Ideally all projects would have schedules submitted and approved, but sometimes the quality of the schedule prevents approval. This presentation suggests ways to deal with this situation, as well as ways to encourage approvable schedules.
Dealing With A Schedule That Cannot Be Approved - AACE 2012 Meeting
1. Dealing with Schedules That
Cannot be Approved
Chris Carson, PSP, CCM, PMP
Corporate Director of Project Controls, Alpha Corporation
Chris.carson@alphacorporation.com
757-342-5524
1
2. Chris Carson
Corporate Director of Project Controls, Alpha Corporation
• Responsible for standards, processes, and procedures for a team of schedulers, analysts, and project
managers in multiple office locations, as well as analysis, work product, testimony, and marketing
• Developed and manages the in-house project controls training program at Alpha
• Certifications: PSP, CCM, PMP
• University: University of Virginia, Mechanical Engineering, 1968-1972
• Professional Field: 38 years of experience in Construction Management Services
specializing in Scheduling, Schedule Analysis, Estimating, Claims
• Active in AACE (Association for the Advancement of Cost Estimating International)
• Author & reviewer of Recommended Practices in Scheduling & Forensic Schedule Analysis RP
• Active in PMI (Project Management Institute) Scheduling Community of Practice
• Managing Director for SEI (Scheduling Excellence Initiative) writing Best Practices and Guidelines for
Scheduling and Schedule Impact Analysis
• Active in CMAA (Construction Management Association of America)
• Served on committee revising Time Management Chapter
• Chosen as one of National CCM Trainers
• Active in Planning Planet & the International Guild of Project Controls
• Chief Editor for US, developing accreditations for project controls
Something you do not know about me:
I’m Irish-American so I’ve likely told everything to everyone (my wife can vouch)
2
3. Unapprovable Schedules
• It is in best interests of the project to get an approvable
schedule in place early
• Necessary for:
– Planning
– Management
– Analysis
– Documentation
• As‐planned portion must model Contractor’s means and
methods
• As‐built portion must accurately represent history
• Schedule should represent reasonable approach for all
tasks that could affect the project
3
4. • If schedule does not support these goals, likely does not
meet industry practices
• Owner will likely be taking on risks from the schedule
• Schedule Review
– Process designed to improve quality of schedule
– Protects Owner from illegitimate EoT requests
– Protects Contractor by “proving” entitlement to EoT
– But be reasonable!
4
5. • Too many projects start without approved schedules
– Increases risks to Owner and Contractor
– However, if risks of approval are greater than risks of
rejection, rejection is better option
• This session should:
– Offer suggestions as to ways to increase ability to approve
schedules
– Provide guidance for what to do if schedule cannot be
approved
5
6. • Outline
– Risks of approval of “bad” schedule
– Reasons why schedules cannot be approved
– Suggestions for scheduling requirements to increase ability
to approve schedule
– Project controls actions when schedules cannot be
approved
– General project actions that can be taken to increase
opportunities to approve schedules
– General industry actions that can be taken to increase
opportunities to approve schedules
6
7. • Risks of approval of “bad” schedule
– Owner
• Opportunities for claims positioning from manipulation
• Reduced ability to analyze delay
• Reduced ability to predict completion
• Could commit Owner to high resource need for submittals and
paperwork
• Poor logic makes Total float values less meaningful
• Increased chances that trades and spaces will overload near end of
project
– Risk of delay and disruption
– Risk of reduced quality (Dick Faris – Q x S = T x C)
7
8. • Risks of approval of “bad” schedule
– Contractor
• No approved basis from which to measure delays
• Owner has not accepted Owner‐responsible work integration into the
schedule
• inability to prove Owner caused delays or disruption
• Planning is probably not sufficient
• Subcontractor input probably not sufficient
• Total Float values not legitimate or useful
– No early warning of problems
– No ability to correct course before wasting money
8
9. • Reasons why baseline or as‐planned schedules
cannot be approved
– Incomplete schedule
– Poor modeling of scope and plan
– Misalignment between schedule and narrative (plan not
evident in schedule)
– Missing narrative
– Missing scope of work
– Uneven development of trade scope
– Inappropriate Critical Paths
– Problems with logic relationships
– Failure to plan for resources
– Schedule component problems (lags, constraints, calendars,
dangling or open activities, cost loading)
9
10. • Reasons why update schedules cannot be approved
– Poor continuing modeling of scope and plan
– Unexplained revisions
– Missing narrative (to explain revisions)
– Out of sequence work (affecting Critical Path)
– Inappropriate Critical Paths
– Addition of delay events not approved by Owner
– Inaccurate as‐built data
– Inadequate resource planning
– Cost loading errors
10
11. • Suggestions for scheduling requirements to increase
ability to approve schedule
– Require bid or tender schedule to qualify for award
– Time for planning – Contract should precede NTP
– Specify scheduler requirements (PSP, experience)
– Use two stage schedule submission
• Preliminary or Initial – short interim planning
• Detailed or Initial – full schedule
– Clarification of level of detail requirements
– Elaboration of written narrative requirement
– Requirement for crew resource loading
– Higher retainage costs for submission of approvable
schedule
11
12. • Suggestions for scheduling meetings to increase ability to
approve schedule:
– Preliminary schedule review feedback
– Risk workshop
– Scheduling planning presentation meeting
– Presentation of Time Impact Analyses for EoTs
– Presentation of disputed issue analyses
12
15. • Project controls actions when schedules cannot be
approved
– Identification of major discrepancies
– Careful documentation of all discrepancies
• Point out reason for discrepancies
• Summarized list
– Separate impacts absorbed into the
schedule/project from those that are not
• Absorbed impacts require a forensic analysis
• Impacts not yet absorbed require a Prospective TIA
15
17. • Project controls actions when schedules cannot be
approved
– Project requires a much higher level of documentation of
as‐built data
• Daily recordkeeping is necessary
– Deal with as‐built portion of the schedule separately from
as‐planned
• Similar to impact analysis
– As‐built has absorbed delays
– As‐planned has not absorbed delays
17
18. • As‐Built Documentation
– When schedule discrepancies are severe, develop
Daily Specific As‐Built (DSAB) Schedule to document
actual conditions
– Document actual resources, ideally crews/equipment
– Perform resource analysis to validate what drove
schedule performance
– Perform identification of As‐Built Longest Path (or
ABCP as noted in AACE International’s FSA RP)
– Maintain cumulative delay chart from revised
schedules, annotate delay chart with impacts/low
productivity – Schedule Log (RP upcoming)
– Capture Time Performance Ratio or Missed S/F
18
28. As‐Built Longest Path
• As‐Built Longest Path (ABLP) presentation
2004 2005 2006
Location Work Description
A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D
Mobilization
SBW 5 Clearing and Grubbing
Demolition, Asphalt Placement, Erosion
SBW 4
and Sediment Control
38 CD
B603 Electrical Conduit, Demolition
Demolition, Formwork, Rebar, Deck
13 CD
B601
Concrete Placement 19 CD
Formwork, Rebar, Deck Concrete
B602
Placement 37 CD
Formwork, Rebar, Footer & Wingwall
Placement, Precast Concrete Wall
99 CD
SBW 5
Erection, Asphalt Placement, Guardrail 90 CD
Installation
SBW 6 Precast Concrete Wall Erection 361 CD
Electrical, Clearing & Grubbing,
SBW 5
Excavation & Backfill 20 CD
Excavation & Backfill, Asphalt Placement,
SBW 6
Guardrail Installation 11 CD
B602 Concrete decks, Curb and Gutter 39 CD
B601 Demolition, Demobilization
3 CD
Concrete sidewalk placement, Demolition,
4 CD
B603
Demobilization 27 CD
28
37. Cumulative Delay Discussion
• Annotate Cumulative Delays
Period of possible concurrent production problems
No overall delay due to IT design
Period of possible
concurrent submittal
problems
Shows two schedules with same data date & different EF dates
37
41. As‐Built
• As‐Built documentation
– This provides solid documentation of what
happened
– Collected from project records – validated
– Documented in form for use in meeting
with contractor
• Next step – As‐Planned documentation
41
42. As‐Planned
• As‐Planned documentation
– Create separate set of schedules incorporating revisions to
correct discrepancies
• Document how discrepancies are incorporated
– Identify analysis differences between submitted schedules
and revised schedules
– Analyze resource (crew) needs for next period work
• Review for reasonableness (compare to actual)
– Compare that ASLP/CP to the previous period revised
analysis, record differences, and analyze
– Generally it should align fairly well – while the contractor’s
schedule will not
– Meet with Contractor – present results of ABLP/CP,
resource analysis
• Intent is to show how revised analysis (incorporating
discrepancy revisions aligns with actual project data in
DSAB/ABLP
42
46. Conclusions
• These steps will put the Owner in a strong position even
without approvable schedules
• The goal is to use the data to meet with the Contractor
– Convince them to cooperate and fix
schedules
– Convince them that documentation rebut
loose/inaccurate claims
– Convince them that the Owner’s analysis
process is accurate and convincing
• Ideally this process will influence the Contractor to raise
the quality of their schedules
• Bingo; approvable schedules
46
47. Other Opportunities
• General industry actions that can be taken to increase
opportunities to approve schedules
– Providing free training in the industry to improve the quality
of schedules
– Refer contractors to quality scheduling consultants
– Industry involvement to define and raise the level of good
practices for scheduling
– Helping the Owner to develop a schedule‐driven culture
– Conference participation:
• ConstructionCPM
• AACE International
• PMI SCoP
• CMAA
47