Critical Path Method (CPM) improves on bar charts, offers a realistic problem-solving framework, reduces delays common with simple bars, and was introduced in 1957 by Morgan R. Walker (DuPont) and James E. Kelley (Remington Rand)—therefore, all the above.

Introduction / Context:
CPM adds logic, float analysis, and critical-path focus to scheduling—capabilities absent in simple bar charts. Historically, it emerged in the late 1950s in U.S. industry for large, complex projects requiring rigorous control.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Statements compare CPM to bar charts and cite historical origin.
• Minor spelling inconsistencies in names do not alter the fact pattern.

Concept / Approach:
Bar charts visualize time but not dependencies. CPM encodes precedence, computes earliest/latest times, derives floats, identifies the critical path, and enables crashing/time–cost optimization—making it more realistic for daily problem-solving and delay avoidance through proactive control.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Recognize CPM's enhancements: precedence logic + float → better control than bars alone.2) Realistic approach: CPM aligns resources and priorities with schedule risk (criticality).3) Delay avoidance: by guarding critical activities and using floats intelligently.4) Historical note: 1957 development credited to Morgan R. Walker (DuPont) and James E. Kelley (Remington Rand).

Verification / Alternative check:
Project management histories uniformly document the 1957 origin and industry application of CPM; practitioner evidence shows CPM reducing uncertainty-driven slippages compared with bar-only tracking.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Options A–D are all valid; choosing only one is incomplete. The inclusive choice reflects the full truth.

Common Pitfalls:

• Using CPM without periodic updates—logic must reflect reality to avoid delays.
• Relying solely on bars and missing dependency-driven risks.

Final Answer:
All the above.