ in in g wh at is ap p rop riate for an y
76
92312$CH12
09-08-06 04:50:55
Appendix H
Pharmaceut ical Work Breakdown

Pharmaceutical Project WBS
Th e followin g rep resen ts an exam p le of a WBS for a ph arm aceutical developm en t
project. It is n ot in ten ded to rep resen t th e on ly feasible WBS for this typ e of project.
Th ere are n um erous variation s and ap p roach es th at a p roject m an ager can take to
develop the WBS for the p roject.
In this exam ple, a WBS is p resen ted for a n ew com poun d. A develop m en t program
con tain in g m ore than on e com poun d would con sist of a sim ilar WBS structu re for
each com p ou n d. Som e Level 2 WBS elem en ts describe deliverables that fall within
th e area of exp ertise of sp ecific techn ical sp ecialties an d occur at differen t p oin ts over
th e course of th e p rodu ct developm en t lifecycle. These are structu red to reflect th e
organ ization s m akin g up th e en terprise, such as Marketin g, Regu latory Affairs, Ph arm aceu tical Developm en t, etc. Oth er Level 2 elem en ts are organ ized accordin g to th e
produ ct developm en t lifecycle itself, th us: Phase 1 Clin ical Program , Ph ase 2 Clin ical
Program , etc., because this organ ization reflects the way that th e busin ess m an ages
th e overall develop m en t p rogram . The WBS is n ot in ten ded to illustrate th e sequ en ce
by which the deliverables will be created. Wh en th e Network Diagram an d Schedu le
for th is project are created th ey would reflect the sequ en ce of th e activities th at produce
th e deliverables with in both the fun ction ally organ ized elem en ts an d those organ ized
by p rodu ct lifecycle.
Note that this WBS describes a gen eric p roduct, n ot a project to develop a specific
com poun d. As su ch , it is a WBS Stan dard that can be custom ized u sin g specific
term s to describe differen t developm en t p rojects. Som e elem en ts are m odu lar an d
m ay be repeated as often as n ecessary in a given project. For exam p le, th e elem en ts
listed as com pon en ts of 1.7.3 would be rep eated for each m ultip le dose safety clin ical
trial to be con ducted. Dep en din g on the p articu lar project, the p roject m an ager wou ld
in clude som e but n ot all of the p ossible elem en ts in clu ded in the stan dard WBS. For
exam p le, if th e objective of th e p roject were to develop a lin e exten sion of an existin g
produ ct, it is likely th at the p roject m an ager would ch oose not to in clude an y asp ect
of lead iden tification in th e WBS. In oth er cases, th e p roject m an ager m ight wan t to
illustrate geograp hic com p on en ts in th e WBS th at wou ld n ecessitate a m odification
to that depicted here. This m ight be th e case if som e clin ical trials were to be perform ed
outside th e US. Sim ilarly, if som e of deliverables are to be develop ed by a differen t
92312$CH13
09-08-06 04:55:26
77
organ ization as p art of a collaborative p rogram , the project m an ager m ight organ ize
the WBS to sh ow the deliverables for each organ ization in separate bran ch es.
The Level 2 WBS elem en ts are n ot all decom p osed to the sam e level of detail. In
part this reflects th e n eed to provide m ore detail for som e but n ot others. In practice,
the level of detail wou ld also reflect the am oun t of in form ation available for certain
deliverables. Thu s, the sp ecific clin ical trials to be con du cted in Ph ase 3 are n ot usually
kn own u n til after Phase 2 has been com p leted. Thus, early in develop m en t, these
m ight be described with a sin gle h igh -level WBS elem en t called Ph ase 3 Clin ical Trial
Program , while th e Ph ase 1 trials would be described in m uch m ore detail. It is
recom m en ded that th e p roject m an ager develop the WBS to a level of detail that is
app rop riate to en able m an agem en t of th e specific project.
1 WBS for New Com p ou nd Develop m en t Project
1.1 Project In itiation
1.1.1 Decision to Develop Bu sin ess Case
1.1.2 Bu sin ess Case
1.1.3 Project In itiation Decision
1.2 Marketin g/ Sales Sup port
1.2.1 Market Research Program
1.2.2 Bran din g Program
1.2.3 Pricin g Program
1.2.4 Sales Develop m en t Program
1.2.5 Oth er Marketin g/ Sales Su pp ort
1.3 Regulatory Sup p ort
1.3.1 IND Su bm ission
1.3.1.1 Pre-IND Meetin g
1.3.1.2 IND Prep aration
1.3.1.2.1 Preclin ical Package
1.3.1.2.2 Clin ical Package
1.3.1.2.3 Clin ical Pharm acology Package
1.3.1.2.4 CM&C Package
1.3.1.3 IND Subm ission
1.3.2 En d of Ph ase 2 Meetin g
1.3.2.1 Pre-Meetin g Package
1.3.2.2 En d of Ph ase 2 Meetin g
1.3.3 BLA/ NDA Subm ission
1.3.3.1 Pre-BLA/ NDA Meetin g
1.3.3.2 BLA/ NDA Prep aration
1.3.3.2.1 Preclin ical Package
1.3.3.2.2 Clin ical Package
1.3.3.2.3 Clin ical Pharm acology Package
1.3.3.2.4 CM&C Package
1.3.3.3 BLA/ NDA Su bm ission
1.3.3.4 Advisory Com m ittee Meetin g
1.3.3.5 FDA review su pp ort
1.3.3.6 Pre-Ap proval In spection
1.3.3.7 Ap proval
1.3.4 Post-ap proval Regu latory Su pp ort Program
1.3.4.1 An nual Reports
1.3.4.2 Adverse Even t Rep ortin g
1.3.4.3 Post-m arket Com m itm en t Adm in istration
78
92312$CH13
09-08-06 04:55:26
1.4 Lead Iden tification Program

1.4.1 Hypothesis Gen eration
1.4.2 Assay Screen in g
1.4.3 Lead Optim ization
1.4.4 Other Discovery Sup port
1.5 Clin ical Ph arm acology Sup port
1.5.1 Ph arm acokin etic Stu dy(ies)
1.5.2 Dru g In teraction Stu dy(ies)
1.5.3 Ren al Effect Study(ies)
1.5.4 Hep atic Effect Study(ies)
1.5.5 Bioequ ivalen cy Study(ies)
1.5.6 Other Clin ical Pharm acology Study(ies)
1.6 Preclin ical Program
1.6.1 Tox/ ADME Su pp ort
1.6.1.1 Non -GLP An im al Studies
1.6.1.2 Bioan alytical Assay Developm en t
1.6.1.3 ADME Evalu ation s
1.6.1.4 Acu te Toxicological Stu dies
1.6.1.5 Sub-Ch ron ic Toxicological Stu dies
1.6.1.6 Ch ron ic Toxicological Stu dies
1.6.1.7 Oth er Tox/ ADME Su pp ort
1.6.2 Clin ical Ph arm acology Sup port
1.6.2.1 Ph arm acokin etic Study(ies)
1.6.2.2 Drug In teraction Study(ies)
1.6.2.3 Ren al Effect Stu dy(ies)
1.6.2.4 Hep atic Effect Study(ies)
1.6.2.5 Bioequivalen cy Stu dy(ies)
1.6.2.6 Oth er Clin ical Ph arm acology Study(ies)
1.7 Ph ase I Clin ical Stu dy Program
1.7.1 Ph arm acokin etic/ Ph arm acodyn am ic Study(ies)
1.7.2 Dose Ran gin g Study(ies)
1.7.3 Multip le Dose Safety Study(ies)
1.7.3.1 Pre-En rollm en t Activities
1.7.3.2 En rollm en t
1.7.3.3 Treatm en t
1.7.3.4 Follow-up
1.7.3.5 Data Man agem en t
1.7.3.6 Data an alysis
1.7.3.7 Stu dy Rep ort1.10
1.8 Ph ase II Clin ical Stu dy Program
1.8.1 Multip le Dose Efficacy Study(ies)
1.8.2 Other Clin ical Stu dy(ies)
1.9 Ph ase III Clin ical Stu dy Program
1.9.1 Pivotal Registration Study(ies)
1.9.2 Other Clin ical Stu dy(ies)
1.10 Subm ission / Laun ch Phase
1.10.1 Pre-Lau n ch p reparation
1.10.2 Laun ch
1.10.3 Post-Lau n ch Sup port
1.11 Ph ase IV/ Com m ercialization Clin ical Study Program
1.11.1 In vestigator-Sp on sored Stu dies
92312$CH13
09-08-06 04:55:26
79
1.11.2 Registry Studies

1.12 Legal Sup port
1.12.1 Publication s
1.12.2 Paten ts/ In tellectual Property
1.12.3 Tradem arks
1.12.4 Oth er Legal Su pp ort
1.13 Program Man agem en t Sup p ort
1.13.1 Program -Level Project Man agem en t
1.13.2 Preclin ical Project Man agem en t
1.13.3 Clin ical Project Man agem en t
1.13.4 CM&C Project Man agem en t
1.13.5 Oth er Project Man agem en t Sup port
80
92312$CH13
09-08-06 04:55:26
Appendix I
Process Plant Const ruct ion Work

Example
Process Plant Construction Project WBS
Th is is an exam p le of an en gin eerin g-orien ted WBS, rath er than a con tractor-orien ted
WBS, as th e orien tation is on th e design of system s rather th an on the startu p an d
com m ission in g of system s. Com m u n ication between the en gin eerin g team an d th e
con struction / com m ission in g team n eeds to be very good to m in im ize p roblem s durin g
con struction . In practice th ere can be p roblem s wh en engin eers design based on
System s, wh ile th e Cra fts/ Trad es (Co n tra ct ors) d o th eir wo rk b y locat io n a n d
sequ en ce.
It sh ou ld be n oted, however, that wh ether th e WBS has a system s focu s, a structu re
focu s, or deliverable focus, th e sequ en ce of work is n ot th e p urp ose of th e WBS. The
objective of th e WBS is to en su re that th e work required to com p lete th e desired
outcom e an d m eet the project objectives h as been cap tu red com pletely an d in en ough
detail to iden tify resources, assign resp on sibility, an d set sequ en ce.
Note that all bran ches of th e WBS are n ot decom p osed to the sam e level of detail.
Th is could be due to a variety of factors. For exam ple, a subcon tractor m ight h ave
resp on sib ility for d eta ilin g on e WBS elem en t, o r an oth er WBS elem en t m igh t b e
detailed at a later poin t in th e p lan n in g process.
1 WBS for Process Plan t Con struction Project
1.1 Plan t System Design
1.1.1 Busin ess requirem en ts
1.1.1.1 System En gin eerin g
1.1.1.2 Site Develop m en t
1.1.1.3 Civil Stru ctures
1.1.1.4 Th erm al System s
1.1.1.5 Flow System s
1.1.1.6 Storage System s
1.1.1.7 Electrical System s
1.1.1.8 Mech an ical System s
92312$CH14
09-08-06 04:56:18
81
1.1.1.9 En viron m en tal System s

1.1.1.10 In strum en tation an d Con trol System s
1.1.1.11 Au xiliary System s
1.1.1.12 Security System s
1.1.2 Process Models
1.1.2.1 System En gin eerin g
1.1.2.2 Site Developm en t
1.1.2.3 Civil Structu res
1.1.2.4 Th erm al System s
1.1.2.5 Flow System s
1.1.2.6 Storage System s
1.1.2.7 Electrical System s
1.1.2.8 Mechan ical System s
1.1.2.9 En viron m en tal System s
1.1.2.10 In strum en tation an d Con trol System s
1.1.2.11 Au xiliary System s
1.1.2.12 Safety system s
1.2 Con stru ction
1.2.1 Site Developm en t
1.2.2 Civil Structures
1.2.3 Th erm al System s
1.2.4 Flow System s
1.2.5 Storage System s
1.2.6 Electrical System s
1.2.7 Mech an ical System s
1.2.8 In stru m en t an d Con trol System s
1.2.9 En viron m ental System s
1.2.10 Tem porary Stru ctu re
1.2.11 Au xiliary System s
1.2.12 Safety System s
1.3 Legal an d Regulatory
1.3.1 Licen sin g (Non -Govern m en t)/ Perm ittin g (govern m en t)
1.3.1.1 Licen sin g (Non -Govern m en t)
1.3.1.1.1 Roofin g, Gutters, In sulation
1.3.1.1.2 Electric
1.3.1.1.3 Plum bin g
1.3.1.1.4 Com m ercial Sign s
1.3.1.1.5 Elevators
1.3.1.1.6 Steam / Hot Water Boilers
1.3.1.1.7 Air Con dition in g
1.3.1.1.8 Com m ercial Fire Sup p ression System s
1.3.1.1.9 Forced Air Fu rn aces/ Ven tilation
1.3.1.1.10 Water Heaters an d Gas Lin es
1.3.1.2 Perm ittin g (Govern m en t)
1.3.1.2.1 Ap plication
1.3.1.2.2 Accep tan ce Criteria
1.3.1.2.3 Issu an ce of Licen se
1.3.2 En viron m ental Im p act
1.3.2.1 Prelim in ary Assessm en t
1.3.2.2 Im pact Review
1.3.2.3 Magn itu de Assessm en t
82
92312$CH14
09-08-06 04:56:18
1.3.2.4 Mitigation Plan

1.3.3 Labor Agreem en ts
1.3.3.1 Agreem en t
1.3.3.2 Collective Bargain in g
1.3.3.3 Agreem en t Fin alization
1.3.4 Lan d Acqu isition
1.3.4.1 Available Prop erty
1.3.4.2 Local Govern m en t Zon in g Rights/ Restriction s
1.3.4.3 Price Com parison s
1.3.4.4 Profession al Su rvey
1.3.4.5 Fin an cin g
1.3.5 Other Legal/ Regulatory Requ irem en ts
1.4 Testin g
1.4.1 System Test
1.4.1.1 System Test Plan s an d Procedu res
1.4.1.2 System Testin g
1.4.2 Acceptan ce Test
1.4.2.1 Acceptan ce Test Plan s
1.4.2.2 Acceptan ce Testin g
1.4.2.3 Form al Accep tan ce
1.5 Startup
Note: PMI Project Man agem en t Stan dards Open Working Session volun teers at
PMIs 99 Sem in ars & Sym p osiu m origin ally created th is WBS exam p le. It has been
su b seq u en tly u p d at ed a s p a rt of th e d evelo p m en t o f th is re le a se o f th e Pra ctice
Stan dard.
92312$CH14
09-08-06 04:56:18
83
92312$CH14
09-08-06 04:56:18
Appendix J
Service Industry Out sourcing

Work Breakdown Structure
(WBS) Example
Service Indust ry Outsourcing Project WBS
Th e un ique aspect of this WBS is its in clu sion of an RFP (Request for Prop osal) p rocess.
Th is WBS is gen eric an d could be m ade m ore sp ecific for use in a particular project.
It th erefore serves as a WBS tem plate. Not all bran ches of the WBS are decom posed
to th e sam e level of detail. For exam p le Project Man agem en t (1.7) is n ot decom p osed
at all.
1 WBS for Outsourcin g Project
1.1. Needs An alysis
1.1.1 Needs An alysis
1.1.1.1 Feasibility Study
1.1.1.2 Historical In form ation
1.1.2 Defin ition an d Baselin e Requ irem en ts
1.1.2.1 Project Approach Strategy
1.1.2.2 High -Level Project Plan
1.1.2.3 Cost Estim ates
1.1.2.4 Scope Statem en t
1.1.3 Sp ecification s
1.1.4 High-Level Statem en t of Work
1.2 Market An alysis
1.2.1 In tern al Cap ability Plu s Cost
1.2.2 Qualified Ven dors
1.2.3 RFI (In form ation )
1.2.4 RFI Subm ission s
1.2.5 Decision An alysis (In clu des Make/ Buy)
1.3 Requ est for Proposal (RFP)
1.3.1 RFP Develop m en t
1.3.1.1 Solu tion Criteria
1.3.1.2 Backgroun d an d Gen eral Scope of Work
1.3.1.3 Priorities/ Requ irem en ts
1.3.1.4 Type of Solu tion Sought
1.3.1.5 Main ten ance an d Sup p ort; Warran ty; Train in g
92312$CH15
09-08-06 04:58:03
85
1.3.2
1.3.3
1.3.4
1.3.5
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
Accep tan ce Requ irem en ts

Sch edule
Bu dget
RFP Package
1.3.5.1 In struction s for Prep aration / Delivery of Subm ission s
1.3.5.2 Evaluation Criteria
1.3.5.3 Site In sp ection Requirem en ts
1.3.5.4 Withdrawal or Modification s of Prop osals
1.3.5.5 Respon sibility for Prop osal Costs
Solicitation
1.4.1 RFP Issu an ce
1.4.2 Bids
1.4.3 Bidder Con feren ce
1.4.4 RFP subm ission s/ Receip t
1.4.5 Resp on se Evaluation
1.4.6 Ven dor Criteria Matrix
1.4.7 Scorecard
1.4.8 Ven dor Qu alification
1.4.8.1 Prior Experien ce
1.4.8.2 Available Ven dor Resou rces/ Available Tim e
1.4.8.3 Qu ality referen ces
1.4.9 Ven dor Award
1.4.9.1 Managem en t Ap p rovals
1.4.9.2 Legal Review an d App rovals
1.4.10 Letter of In ten t (LOI)
Con tract
1.5.1 Master Agreem en t
1.5.1.1 Contract Negotiation
1.5.1.2 Fin alized Term s an d Con dition s (Use Boiler Plate)
1.5.1.3 Fin alized Scope/ Schedule/ Cost
1.5.2 Con tract Orders/ Task Orders/ CSOWs
1.5.2.1 Sp ecific Deliverables
1.5.2.2 Iden tified Resou rces
1.5.2.3 Defin ed SLAs
1.5.2.4 Defin ed Acceptan ce Criteria
1.5.2.5 Defin ed Perform an ce Measures
1.5.2.6 Issued PO/ Task Order
1.5.3 Executed Agreem en t/ Sign ed Con tract
Task Order/ Con tract Order SOW
Project Man agem en t
Note: PMI Project Man agem en t Stan dards Op en Workin g Session volu n teers at
PMIs 99 Sem in ars & Sym posiu m origin ally created this WBS exam p le. It h as been
su bsequ en tly been up dated as part of the develop m en t of th is release of th e Practice Stan dard.
86
92312$CH15
09-08-06 04:58:03
Appendix K
Web Design Work Breakdown

Web Design Project WBS
Th is exam p le is of a WBS to design , build an d dep loy a com m ercial In tern et Web site
th at sells th e organ ization s own products within on e cou n try. The h igh -level ph ases
of the develop m en t lifecycle are placed at Level 1 of the WBS. Major work with in that
ph ase is further elaborated with in each area. As with all WBS exam p les, differen t
bran ch es of a WBS can be decom posed to differen t levels of detail. This WBS is gen eric
an d as su ch serves as a WBS tem plate wh ich would be cu stom ized for specific p roject
in stan ce. Addition ally, both outline an d tree-stru cture views of th is WBS are provided
for com parison .
1 WBS for Web Design Project
1.1 Plan n in g
1.1.1 Product Defin ition
1.1.2 Stakeholder App roval
1.2 Defin ition
1.2.1 Requirem en ts Develop m en t
1.2.1.1 Bu sin ess Requirem en ts Developm en t
1.2.1.2 System Requ irem en ts Develop m en t
1.2.2 Con ceptual Design Develop m en t
1.2.2.1 Con cep tual Data Design
1.2.2.2 Con cep tual Process Design
1.2.3 Arch itectural Design Developm en t
1.2.3.1 Web Design Methods Evaluation
1.2.3.2 Web Design Method Selection
1.2.4 Bill of Materials (BoM) Creation
1.2.5 Resource Procurem en t
1.2.5.1 Hu m an Resou rces Procu rem en t
1.2.5.2 Hardware Procurem en t
1.2.5.3 Software Procurem en t
1.2.5.4 Telecom m un ication s Procurem en t
1.3 Con struction
1.3.1 Detailed Design Develop m en t
92312$CH16
09-08-06 05:49:24
87
1.3.1.1 Data Design

1.3.1.2 Busin ess Logic Design
1.3.1.3 User In terface Design
1.3.1.4 In tern al Design Stan dards Consu ltation
1.3.1.5 In dustry Design Stan dards Con sultation
1.3.2 High -Level Test Plan Develop m en t
1.3.3 System Com p on en tsCode, Un it Test
1.3.3.1 Database Com p on en ts
1.3.3.2 Code/ Logic Com p on en ts
1.3.3.3 Web GUI In terface Com p on en ts
1.3.4 System In stallation (Con figu re)
1.4 Testin g
1.4.1 Testin g Execu tion
1.4.1.1 System Test
1.4.1.2 User Acceptan ce Test
1.4.1.3 Perform an ce Test
1.4.2 An alyze Defects/ Correct
1.4.3 Produ ction Readin ess Verification
1.5 Dep loym en t
1.5.1 Tran sition
1.5.1.1 Su pp ort Person n el Train in g
1.5.1.2 Su pp ort Procedures Docum en tation
1.5.1.3 Software
1.5.1.4 Hardware
1.5.2 Legacy System Decom m ission in g
Tree Structure View

On e of th e m ost com m on ways to rep resen t a WBS is the grap hic Tree Stru ctu re, or
Orga n iza tion a l Cha rt structu re in wh ich each ch ild elem en t is shown as a box
with a lin e con n ectin g it to the p aren t elem en t of which it is a com p on en t. This
rep resen tation m akes very explicit th e way in which the p roject an d the su bordin ate
com p on en ts are h ierarch ically decom posed in to sm aller an d sm aller elem en ts. Th e
exam ple illu strates h orizontal distribution for WBS levels. The p h ases are placed vertically in top down sequen ce. Th is app roach works well for WBS with variable decom position of each p hase. Two techn iqu es are illustrated in Figures K1 an d K2 to sh ow h ow
pap er position (lan dscap e or vertical) can ch an ge th e WBS. In the h orizon tal lan dscape
the boxes for Level 3 h ad been om itted for addition al clarity to the graph .
88
92312$CH16
09-08-06 05:49:24
Figure K-1. Horizontal Portrait View
92312$CH16
09-08-06 05:49:24
89
Figure K-2. Horizontal Landscape View
Th is WBS exam p le is illu strative on ly an d is in ten ded to p rovide gu id an ce to th e reader. No claim of
com p leten ess is m ade for an y sp ecific p roject, th e exa m ple m ay be com p lete or in com p lete. All exa m p les
reflect th e qu ality p rin cip les expressed in th is Practice Stan dard. As exp ressed in the PMBOK Gu ide
given p roject (Project Man agem en t In stitute 2004).
90
92312$CH16
09-14-06 11:21:09
Appendix L
Telecom WBS Example

Th e WBS exam ple below is disp layed in a stan dard outlin e form at. At level 2, th is WBS
is organ ized accordin g to th e p roject lifecycle, from creation of th e con cep t th rou gh
produ ct develop m en t, cu stom er accep tan ce an d on goin g sup port an d m ain ten an ce.
Within each level 2 WBS Elem en t are in clu ded lower level deliverables th at are sp ecific
to th at stage an d in clude, am on g others, reviews an d decision s, an alyses, tan gible
deliverables, an d services. Th e Project Man agem en t WBS Elem en t is n ot decom posed
to the sam e level of detail as the others. Both an outlin e an d vertical tree-structu re
view are p rovided for com parison.
1 WBS for Telecom Project
1.1 Con cep t/ Feasibility
1.1.1 Con cept
1.1.2 Marketin g An alysis
1.1.3 Market Plan
1.1.4 Tech n ical An alysis
1.1.5 Product Scope Defin ition
1.1.6 Prototype
1.2 Requ irem en ts
1.2.1 En d-User Requ irem en ts
1.2.2 App lication Requirem en ts
1.2.3 In frastructure (System s) Requirem en ts
1.2.4 Op eration s/ Main tenan ce Requirem en ts
1.2.5 Service Requirem ents
1.3 Go/ No Go Decision
1.3.1 Prototype Review
1.3.2 Fin an cial Review
1.3.3 Schedule Review
1.3.4 Tech n ical Capabilities Review
1.3.5 Fin an cial Com m itm en t Review
1.3.6 Go/ No-Go Decision
1.4 Develop m en t
1.4.1 En d-User System s
1.4.2 App lication
92312$CH17
09-08-06 05:53:34
91
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.4.3 In frastructu re System s

1.4.4 Network
1.4.5 Operation s/ Main ten an ce System s
1.4.6 Service Plan
Testin g
1.5.1 Test Plan s
1.5.2 Tests
1.5.3 Resu lts
1.5.4 Corrective Action s
1.5.5 Retests
1.5.6 Retest Results
Dep loym en t
1.6.1 Trial in a Non -Pen alty En viron m en t
1.6.2 First Action Site
1.6.3 Deploym en t
Life-cycle Sup p ort
1.7.1 Custom er Train in g & Education
1.7.2 Tu rn over to Cu stom er
1.7.3 Custom er Accep tan ce
1.7.4 Sup port & Main ten an ce
The in form ation sh own in th e above ou tlin e form at can be disp layed in m an y
oth er views. For exam p le, a top -down tree structu re is frequen tly used. This view is
dep icted below.
Figure L-1. Top-Down Tree Structure
92
92312$CH17
09-08-06 05:53:34
Note: PMI Project Man agem en t Stan dards Open Working Session volun teers at
PMIs 99 Sem in ars & Sym p osiu m origin ally created th is WBS exam p le. It has been
subsequen tly been up dated as p art of th e develop m en t of th is release of th e Practice Stan dard.
92312$CH17
09-08-06 05:53:34
93
92312$CH17
09-08-06 05:53:34
Appendix M
Refinery TurnAround WBS

Example
Refinery TurnAround Project WBS
Th is is an exam ple of a WBS for the Tu rn Arou n d (T/ A) of equ ip m en t for a refin ery.
Work orders are rolled u p u n der the Equip m en t ID 1.2.1.3 (WBS Level 4). In this
exam p le, th e Level 3 deliverable (Coolan t) is decom p osed to the work level in align m en t
with h ow th e work will be p erform ed. Not all bran ches of th e WBS are decom posed
to th e sam e level of detail. Th is WBS is gen eric an d as such serves as a WBS tem p late
which would be custom ized for specific p rojects. Certain WBS elem en ts will be decom posed to a greater level of detail as those details for a sp ecific project becom e kn own .
Th is exam p le is sh own in two form ats, as an in den ted tabular ou tlin e an d as a
grap h ic tree structure. An y form at is accep table as lon g as it is con sisten t with the
Qu ality prin cip les described in this Stan dard.
1 WBS for Refin ery Turn Arou n d Project
1.1 Pre-Tu rn Aroun d
1.2 Shu tdown
1.2.1 Coolan t
1.2.1.1 Main Coolan t System (s) Shu t Down
1.2.1.2 Radiator CDWEST02
1.2.1.2.1 Work Order #1
1.2.1.2.2 Work Order #2
1.2.1.2.3 Work Order #3
1.2.1.3 Radiator CDWEST03
1.2.1.4 Au xiliary Coolan t System (s) Shu t Down
1.2.2 Hydrau lic
1.2.3 Electrical
1.2.3.1 Tran sform er ELECTNWDC05
1.2.3.1.1 Work Order #1
1.2.3.1.2 Work Order #2
1.2.3.1.3 Work Order #3
1.2.3.2 Tran sform er ELECTNWDC07
92312$CH18
09-08-06 05:54:44
95
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
Main Tu rn Aroun d
Com m ission in g
Post-Turn Arou n d
En gin eerin g
96
92312$CH18
09-08-06 05:54:44
Appendix N
Government Design-Bid-Build
WBS Example
Government Design-Bid-Build Project WBS
Th is is an exam p le of a WBS for a Govern m en t Design -Bid-Build Con struction p roject,
dep icted from th e govern m en ts poin t of view.
Th is is a very h igh level WBS and wou ld be decom posed to a greater level of detail
in sp ecific cases. Becau se th is is a Design -Bid-Build Project, each ph ase is treated
alm ost as a sep arate p roject because each m ay be p lan n ed and executed by a differen t
organ ization . For this reason it m akes sen se to in clu de certain service deliverable WBS
elem en ts sep arately with in each ph ase, e.g., Project Man agem en t. Th ese are m odu lar
WBS Elem en ts.
1 WBS for Govern m en t-sp on sored Design -Bid-Bu ild Project
1.1 Ph ase 1: Prosp ectu s
1.1.1 Project Man agem ent Plan s for Phase 1
1.1.1.1 Scope Man agem en t Plan
1.1.1.2 Cost an d Sch edu le Man agem en t Plan
1.1.1.3 Quality Man agem en t Plan
1.1.1.4 Hu m an Resou rces Man agem en t Plan
1.1.1.5 Com m un ication Man agem en t Plan
1.1.1.6 Risk Man agem en t Plan
1.1.1.7 Procurem en t Man agem en t Plan
1.1.2 Description of Cu stom er Needs
1.1.3 Prelim in ary Plan s of Altern atives
1.1.4 Estim ates for Alternatives
1.1.5 Cost/ Ben efit An alysis
1.1.6 Rep ort
1.2 Ph ase 2: Selected Altern ative (m ay be com bin ed with Phase 1, depen din g on
the requirem en ts set by the legislative bran ch )
1.2.1 Project Man agem ent Plan s for Phase 2 (seven p lan s, as for Ph ase 1)
1.2.2 En viron m en tal Studies
1.2.2.1 Biological
1.2.2.2 Arch aeological
1.2.2.3 Air Quality
92312$CH19
09-08-06 05:55:42
97
1.2.3
1.2.4
1.2.5
1.2.6
1.3 Phase
1.3.1
1.3.2
1.3.3
1.3.4
1.3.5
1.3.6
1.3.7
1.3.8
1.4 Phase
1.4.1
1.4.2
1.4.3
1.4.4
1.4.5
1.4.6
1.5 Phase
1.5.1
1.5.2
1.5.3
1.5.4
1.5.5
1.2.2.4 Water Qu ality

1.2.2.5 Social an d Econ om ic
More Detailed Plan s of Altern atives
Estim ates for Altern atives
Draft Report
Fin al Rep ort
3: Real Property
Project Man agem en t Plan s for Ph ase 3 (seven plan s, as for Phase 1)
Ap p raisal
Acqu isition
Relocation of Occu p an ts
Dem olition
Relocation of Utilities
Hazardous Waste Rem oval
En viron m ental Mitigation
4: Con tract Award Docum en ts
Detailed Plan s of Selected Altern ative
1.4.2.1 Civil Plan s
1.4.2.2 Water Su p ply an d Rem oval Plan s
1.4.2.3 Structural Plan s
1.4.2.4 Fu rnish in g Plan s
Specifications
1.4.3.1 General Provision s
1.4.3.2 Sp ecial Provision s
Estim ate
Bid Docum en ts
Sign ed Con tract
5: Ph ysical Im p rovem en t (con struction)
Civil Work
1.5.2.1 Earth work
1.5.2.2 Pavem en t
Water Sup p ly, Drain age, an d San itation
1.5.3.1 Drain age
1.5.3.2 Water Su p ply
1.5.3.3 Sanitary Sewers an d Pu rification
Stru ctural Work
1.5.4.1 Structures
1.5.4.2 Electrical
1.5.4.3 Mechan ical
Fu rn ish in gs
98
92312$CH19
09-08-06 05:55:42
Appendix O
Soft ware Implement at ion WBS

Example
Th is exam p le illustrates a gen eric WBS that cou ld be ap plied to ran ge of differen t
software develop m en t p rojects by suitable cu stom ization , especially at th e lower levels.
As su ch it is a WBS Tem p late. The deliverables in clude overhead work, su ch as Adm in istration, in term ediate deliverables, su ch as requ irem en ts ap p rovals, tan gible en d
produ cts, such as con figured software an d services su ch as train in g. Not all WBS
Elem en ts are decom p osed to the sam e level of detail, for exam p le, Go Live. Th ese
could be decom p osed furth er in the con text of a sp ecific p roject. This WBS exam p le
is shown below in two form ats. The first is the stan dard outlin e form at, th e secon d
top-down tree structure view is provided for com parison .
1 WBS for Software Im p lem en tation Project
1.2 Produ ct Requ irem en ts
1.2.1 Software Requirem en ts
1.2.1.1 Draft Software Requirem en ts
1.2.1.2 Fin al Software Requirem en ts
1.2.1.3 Software Requ irem en ts Ap p roval
1.2.2 User Docum en tation
1.2.2.1 Draft User Docum en tation
1.2.2.2 Fin al User Docu m en tation
1.2.2.3 User Docu m en tation Ap proval
1.2.3 Train in g Program Materials
1.2.3.1 In itial Trainin g Requ irem en ts
1.2.3.2 In itial Trainin g Materials
1.2.3.3 Trial Course Delivery
1.2.4 Hardware
1.2.4.1 Draft Hardware Requirem en ts
1.2.4.2 Fin al Hardware Requ irem en ts
1.2.4.3 Hardware Requ irem en ts Ap proval
1.2.5 Im p lem en tation & Future Sup p ort
1.3 Detail Software Design
1.3.1 In itial Software Design
1.3.2 Fin al Software Design
1.3.3 Software Design Approval
1.4 System Con struction
1.4.1 Con figu red Software
1.4.2 Cu stom ized User Docum en tation
1.4.3 Cu stom ized Train in g Program Materials
1.4.4 In stalled Hardware
1.4.5 Im p lem en tation & Future Sup p ort
92312$CH20
09-08-06 05:59:28
99
1.5 Test
1.5.1 System Test Plan
1.5.2 System Test Cases
1.5.3 System Test Resu lts
1.5.4 Accep tan ce Test Plan
1.5.5 Accep tan ce Test Cases
1.5.6 Accep tan ce Test Resu lts
1.5.7 Ap p roved User Docu m en tation
1.6 Go Live
1.7 Su pp ort
1.7.1 Train in g
1.7.2 En d User Sup port
1.7.3 Produ ct Su pport
Figure O-1. Software Implementation WBS Example

100
92312$CH20
09-08-06 05:59:28
Appendix P
Horizont al Tree St ruct ure Format

WBS Example
Th is h orizon tal tree disp lay of a high level Work Breakdown Stru cture (WBS) con tain s
all basic work associated with th e con crete can oe design , con struction , an d docu m en tation . It clearly defin es the work to be perform ed, iden tifies the n eeded exp ertise,
assists in selection of th e p roject team an d establishes a base for p roject sch edulin g
an d con trol. Each of th e item s listed can con tin ue to be broken down (as in dicated
by th e arrows) u n til there is a specific task th at can be assign ed to m em bers of the
con crete can oe team . For exam ple, u n der Can oe Display Stan ds, th e sp ecific tasks
wou ld in clude p rocurin g m aterials, con stru ctin g the stan ds, pain tin g th e stan ds, an d
ap plying an y decals. Th ese are work tasks th at can be given specifically to a group or
in dividual. An issu e with th is WBS is the fact that som e WBS elem en ts are stated as
activities usin g verb p hrases. Ideally, all WBS elem en ts sh ou ld be stated as n ou n s that
describe decom posed elem en ts of th e work.
92312$CH21
09-08-06 06:01:00
101
Figure P-1. Horizontal Tree Structure Format WBS Example

Source: Modified from: Concrete Canoe Design GuideScott Rutledge & Ryan McKaskle, http:/ /
members.cox.net/ concretecanoe/ wbs.htm
102
92312$CH21
09-08-06 06:01:00
References
Hau gan, Gregory T. (2002). Effective Work Brea kdown Stru ctures. Vien n a, VA Man agem en tCon cep ts.
Pritchard, Carl L. (1998). How to Bu ild a Work Brea kdown Stru ctu re: The Corn erston e
of Project Ma n a gem en t. Arlin gton VA. ESI In tern ation al.
Project Man agem en t In stitu te. (2003). Orga n iza tion a l Project Ma n a gem en t Ma tu rity
Model (OPM3 ): Kn owledge Fou n dation . Newtown Squ are, PA: Project Man agem en t In stitu te.
Project Man agem en t In stitute. (2004). Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Ea rn ed Va lu e Ma n a gem en t
(EVM). Newtown Squ are, PA: Project Man agem en t In stitute.
Project Man agem en t In stitute. (2001) Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu res. Newtown Square, PA: Project Man agem en t In stitu te.
Project Man agem en t In stitute. (2004). A Gu ide to the Project Ma n a gem en t Body of
Kn owledge (PMBOK Gu ide)Third Edition . Newtown Squa re, PA: Project Ma n a gem en t In stitu te.
Project Man agem en t In stitu te. (in developm en t). Th e Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Schedu lin g.
Newtown Square, PA: Project Man agem en t In stitu te.
Project Man agem en t In stitu te. (Available May 2006). Th e Stan da rd for Portfolio Ma n a gem en t. Newtown Square, PA: Project Man agem en t In stitu te.
Project Man agem en t In stitu te. (Available May 2006). Th e Stan da rd for Progra m Ma n a gem en t. Newtown Square, PA: Project Man agem en t In stitu te.
Uyttewaal, Eric (2005). Dyn a m ic Sch edu lin g with Microsoft Office Project 2003: The
Book by a n d for Profession a ls. Boca Raton , FL: J. Ross Pu blishin g, In c.
McDon ald Bradley, In c. 2002. In depen den t Verifica tion a n d Valida tion (IVa n d V) White
Pa per. Decem ber 2002, available from h ttp :/ / www.m cdon aldbradley.com / com p s/
wh ite%20papers/ IVV%20white%20p ap er.pdf; accessed 20 February 2005.
Berg, Cin dy an d Colen so, Kim . 2000. Work Breakdown Stru cture Practice Stan dard
Project WBS vs. Activities, PM Network, April 14(4): 6971. Project Man agem en t
In stitu te, 2000. (Jou rn a l a rticle) CID 1253
Chapm an , Jam es R. 2004. Work Brea kdown Stru ctu res, Version 2.01, Novem ber, 2004.
a va ilab le fro m h ttp :/ / www.h yp erth ot.com / p m wb s.h tm ; accessed 22 Feb ru a ry
2005.
Clelan d, David I. 1964A. Air Un iversity Review. Novem berDecem ber. p . 13.
Clelan d, David I. 1964B. Wh y Project Ma n a gem en t? Busin ess Horizon s. Win ter. p . 81.
Dep artm en t of Defen ce. 1995. Work Brea kdown Stru ctu res for Defen ce Ma teriel Projects.
Com m on wea lth o f Au stra lia , Au stralia n De fen ce Stan da rd Draft Def(Au st)5664
Issue A.
Dep a rtm en t of Defen se. 1975. Milita ry Sta n d a rd Work Brea kd own Stru ctu res for
Defense Ma teriel Item ., (MIL-STD-881A). Wash in gton DC. 1 Novem ber 1975.
Dep artm en t of Defen se, 1998. Depa rtm en t of Defen se Ha ndbook. Work Brea kdown
Stru ctu re MIL-HDBK-881. Washin gton DC. 2 Jan uary 1998.
92312$CH22
09-08-06 06:02:03
103
De p a rt m e n t o f En ergy. 2001. Perfor m a n ce Ba sed Con t ra ctin g: Develop m en t of a

Wor k St a t em en t . Au gu st .. a va ila b le fr o m h t t p :/ / www1.p r.d o e .go v/ a cq gu id e /
AGCh ap ter37.htm ; accessed 18 Jan u ary 2005.
Din sm ore, Pau l C. 2000. En terprise Project Man agem en t: A Road Map for Gettin g off
to th e Righ t Start,PM Network. Ju n e. p. 27.
Gith en s, Gregory D. 2001. Man age In n ovation Program s with a Rollin g Wave. PM
Network. May. p . 35.
Globerson , S. 1994. Im pact of Various Work-Breakdown Structu res on Project Con cep tualization . In tern a tiona l Jou rn a l of Project Ma n agem en t. 12 (3) p . 165.
Grove, Corn elius, Hallowell, Willa an d Sm ith, Cyn th ia J. A Parallel WBS for Intern ation al Projects. PM Network. March. p . 37.
Halli, Wayn e. 1993. PM Network. May. p . 12.
Haugan , Gregory T. 2002. Effective Work Brea kdown Stru ctu res. Vien n a, VA Man agem en t Con cep ts.
Hom er, John L an d Gu n n , Pau l D. 1995. Work Stru cturin g for Effective Project Man a gem en t. Project Man agem en t In stitute 26th An n u al Sem in ar/ Sym p osiu m . New Orlean s
LA, October, 1995. p. 84.
Kast, Frem on t an d Rosen zweig, Jam es. 1961. Weap on System Man agem en t an d Organ ization al Con cep ts. Jou rn a l of Am erica n Milita ry. Decem ber.
Kerzn er H. 1997. Project Ma n a gem en t: A System s Approa ch to Pla n n in g, Sch edu lin g,
a n d Con trollin g (6th ed.). New York: Joh n Wiley & Son s.
Kerzn er H. 1996. Th e Growth a n d Ma tu rity of Modern Project Ma n a gem en t. 27th An n ual
Sem in ar/ Sym p osiu m October 1996. Boston MA: Project Man agem en t In stitute.
Klopp en borg, Tim othy J an d Op fer, Warren A. 2002. The Cu rren t State of Project
Man agem en t Research : Tren ds, In terp retation s, and Prediction s. Project Man a gem en t Jou rn a l. 33 (2).
Luby, Robert E., Peel, Douglas, an d Swahl, William . 1995. Com p on en t-Based Work
Breakdown Stru cture (CBWDS). Project Ma n a gem en t Jou rn a l. Decem ber. p . 38.
Man su y, Joh n . 1991. Work Breakdown Stru ctu re: A Sim p le Tool for Com p lex Jobs.
Cost En gin eerin g. 33(12). Decem ber.
McDon ald Bradley, In c.. 2002. In dep en den t Verification an d Validation Wh ite Paper.
Decem ber 2002., retrieved 2/ 20/ 2005, Website: h ttp:/ / www.m cdon aldbradley.com /
com p s/ wh ite%20p apers/ IVV%20white%20p ap er.pdf
Nation al Aeron autics an d Space Adm in istration . 1962. DOD a n d NASA Gu ide. PERT
Cost System s Design . Ju ne 1962. Washin gton DC: Office of the Secretary of Defen se.
Nation al Aeron autics an d Sp ace Adm in istration . NASA PERT a n d Com pa n ion Cost
System Ha n dbook. Washin gton , DC. October 30, 1962.
Nation al Aeron au tics an d Sp ace Adm in istration . (1994) Work Breakdown Structure.
May, 1994.
Pritch ard, Carl L. 1998. How to Bu ild a Work Brea kdown Stru ctu re: The Corn erston e
of Project Ma n a gem en t. Arlin gton VA. ESI In tern ation al.
Project Man agem en t In stitute. 1969. Articles of In corpora tion .
Project Man agem en t In stitute. PMI Toda y. Ap ril 2003.
Project Man agem en t In stitu te. 2003. Orga n iza tion al Project Ma n a gem en t Matu rity
Model (OPM3 ): Kn owledge Foun dation . Newtown Square, PA: Project Man agem en t In stitute.
Project Man agem en t In stitute. 2004. Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Ea rn ed Va lu e Ma n a gem en t
(EVM). Newtown Square, PA: Project Man agem en t In stitu te.
Project Man agem en t In stitute. 2001. Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu res.
Newtown Squ are, PA: Project Man agem en t In stitute.
104
92312$CH22
09-08-06 06:02:03
Project Man agem en t In stitu te. 2004. AGu ide to th e Project Man a gem en t Body of Kn owledge (PMBOK Gu ideThird Edition ). Newtown Square, PA: Project Ma n a gem en t
In stitu te.
Project Man agem en t In stitu te. (curren tly in develop m en t). The Pra ctice Sta n da rd for
Sch edu lin g. Newtown Square, PA: Project Man agem en t In stitu te.
Project Man agem en t In stitu te. (Available May 2006). Th e Stan da rd for Portfolio Ma n a gem en t. Newtown Square, PA: Project Man agem en t In stitu te.
Project Man agem en t In stitu te. (Available May 2006). Th e Stan da rd for Progra m Ma n a gem en t. Newtown Square, PA: Project Man agem en t In stitu te.
Project Man agem en t In stitu te. 2000. Pra ctice Sta n da rd for Work Brea kdown Stru ctu res .
Newtown Square, PA: Project Man agem en t In stitu te.
Project Man agem en t In stitu te Stan dards Com m ittee. 1987. A Gu ide to the Project
Ma n agem en t Body of Kn owledge (PMBOK Gu ide ). Newtown Squ are, PA: Project
Man agem en t In stitute.
Project Man agem en t In stitu te Stan dards Com m ittee. 1996. A Gu ide to the Project
Ma n agem en t Body of Kn owledge. Darby PA: Project Man agem en t In stitute.
Rad, Parviz F. 1999 Advocatin g a Deliverable-Orien ted Work Breakdown Structu re.
Cost En gin eerin g. 41(12). Decem ber, p 35.
Raz, T. an d Globerson , S. 1998. Effective Sizin g an d Conten t Defin ition of Work
Packages. Project Man agem ent Journ al. Decem ber.
Sh tub, Avrah am . 1997. Project Segm en tation ATool for Project Man agem en t. In tern a tion a l Jou rn a l of Project Ma n a gem en t. 15(1). p. 15.
Stewart, Jo h n M. 1965. Ma kin g Project Ma n a gem en t Work. Bu sin ess Horizon s.
Fall. 1965.
Uyttewaal, Eric. 2005. Dyn a m ic Schedu lin g with Microsoft Office Project 2003: The Book
by a nd for Profession a ls. Boca Raton , FL. J. Ross Pu blishing, In c.
Ward, Gregory F. 2001. The WBS Diction aryExten din g th e Work Breakdown Structu re, Proceedin gs of th e Project Ma n a gem en t In stitu te Ann u a l Sem in a rs & Sym posiu m . Novem ber. Nash ville TN: Project Man agem en t In stitute.
Webster, Fran cis M. Jr. 1999. They Wrote th e Book. Th e Early Literature of Modern
Project Man agem en t. PM Network. Augu st.
You ker, Robert. 1999. A New Look at the WBS: Project Breakdown Structure. PM
Network. Novem ber. p. 33.
92312$CH22
09-08-06 06:02:03
105
92312$CH22
09-08-06 06:02:03
Glossary
Man y of th e words defin ed here have broader, an d in som e cases, differen t diction ary
defin ition s.
Th e defin ition s use the following con ven tion s:
Term s used as p art of th e defin ition s an d th at are defin ed in the glossary are sh own
in italics.
Wh en th e sam e glossary term ap p ears m ore th an on ce in a given defin ition , on ly
the first occurren ce is italicized.
In so m e ca ses, a sin gle glossa ry te rm co n sists o f m u lt ip le wo rd s (e .g., risk
resp on se p lan n in g).
Wh en syn on ym s are in cluded, n o defin ition is given an d the reader is directed to
th e preferred term (i.e., see preferred term ).
Related term s that are n ot syn onym s are cross-referen ced at the en d of th e defin ition
(i.e., see also related term ).
Activity. A com p on en t of work p erform ed du rin g the course of a p roject.
Ap p ortion ed Effort (AE). Effort ap plied to p roject work that is n ot readily divisible
in to discrete efforts for that work, bu t which is related in direct p rop ortion
to m easurable discrete work efforts. Con trast with discrete effort.
Con trol Accou n t (CA). A m an agem en t con trol poin t wh ere scope, budget (resou rce
p lan s), actu al cost, an d sch edule are in tegrated an d com p ared to earn ed
value for p erform an ce m easu rem en t. Con trol accoun ts are p laced at selected
m an agem en t p oin ts (sp ecific com p on en ts at selected levels) of th e work brea kdown stru ctu re. Each con trol accou n t m ay in clude one or m ore work p ackages,
bu t each work package m ay be associated with on ly on e con trol accoun t.
Each con trol accoun t is associated with a specific sin gle organ ization al com p on en t in th e organ ization al breakdown stru cture (OBS). Previously called a cost
accou n t. See also work package.
Cu stom er. Th e p erson or organization that will u se the p rojects p rodu ct or service
or resu lt. (See also u ser).
Decom p osition . A p lan n in g tech n iqu e th at su bdivides th e project scope an d project
delivera bles in to sm aller, m ore m an ageable com pon en ts, un til th e p roject
work associated with accom plishin g th e p roject scope an d providin g th e deliverables is defin ed in sufficien t detail to su pp ort executin g, m on itorin g, an d
con trollin g the work.
Deliverable. An y un ique an d verifiable produ ct, resu lt, or cap ability to p erform a
service th at m ust be produced to com plete a p rocess, ph ase, or project. Often
u sed m ore n arrowly in referen ce to an extern al deliverable, wh ich is a deliverable th at is su bject to app roval by th e p roject spon sor or cu stom er.
Level of Effort (LOE). Sup port-type activity (e.g., seller or cu stom er liaison , p roject
cost a ccou n tin g, p roject m an agem en t, etc.) wh ich does n ot p rodu ce defin itive
92312$CH23
09-08-06 06:02:59
107
en d products. It is gen erally ch aracterized by a un iform rate of work perform an ce over a period of tim e determ in ed by th e activities sup ported.
Organ ization al Breakdown Stru ctu re (OBS). A hierarch ically organ ized depiction
of the project organ ization arran ged so as to relate the work packages to the
p erform in g organ ization al u n its.
Ph ase. See project pha se.
Portfolio. A collection of projects or progra m s and other work th at are grou ped
together to facilitate effective m an agem en t of that work to m eet strategic
busin ess objectives. Th e projects or p rogram s of th e p ortfolio m ay n ot n ecessarily be in terdepen den t or directly related.
Portfolio Man agem en t. Th e cen tralized m an agem en t of on e or m ore p ortfolios,
wh ich in clu des iden tifyin g, p rioritizin g, authorizin g, m an agin g, an d con trollin g projects, progra m s, an d oth er related work, to ach ieve specific strategic
busin ess objectives.
Produ ct Scope. Th e featu res an d fun ction s th at ch aracterize a p rodu ct, service,
or result.
Program . A group of related projects m an aged in a coordin ated way to obtain
ben efits an d con trol n ot available from m an agin g them in dividually. Program s
m ay in clu de elem en ts of related work ou tside of th e scop e of the discrete
p rojects in the program .
Program Man agem en t. Th e cen tralized coordin ated m an agem en t of a progra m to
ach ieve the p rogram s strategic objectives an d ben efits.
Progressive Elaboration . Con tin u ou sly im p rovin g an d detailin g a p lan as m ore
detailed an d specific in form ation an d m ore accurate estim ates becom e available as the project p rogresses, an d th ereby produ cin g m ore accu rate an d
com p lete p lan s that result from th e su ccessive iteration s of th e plan n in g
process.
Project. A tem p orary en deavor un dertaken to create a u n iqu e product, service,
or result.
Project Ph ase. A collection of logically related project activities, usually culm in atin g
in the com p letion of a m ajor deliverable. Project ph ases (also called phases)
are m ain ly com pleted sequ en tially, but can overlap in som e project situation s.
Phases can be subdivided in to subp hases and th en com p on en ts; th is hierarch y, if th e p roject or p ortion s of the p roject are divided in to p hases, is con tain ed in th e work brea kdown stru ctu re. A p roject ph ase is a com p on en t of a
project life cycle. A p roject p hase is n ot a p roject m an agem en t p rocess group .
Project Scop e. Th e work that m ust be p erform ed to deliver a p rodu ct, service, or
result with th e specified featu res an d fun ction s.
Resou rce Breakdown Stru ctu re (RBS). A h ierarch ical structure of resou rces by
resou rce category an d resource type used in resource levelin g sch edu les an d
to develop resou rce-lim ited schedules, an d which m ay be u sed to iden tify
an d an alyze project h um an resource assign m en ts.
Respon sibility Assign m en t Matrix (RAM). Astructure th at relates th e p roject orga n iza tion a l brea kdown stru ctu re to the work brea kdown stru ctu re to help en sure
that each com p on en t of the projects scope of work is assign ed to a resp on sible
person / team .
Risk. An un certain even t or con dition th at, if it occurs, has a p ositive or n egative
effect on a projects objectives.
108
92312$CH23
09-08-06 06:02:59
Scope. The su m of the products, services, an d results to be provided as a p roject.

(See also project scope and produ ct scope.)
Scope Ch an ge. An y chan ge to the project scope. A scope chan ge alm ost always
requ ires an adjustm en t to the project cost or sch edule.
Stakeh older. Person or organ ization (e.g., cu stom er, sp on sor, p erform in g organ ization , or the pu blic) that is actively in volved in th e project, or wh ose in terests
m ay be p ositively or n egatively affected by execu tion or com p letion of th e
p roject. A stakeholder m ay also exert in fluen ce over th e project an d its delivera bles.
Stan dard. A docu m en t established by con sen su s an d app roved by a recogn ized
body th at p rovides, for com m on an d repeated use, rules, gu idelin es, or characteristics for activities or their resu lts, aim ed at th e achievem en ts of th e optim um degree of order in a given con text.
Statem en t of Work (SOW). A narrative description of products, services, or results
to be sup p lied.
Task. A term for work wh ose m ean in g an d p lacem en t with in a stru ctu red plan for
project work varies by the app lication area, in dustry, an d bran d of p roject
m an agem en t software.
User. Th e p erson or organ ization th at will use th e projects p rodu ct or service. (See
also cu stom er.)
Work Breakdown Stru ctu re (WBS). A deliverable-orien ted hierarchical decom p osition of the work to be execu ted by the project team to accom p lish the p roject
objectives an d create th e requ ired delivera bles. It organ izes an d defin es the
total scop e of th e p roject. Each descen din g level represen ts an in creasin gly
detailed defin ition of th e p roject work. The WBS is decom p osed in to work
pa cka ges. The deliverable orien tation of the h ierarchy in clu des both in tern al
an d extern al deliverables. (See also work pa cka ge and con trol a ccou n t.)
Work Breakdown Stru ctu re Com p on en t. An en try in th e work brea kdown stru ctu re
th at can be at an y level.
Work Breakd own Stru ctu re Diction ary. Adocum en t th at describes each com pon en t
in th e work brea kdown stru ctu re (WBS). For each WBS com p on en t, the WBS
diction ary in cludes a brief defin ition of th e scope or sta tem en t of work, defin ed
delivera ble(s), a list of associated activities, an d a list of m ileston es. Other
in form a tio n m ay in clu d e: resp o n sib le orga n iza tion , sta rt a n d e n d d a te s,
resources requ ired, an estim ate of cost, ch arge n u m ber, con tract in form ation ,
quality requirem en ts, an d tech n ical referen ces to facilitate perform an ce of
th e work.
Work Breakdown Stru ctu re Elem en t. An y sin gle work brea kdown stru ctu re (WBS)
elem en t or com pon en t an d its associated WBS attribu tes con tain ed within
an in dividual work breakdown structu re.
Work Package. A delivera ble or project work com p on ent at the lowest level of
each bran ch of the work brea kdown stru ctu re. The work p ackage in cludes the
sch edule activities an d sch edule m ileston es required to com p lete th e work
p ackage deliverable or project work com pon en t. (See also con trol a ccou n t.)
92312$CH23
09-08-06 06:02:59
109
92312$CH23
09-08-06 06:02:59
Index by Keyword
Activity ....................................................................................... 1, 4-5, 8, 14, 16-18, 43, 107
Apportioned Effort (AE) ......................................................................................................107
Cont rol Account (CA) ........................................................................................................107
Cust omer ...................................... 4-6, 10, 22, 24, 36, 52-53, 60-61, 63, 91-92, 97, 107, 109
Decomposition .................. 1, 3-4, 7-10, 16, 20, 22-23, 25, 35-38, 54-55, 65, 72, 88, 107, 109
Deliverable ...................3-6, 13, 15, 20-21, 24-25, 30-32, 35-38, 65, 81, 95, 97, 105, 107-109
Level of Effort (LOE) .......................................................................................................5, 107
Organizational Breakdown St ructure (OBS) ........................................5, 7, 13, 15, 22, 107-108
Phase .......................................................................... 4, 6, 24, 73-79, 87-88, 97-98, 107-108
Port folio .............................................................................................1-2, 15, 22, 27, 40, 108
Port folio Management ......................................................................18, 27, 40, 103, 105, 108
Product Scope ......................................................................................................91, 108-109
Program ..................................... x, 1-2, 15, 18, 22, 27, 37, 40, 43-44, 49, 62, 77-80, 99, 108
Program Management .................................................................13, 17-18, 80, 103, 105, 108
Progressive Elaborat ion ...........................................................................................2, 20, 108
Project ................ ix-xi, 1-25, 27-45, 47-55, 60-61, 63, 65, 69, 71-78, 80-81, 83, 85-88, 90-93,
95-105, 107-109
Project Phase ....................................................................................................................108
Project Scope ......................................... 1, 4-8, 11, 13-15, 18, 20-21, 24, 27-30, 33, 107-109
Resource Breakdown Structure (RBS) ..........................................................................15, 108
Responsibilit y Assignment Matrix (RAM) ...........................................................7, 13, 22, 108
Risk ....................................................... 1-4, 6, 13-14, 21, 25, 28, 33-35, 38-39, 97, 107-108
Scope ...................... 1-3, 5-9, 13-18, 20-22, 25, 28, 31, 33, 35-40, 51, 60, 85-86, 97, 107-109
Scope Change ...................................................................................................................109
St akeholder ................................................................................................14, 35-36, 87, 109
St andard .... ix-x, 1-2, 4, 8, 10, 13, 17-19, 27, 29-30, 41-49, 51, 61, 63, 69, 72, 76-77, 80, 83,
86, 90-91, 93, 95-96, 98-100, 102-105, 109
St atement of Work (SOW) .................................................................................................109
Task ..........................................................................................................5, 18, 86, 101, 109
User .............................................................................................2, 88, 91, 99-100, 107, 109
Work Breakdown St ructure (WBS) .... ix, 1, 5, 27, 43, 51, 65, 71, 73, 77, 81, 85, 87, 101, 109
Work Breakdown St ructure Component ..........................................................................5, 109
Work Breakdown St ructure Dictionary ................................................................................109
Work Breakdown St ructure Element ...................................................................................109
Work Package .................................................. 5-6, 8, 15, 17-18, 20-21, 30, 32, 36, 107, 109
92312$CIND
09-15-06 08:59:05
111

Practice Standard For Work Breakdown Structures Second Edition

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Practice Standard For Work Breakdown Structures Second Edition

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Project Management Institute

Practice Standard for Work Breakdown StructuresSecond Edition

Appendix GProcess Improvement Work Breakdown St ructure (WBS) Example ...................73

List of Tables and Figures

WBS Bicycle Example ...............................................................................8

Preface to the Second Edition

Preface to the Second Edition

In trodu ces th e WBS concept.

Defin ing th e WBS

Defin es the WBS an d its ch aracteristics.

How th e WBS fits with other project

Defin ing WBS

Docum en ts the characteristics of a

Provides guidance an d presen ts

Provides backgroun d inform ation on

Preface to the Second Edition

Provides docum en ted in du stry

Provides clarification of key term s th at

Introduction to t he Pract ice

1.3 Object ives

2.2 Common Usage of Terms

2.2.1 Definit ion of Terms

Activity. A com p on en t of work p erform ed du rin g the course of a p roject.

2.3.5 Organizat ional Perspect ive

2.3.6 WBS Levels

2.4 The 100% Rule

2.5 WBS for Const ruct ion of a Bicycle

Figure 2-1. WBS Bicycle Example

Figure 2-2. Annotated Bicycle Example

Figure 2-3. WBS Example

2.6 Represent at ions of t he WBS

Figure 2-4. WBS Representations Comparison

In tegration with Project Man agem en t Processes

3.2 Integration wit h Project Management Processes

Import ance of WBS in Process

Develop Preliminary Project Scope Statement (Section 4.2)

Scope Planning (Section 5.1)

Information Distribution (Section 10.2)

Monitoring and Controlling

Scope Verification (Section 5.4)

Table 3-1. Project Management Processes

3.3 Relat ionship t o Ot her Tools

3.3.2 Int errelat ionships Among Project Management Tools

3.3.3 WBS Development Tools

3.4 WBS Int egrat ion and Use by Other Standards

Defining WBS Qualit y

4.2 WBS Quality Principle 1

4.2.1 WBS Qualit y Sub-Principle 1Core Charact erist ics

4.2.2 WBS Qualit y Sub-Principle 2Use-Relat ed Charact erist ics

they be so large that th e item is un m an ageable or th e associated risks can n ot

4.3 WBS Qualit y Principle 2

4.4 Annotated Example of a High-Qualit y WBS

Figure 4-1. Annotated Example of a High-Quality WBS

4.5 Problem Diagnost ic Checklist

Som e plan n ed work does n ot get don e

Considerat ions While Creat ing

5.2 Preparing a WBS

5.2.1 Preparat ion Met hods

Structures project conveniently for

Requires constant attention that no

Starts with all deliverables and works

Identifying all deliverables before

Formats are predefined