Mairav Mintz PE CCM Omoniyi Ladipo CCM CCP EVP 2018 Project Management Symposium So your schedule says your project will finish on time is that all it is really telling you Learn how common distortions and practices make CPM schedules less useful than they should be ID: 723468
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Christopher Payne, PE, CCM" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Christopher Payne, PE, CCMMairav Mintz, PE, CCMOmoniyi Ladipo, CCM, CCP, EVP 2018 Project Management Symposium
So your schedule says your
project will finish on time . . .
is that all it is really telling you?Slide2
Learn how common distortions and practices make CPM schedules less useful than they should be.Understand earned value metrics in cost-loaded schedules.Examine insights gained from research of thousands of cost-loaded schedules.
Understand distinction between “schedule delay” (days) and “progress delay” (earnings).
See practical applications of these concepts.
Learning ObjectivesSlide3
Projects are often behind and finish late.Owners/construction managers consistently misinterpret schedules.Combined schedule and EVM review can help.Our research findings support this.
Our project experience supports this.
What We KnowSlide4
Is the critical path reasonable?Does the schedule show negative float?Is the project predicted to finish on time?Is progress recorded accurately?Are schedule revisions explained and justifiable?
The Obvious Signs in CPM Schedule ReviewSlide5
We conducted schedule review and EVM in tandem on a number of our projects.Our observations confirm that the best determination of project health is through the use of concurrent measurement of progress in time and earnings.
CPM Schedule Review & EV AnalysisSlide6
Origin of Combined cpm Review & EVm AnalysisSlide7
A result of a contract requirement.Project team understood the benefits resulting from looking beyond the critical path projection of completion and known distortions
How Has Combined Review Emerged?Slide8
Cpm schedule reviewSlide9
Owners examine contractors schedules to:Determine whether project is on, behind, ahead of plan through current critical and near critical path review.Forecast when the
project will be
completed through current critical path
review.
CPM Schedule ReviewSlide10
Some owners examine contractor schedules to:Review resource and cost loading plan, earnings and projections
Construction industry has been slow to adopt
Requires detailed updates to reflect
accurate progress.
Requires detailed
review of baseline
plan versus previous
and current updates.
CPM Schedule ReviewSlide11
COMBINED Cpm schedule review and EV analysisSlide12
Owners develop and analyze the PMBPMB: A time-phased budget plan for accomplishing work, used to measure contract performance. Developed using the data in the Baseline Schedule.
Performance Measurement BaselineSlide13
Owners use parameters such as:Planned Value (PV) or Budgeted CostEarned Value (EV)
Actual Cost (AC)
Derive EV schedulemetrics and
cost metrics
EVM ParametersSlide14
EV Schedule Metrics:Schedule Variance (SV)Schedule Performance Index (SPI)EV Cost Metrics:
Cost Variance (CV)
Cost Performance Index (CPI)
Estimate at
Completion (EAC)
EV AnalyticsSlide15
Project examples and our observations Slide16
Earned Schedule and Actual TimeSlide17
Budgeted costs vs. EV (S curves) were very effective illustrations of
progress.
EV curve for overall project showed overall
performance.
EV curves for subsets of
project revealed more
details about performance.
ObservationsSlide18
As time progressed, and work fell behind the plan, the S curves became steeper.Progress delay (AT-ES) also increased. Progress delay based on the critical path was sometimes more optimistic than the progress delay (AT-ES).
Schedule review and EV analysis used
concurrently to predict performance.
ObservationsSlide19
Tracked earned vs. planned values based on early, late, and average dates.Used average dates to determine performance
Late dates are too
late to course correctEarly dates don’t
consider float
ObservationsSlide20
Focused on monitoring work on the critical/near critical paths.Tracked earned vs. planned values
separately for:
Trades.Installation.
Procurement/
Level of Effort.
Change orders.
ObservationsSlide21
Tracked remaining work effort for trades against remaining time to planned completionEffective in projecting estimate to complete (ETC).Helped contractor
re-plan as needed.
ObservationsSlide22
Project schedule contained too much float. Contractor’s early completion schedule was unrealistic – confirmed by S curves.The continuing erosion
of float month after
month resulted in
S curves that were
progressively less
achievable.
ObservationsSlide23
Benefits of combined reviewSlide24
Alerts project team to project risks
Facilitates informed decision making
Enhances project team collaboration
Improves forecasting capabilities.
Benefits of Combined ReviewSlide25
Provides historical data for future projects.Provides lessons learned for future projects.
Scalable and
valuable for many
sizes and types
of projects.
Benefits of Combined ReviewSlide26
Independent research project by MBP.Are there common factors we can identify in looking at many projects and their schedules?
Are there common indications of trouble that can be observed by looking beyond the obvious signs?
Given Benefits of Combined Review, We Launched a Broader StudySlide27
Our research and findingsSlide28
Reviewed 128 projects of various types.Reviewed more than 2,500 schedules.Strictly used cost-loaded schedules.Converted all schedules to a common base of percentage time and percentage cost.
Our ResearchSlide29
The “crystal ball” of a CPM schedule is often broken.There is no “point of no return” in terms of schedule slippage. But…There is no “out of the woods” point, either!
In other words, projects can fail at any point.
Is there a project tipping point?Slide30
Earned Schedule and Actual TimeSlide31
We accept a poor baseline schedule…Late earnings too late.Late performance too steep. How realistic?
Research shows many
schedules exhibit unrealistic aspects.
Large float values
The
First
Crack in the Crystal BallSlide32
We look at the updates in the wrong way…We ignore EVM metrics in schedule updates.We zero in on projected end date/minimum float value.
We should look for the trend of earnings.
Our research shows: a “persistent delusion” on projects that finish late.
The
Second
Crack in the Crystal BallSlide33
Look for:
Underperformance compared to plan.
ES/AT vs. Projected
Finish/Planned Finish.
These should be
similar.
AT - ES is “progress
delay”.
Projected finish vs.
Planned finish is
“schedule delay”.
The
Second
Crack in the Crystal BallSlide34
We fail to consider, "Can it be done?"In baselines or updates, be very skeptical of steep sloping curves.J-curve or S-curve
Max slope? Recommend no more than 4
The Crystal Ball is Broken in halfSlide35
Research – Huge Slope Variations BadSlide36
Weak work breakdown structure, poor scheduleand cost loading pose
difficulties.
Lack of scheduling and EVM capabilities.Inaccurate specifications.
Cost of EVM – scalable.
Subjective interpretation of EVM metrics.
Challenges of Combined ReviewSlide37
The research findings have been borne out on several of our projects.The findings cannot be ignored.Adapt our practice of schedule management to address what we have learned.
Transform the way we think about progress.
Changing the Way we Think Slide38
Contact Niyi Ladipo at
nladipo@mbpce.com or 703-641-9088
Thank You!