Transcript Project Scheduling

Project Scheduling Presentation
Association for the Advancement
of Cost Engineering International (AACEi)
North Florida Section
March 19th, 2009 Section Meeting
By John P. Orr, PSP
Scheduling and Cost Engineering on Overseas Projects:
Earned Value and Performance Intensity Progress Measurement
March 19, 2009
Scheduling & Cost Engineering
on Overseas Projects
I.
Earned Value and Performance
Intensity Progress Measurement
II. Tools for Monitoring and Controlling
Project Objectives:
(Cost / Quality / Time)
III. Claims Avoidance & Resolution
Present / Refute Claims:
Sword / Shield
2
Importance of Scheduling
• Convert the Work Plan into a Map
– “The scheduling process forces people to quantify
their effort in discrete terms and to place activities
in proper relationship to each other.”
• Establish a Baseline Against Which Progress is
Measured
• Monitor and Control Projects
• Goal: To Provide Accurate Information to
Decision-Makers
3
Who Sets Scheduling Standards?
• PMBOK – Project Management Institute
Body of Knowledge
• PMI – College of Scheduling
– Scheduling Excellence Initiative (SEI)
Best Practices and Guidelines (being developed)
•
•
•
•
AACE International – Recommended Practices
CMAA – Scheduling Committee Guidelines
AGC – The Associated General Contractors
US Army Corps of Engineers
– Impact Evaluation Guide (Productivity)
4
Who Sets the Standards?
• No Single Body is Authoritative
• Training:
–
–
–
–
Collegiate
Corporate
Software Providers
Books
• No Consistency in the Universities as to how
CPM Scheduling is Taught
• Schedulers Use a Variety of Techniques
• No Single Standard for Certification of
Schedulers
5
US Dept of State – Overseas Building
Operations
• Provide Facilities for Diplomatic and Consular
missions overseas
• As of January 2009, OBO has opened 65 new
facilities with an additional 31 under design or
construction
• Point position overseas in the field:
The OBO Project Director (PD)
6
OBO Project Director Responsibilities
• Project Controls
–
–
–
–
Project Objectives (Cost/Quality/Time)
Primary Contact with Contractor & Subs
Interface with Embassy (Post) stakeholders
Interface with Stateside stakeholders
• Project Status & Completion Projections
7
OBO Project Scheduling
Requirements
• Project Execution Schedule (PES)
• Contractor-prepared & updated
– Initial PES, Baseline PES & Updates
– Cost-loaded
– Tied to Monthly Payment Requisition
8
What does a PD Face?
• His Approval Binds the USG to the Schedule
• Implied Duties:
– Cooperate
– Coordinate
– Not Delay, Hinder or Interfere
• Submittal Reviews (duration, stacking)
• Manpower – Post Access / Clearances
• Government-Furnished Material Deliveries
9
What Else Does a PD Face?
• Other Legal Issues
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Ownership of Float
Right to Finish Early
Acceleration (Directed / Constructive)
Front-end Loading
Improper Use of Lag Factors
No Damage for Delay Clauses
Concurrent, Excusable, Compensable Delay
Schedule Pacing
Schedule Impossibility
10
What Else Does a PD Face?
• Loss of Productivity
–
–
–
–
–
Disruptions
Delays
Overtime
Change Orders
Acceleration
• Changed Working Conditions
– Loss of Productivity & Increased Labor
Costs
11
What does a PD Use?
• Primavera Project Planner (P3 ver 3.1)
– Very Flexible Tool
– Allows for Creative Scheduling
– Allows Hidden Lag Factors and Multiple Logic
Options
• ADM: You saw the logic
• PDM: Less Activities, More Options for Logic
– Possibility of “Schedule Embezzlement”
• Remember:
It Only Looks Like a Gantt Chart!
12
Overseas Construction
Scaffolding:
Rome-style
13
Scaffolding: Rome-style
14
Scaffolding: Tbilisi-style
15
Formwork – African-style
16
Unfamiliar Construction
17
Unfamiliar Food
18
Unfamiliar Altitude
(for Floridians)
2,440M (9,700 feet above sea level)
19
Unfamiliar Level of Labor Intensity
20
Overseas Issue #1: Timeliness
Project Execution Schedule (PES) turn-around:
•
Field updating process
•
•
Focus/Emphasis on Payment Requisition
Data sent Stateside for Primavera (P3) updating
•
•
•
Payment data does not include Actual Start/Finish dates
Cycle return to field NOT timely
Formal schedule submittal received back in field well
past data date. Information no longer current
Project Director without timely information
cannot provide current, accurate projections
with a high degree of confidence
21
Issue #2: “Schedule Embezzlement”
Relationship logic changes, or changes to lag
factors, constraints and other “unseen” items:
•
•
•
•
Masks poor progress
Can “stack” trades in concurrent work
Constraints modify CPM calculations
Date tables and bar charts do not indicate changes
Comparison to Target (prior) schedule
requires P3 schedule analysis or “Digger”
software, not always available in the field.
22
23
Slippage Masked by Logic Change(s)
24
Issue #3: Out-of-Sequence Work
• Schedule does not reflect actual sequence
–
–
–
–
–
Disruptions
Delivery Delays
Resource Limitations / Availability
Change Orders
Changed Working Conditions
• Inaccurate Schedule Projections
– Immediate & Intermediate dates inaccurate
– Limited credibility and usefulness
25
26
Introduction to “Momentology”
• A measurable rate of Performance Intensity
– The Elusive “Miles-per-Hour”
– Maintaining the emphasis of the Project Schedule on
the time-related aspects of project management
– Schedule performance measurement must reconcile
the rate of work placement with that rate’s
relationship to time-based goals
• Earned Value does not accomplish this
“The concept of the critical path was all-important to the
Scheduler, while it was of dubious value or interest to
the Project Manager.”
27
The “Duration-Day”
• The Duration-Day = is the amount of
work performance required to reduce a
schedule’s remaining duration by one
day.
• Also known as a “Crew-Day”
• Project Performance = Aggregate
Duration-Days
28
Performance Intensity
Work Performance / Time Consumption
• Add all Original Duration-Days for all
(typically construction) activities in the
schedule
• Divide by the number of workdays
required for their performance
This is the basic formula for Performance
Intensity (P.I.)
29
30
31
P.I. equivalent to Miles per Hour
• Car trip: 2,000 miles in five days. I must
drive at 50 MPH for 8 hrs/day (40 hours
driving) in order to travel 2,000 miles in 5
days.
• Tools: Odometer & Speedometer
• If at the end of the first hour I see I have
only covered 48 miles, I can re-set the
cruise control to 52 MPH to recover
32
P.I. vs Total Float Analysis
• Total Float analysis is subject to the
Timeliness Issue (after-the-fact
evaluation)
– Car trip illustration: wait until the end of the
first day to learn that I have only travelled
384 miles
• Total Float is also subject to “Schedule
Embezzlement” through logic changes or
constraints that reserve or sequester float
33
P.I. vs Earned Value
• Earned Value is also subject to the
Timeliness Issue
• A resource-interpolation method, Earned
Value is also performed after-the-fact.
– Car trip illustration: wait for a gas fill-up in
order to check gallons of fuel consumed
against miles-per-gallon estimates
34
35