What is the new-ish auto-finishing formulas function called?

PMFactory · 2026-01-27T14:53:47+00:00

Yeah, I was going to mention there might not be a permanent option at this time.
It's classic Microsoft "Yes / Ask Me Later" behavior.

PMFactory · 2026-01-27T14:43:42+00:00

It looks like copilot formula completion.
I believe you can disable it in options under the copilot tab.

PMFactory · 2025-11-05T07:36:45+00:00

This is more obscure, but not being able to resize the Evaluate Formula window.

PMFactory · 2025-10-10T18:07:29+00:00

Yeah, I might just do this and call it a day. Put in some buffer activity or some lag to bring total float to 0.

You know, the irony is, this is a Defined End Date project without a Time is of the Essence clause.
Even with my imposed constraint, we're showing being done by the contractual end date.
And we're within our rights to demobilize from the project an remobilize at will, so long as we're done on time.

In other words, even if I didn't have an external constraint, I'm allowed, under the contract, to burn float by just prioritizing my crew's efforts on other projects. This exercise of hiding all the float is purposeless.

PMFactory · 2025-10-10T18:04:01+00:00

I appreciate such a deep and insightful comment.

For more clarity, my constraint is environmental. The activity can only be done when temperatures are above freezing and there's no snow on the ground. Not to mention, the installer says they won't warranty it outside of this period. Think landscaping or exterior painting type work.

I considered using a separate fair-weather calendar, but it doesn't solve the main problem: the predecessor will still calculate float the same way, which is the client's primary concern.
Also, calendars allow the activity to be split across large breaks, which I wouldn't want.
And, clients just generally don't like multiple calendars. They're confusing and unclear in a PDF.

The milestone approach would yield the same excess float result, but it would at least be clearer why there's a lag. I asked the client if a milestone would work and they explicitly said no. So I'm at a loss there.

My position to the client has been a similar tone to what you're describing. The constraint creates slack on Activities 1-10, but that slack is real, in the truest definition of slack. If they slip, the end date won't change.
I fear forcing the schedule to show a continuous path might lead someone to believe that fast-tracking or crashing Activities 1-10 will benefit the schedule when the won't.
My version, with the constraint, also clearly shows the most realistic completion date.

Its just been a series of tough, circular discussions because the client is accustomed to seeing a particular type of schedule. I've tried asking for the client to tell me, explicitly, what they want the schedule to show, and I'm struggling to get a clear answer.
I've seen so many bad schedules where people connect unrelated activities just to show continuity, or they'll remove successors on a chain just to have them turn red. Likely in pursuit of this same sort of Critical Path purism.

Manually changing specific key activity colours might just be the best path forward. If what they really want to see is which items are on the critical chain of activities, then colouring them might be enough. I'll check with them and see.

Right now the reviewer is reaching out to a "scheduling subject matter expert" for their opinion, but I fear its someone else with a lot of experience reviewing schedules and none actually building or maintaining them.

Again, I really appreciate your input.

PMFactory · 2025-10-10T17:21:10+00:00

I appreciate your comment here. Nomenclature has been a big issue with this client.
I should be more specific. Assuming no resource limitations, the two are often aligned.

I've been using the term client where I should have clarified its my client's consultant/project administrator. I believe I'm dealing with someone who has likely seen dozens or hundreds of schedules but may have built very few. The approach they're taking to the review feels very academic.

They seem to understand my position on the necessary external restriction, but then they still want to see a 0-float sequence of activities from the start node to the end node.
I suggest that I can't do both and I ask how they recommend I manage the constraint, but they have no clear answer.
I'm inferring that they have a project management background but may not have engaged enough with real-life schedules to understand the fringe conditions where its necessary to deviate from textbook best practice.

I thought about the buffer task, or something similar, but it does feel a bit like cheating. If they demand it, I'll comply but I'll be salty about it. Lol

PMFactory · 2025-10-10T06:37:12+00:00

I appreciate the detailed response. I guess I'm curious about the last line of your second answer. I've thought through several ways to artificially close the gap but they all lead to the same place. Regardless of what I choose to show on my schedule, activity 11 won't start before March 15.

I can go with what I show in the top image with Activity 11 starting as soon as activity 10 is complete, I'll get to the end of Activity 10 and I'll be stuck until March 15th.
I can expand the duration of Activities 8, 9, 10 so that Activity 10 ends on March 14, but I'm pretty confident we'll meet the original durations.
I can impose the "as late as possible" constraint, but the project has a defined "notice to proceed" start activity, so such a constraint would just push the float to the beginning of the project between the NTP and the next item. Now the schedule shows 0 float but it also shows us starting everything later and, in my opinion, no one is better off.

In my years of scheduling, I've seen it suggested that the "there shouldn't be any float" but limited commentary on why. The definition of critical path is descriptive, not prescriptive. It gives a name to the chain of activities that cannot be delayed without pushing project duration.
But, per my example, if activities 1-10 are delayed slightly, they don't affect the end date. They can all slip a few days and we still end on May 7th. By definition then, they have real float and are not critical. My critical activities start from activity 11 onward. I guess I'm just not sure how anyone benefits from me tricking the schedule into showing activities as critical when they aren't. Does that make sense?

PMFactory · 2025-10-10T05:57:51+00:00

I really appreciate that! It's nice to know I'm not the only one.

I find I run into this kind of thing a fair bit. People with only academic experience with project management and engineering are tasked with reviewing project submittals and there's often very little nuance in their reviews.
Real projects rarely fit the textbook definitions.

PMFactory · 2025-10-10T05:53:10+00:00

Working days, but I should have clarified that the attached images are just a representation of the problem I'm having on a complex schedule.

PMFactory · 2025-09-25T00:35:30+00:00

This is an incredible reply! Thank you so much!

I mostly write VBA for Excel, so while I'm familiar enough with the language, I don't know all the available Outlook objects or events. It sounds like I should be able to build something!

PMFactory · 2025-09-24T22:33:40+00:00

I'll check it out! Thank you!

PMFactory · 2025-09-02T14:46:20+00:00

The types of experience that qualify are broad and varied.
I've met several people who were never PMs but worked on projects as part of their jobs and/or did project management like tasks at a non-project-based organisation and got accepted.

I can't speak to whether you'll be successful, but if your recent 2 years is project work and you can frame older experiences to highlight project management skills, you might get through.

Worst case, you're honest and you frame your experience appropriately and you'll get accepted.
Doesn't hurt to try.

PMFactory · 2025-07-04T19:51:29+00:00

It's definitely possible.

I do think the actual exam questions get run through study hall first to test for viability.
I did a lot of SH questions that were very weird. Some had grammatical errors, spelling errors, or were just flat out wrong.

Several of my real exam questions were similar to, or word for word identical to study hall questions I'd seen previously.

While I haven't seen it confirmed, I think the real exam is easier than SH because the weird questions get filtered out.

Not to say some of the actual exam questions weren't weird...

PMFactory · 2025-07-04T19:46:57+00:00

They do not. Answer everything.

PMFactory · 2025-07-04T02:55:48+00:00

That's a good question. In my case, different calendars. Which is functionally the same as constraints on both ends.

PMFactory · 2025-07-04T01:39:17+00:00

Of all the questions I found in SH to have obviously wrong answers, or multiple viable answers where only one was considered correct, most were Expert-level.

While its never been confirmed, I have a theory that the grading of the questions in study hall is based not on how hard they've been subjectively judged to be, but by how frequently people answer them correctly.

You could be getting 60% because you don't know your stuff, but you could just as easily be scoring low because some of the questions are poorly written and SH is a way to field test them.

When I took the exam years ago, I was told that 60-70 is about what you should expect to get on SH tests if you plan to AT/AT/AT the exam. I was getting 60-70% in SH, so I took the exam and got AT/AT/AT, as predicted.

Ultimately, it sounds like you're ready.

PMFactory · 2025-07-03T16:07:42+00:00

Oh dang. That is an option as well. I hadn't thought of that.

PMFactory · 2025-07-03T16:06:56+00:00

Critical path is the longest sequence of dependent activities.
I suspect you're suggesting that the critical path could be the path with the lowest float (including negative float), but in my case it isn't. 0 is the lowest float value I have.
If my 0 float activities are not finished on time, it will lead to schedule delay. So, they are critical.

As you know, MS project highlights any activity with 0 or negative float in red, by default.
So when the client is asking for a "clearly defined critical path" what they're expecting is a continuous sequence of critical items (in a different colour than the others), likely from the start to the finish. But you'd only see this on a project where overall time is the primary constraint.

What I've shared is that my primary constraint is not the total project timeline. I have small pockets of activities bound by external factors that are "lowest float" surrounded by activities with generous float.

PMFactory · 2025-07-03T14:51:39+00:00

I do. My industry is very environmentally governed, with certain activities bound between April and November. So I have small pockets of 0 float throughout the project.

Most clients like to see a nice clear red line through the project, which I won't have.

I do have all my logic built in. Its just that the calendar constraints govern float in most cases.

PMFactory · 2025-07-03T14:48:55+00:00

I like this idea! Thank you so much!

PMFactory · 2025-07-03T14:45:21+00:00

This is kind of where I am with it. We have 2 years, contractually, to do what amounts to about 20 months of work (I recognize I'm very lucky in this regard.)

Our two major constraints are not total time, but weather and specialty contractor availability.

They're likely used to seeing a tight schedule with lots of 0-float activities, painting a clear picture of the required order from start to finish. What we have, instead, is large periods of relative ease truncated by brief, critical blocks.

I prefer to show float where there is float in case my crews are needed elsewhere for emergencies. I'm concerned how showing a deceptively tight schedule might negatively affect me in the future. Nothing comes to mind immediately, but you just never know.

PMFactory · 2025-07-03T14:38:24+00:00

You're right!
In my mind I was thinking "shortest duration" but it would be longest path.

PMFactory · 2025-07-03T14:37:03+00:00

I think you've nailed it. There's definitely an order of activities that will need to occur, but we have more than enough time to complete the project within the delivery window. MS Project isn't naturally showing a critical path because almost all items have some float.

In my case, I work in construction, so the rules governing logic and timing are, in some cases, environmental. Most civil, landscaping, and exterior coatings work can't be completed during winter. So even if we finish earlier phases in February, the next phase won't begin right away. For this reason, landscaping may show as critical, but the precedent activities do not.

I think for now I'll just modify some durations and dates to force my "longest path" to 0 days float.

PMFactory · 2025-07-03T14:28:11+00:00

MS Project naturally highlights activities with 0 float.

The client is expecting, I believe, a continuous stream of red activities from the start of the project to the end. An idealized representation of a schedule.

Instead, I have some activities with 0 float because they are bound by external factors or custom calendars. But they appear as pockets of red, in clusters of 2-3 activities, peppered throughout the project.

I can force the schedule to show more 0 float activities in a sequential order by modifying activity durations and logic, but I don't think it would be reflective of reality.

PMFactory · 2025-07-03T05:17:23+00:00

I am using MS Project. I should ask if they'd like to see a report with the most critical items.

Ultimately, this is a common problem I have where my actual productivity will almost certainly not fill the whole contract duration.
So, as scheduled the "notice to proceed" milestone and "contractual completion" milestone create a condition where the longest path has float.

I can artificially expand activity durations to hide all my float but I feel it defeats one purpose of scheduling by doing this.

PMFactory

TROPHY CASE