PRO workshop proposal · Plan a verifiable work queue

Purpose and limits

Practice turning an operational goal into tasks, dependencies, capacity limits and evidence. This original workshop extends the proposed PRO topics of process design, productivity and business organization. It is editorial material, not the complete PRO curriculum, enrollment or an assessment that grants academic completion.

The entirely fictional project

Build a local information package containing a source sheet, a reply draft and organized sample files. No client data, financial decisions, sending, publishing or external tools. Fictional station A prepares work; station B reviews it. A station can perform only one task at a time. Durations below are fixed teaching assumptions, not forecasts for a real business.

The rules of this exercise

At most two tasks may be active at once, counting preparation or review. Queued tasks do not count as active. A task starts only after all dependencies finish. A handles T1,T3,T5,T6; B handles T2,T4. “Finished” means a local artifact exists for that task; it never means a customer was contacted or something published.

Build the board

Use queued, active, blocked and locally finished states. For each task record its dependency, station, start/end, evidence and pending issues. A blocked task needs a reason and next review; it is not silently marked finished. The task list below is the complete source for this workshop.

Project activity

First propose your own schedule on paper or in the CSV. Check every dependency, overlapping station assignment and active-task count. Keep a trace showing which source sheet and draft versions were reviewed. The package must include the task log, schedule, exception tests and a short explanation of limits.

A worked schedule, not a performance claim

One feasible plan finishes at minute 42: A prepares T1 from 0–15, T3 from 15–27, T5 from 27–37, then T6 from 37–42. B reviews T2 from 15–25 and T4 from 27–35. The sum of task durations is 60 task-minutes, while elapsed time is 42 because some work overlaps. Neither value proves actual time savings; both belong to the invented model.

Test exceptions before trusting the plan

Test 1: T2 at minute 10 is invalid because T1 finishes at 15. Test 2: starting T2,T3,T5 at 15 violates the two-active-task limit and assigns two simultaneous tasks to A. Test 3: if B is unavailable15–20, a feasible revised plan is T2 from 20–30, T4 from 30–38 and T6 from 38–43, with A’s earlier tasks unchanged. This is a one-minute model delay, not a business-loss estimate.

Review rubric — no pass threshold activated

Use four0–2 criteria as self-review: dependency accuracy; capacity/state consistency; evidence/version traceability; and honest limits/no unauthorized actions.0 means absent or incorrect,1 partial,2 complete. Write a reason per criterion. This rubric does not establish a passing score, academic completion, a certificate or any benefit. The owner must approve any formal assessment rule.

Final deliverable

Create one folder with the four CSV worksheets, a short local narrative and the fictional source artifacts. Explain why each test passed or failed and what would require human approval in a real project. Do not connect accounts to demonstrate the exercise. Keep everything local; this page collects no work.

What remains before an official PRO program

The full specialized curriculum, delivery format, schedule, instructors/reviewers and approved assessment criteria remain to be defined. This resource adds one usable workshop; it does not make the entire PRO program complete or activate its membership.

Download local worksheets

Files contain fictional data and no spreadsheet formulas. Do not enter customer data or secrets.

• Task sheet (CSV)
• Schedule (CSV)
• Tests (CSV)
• Rubric (CSV)
• Local project workbook (TXT)