Mee#ng Project Schedule Compliance Standards
Dr. Dan Pa:erson & Brad Arterbury, Acumen Mike Nosbisch, PT&C
Introduc#ons • Acumen
– Dr. Dan Pa:erson • President & CEO • Formerly Pertmaster principle
– Brad Arterbury • Federal Government Business Development
• Project Time & Cost, Inc. (PT&C) – Mike Nosbisch, CCC, PSP
• EVM Prac#ce Lead • President of AACE Interna#onal • Formerly with SM&A
Outline I. Introduc#ons II. Project scheduling standards and best prac#ces
– Government agency – Non-‐government specific
III. Recommenda#ons for reviewing/analyzing project schedules – Using a Schedule Maturity Framework – Using Acumen Fuse to review & analyze projects
IV. Conclusion
PT&C Overview • Our mission is to help clients reduce program risk through applica#on of
sustainable business prac#ces, project management techniques, and effec#ve cost analysis & engineering principles
• We have over 28 years experience providing government and private sector clients with high-‐quality professional consul#ng services in support of capital construc#on, environmental projects & programs, and large-‐scale civil works projects
• We deliver independent program cost, schedule, and risk consul9ng services to ensure comple#on of milestone requirements, successful funding, and execu#on of high-‐visibility programs & projects
• We have extensive government agency experience, most notably with the Department of Defense (DoD)/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and Department of Energy (DOE)
Project Scheduling Standards / Best Prac#ces
• Government agency – Government-‐wide – Department of Defense (DoD)
• Non-‐government specific – AACE Interna#onal
Project Scheduling Standards / Best Prac#ces (cont’d)
• Government agency – Government-‐wide
• Government Accountability Office (GAO)
– DoD • Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) • Na#onal Defense Industrial Associa#on (NDIA)
Project Scheduling Standards / Best Prac#ces (cont’d)
• Government agency – Government-‐wide
• GAO – Independent, nonpar#san agency repor#ng directly to
Congress » Conducts audits to evaluate economy, efficiency, and
effec#veness of government programs » Assesses program schedules in rela#on to “scheduling
best prac#ces” contained in GAO Cost Guide
Project Scheduling Standards / Best Prac#ces (cont’d)
• GAO’s 10 Scheduling Best Prac#ces 1. Capturing all ac9vi9es: Schedule should reflect all ac#vi#es in program’s
WBS (government and contractor) 2. Sequencing all ac9vi9es: Ac#vi#es sequenced in the logical order they
are to be carried out in using dependencies 3. Assigning resources to all ac9vi9es: Schedule should reflect what
resources (i.e. labor, material, and overhead) are needed to do the work 4. Establishing dura9on of all ac9vi9es: Schedule should realis#cally reflect
how long each ac#vity will take to execute using same ra#onale, data, and assump#ons used for cost es#ma#ng
5. Integra9ng schedule ac9vi9es horizontally and ver9cally: Schedule links products and outcomes associated with already sequenced ac#vi#es, and traceability exists among varying levels of the schedule
Project Scheduling Standards / Best Prac#ces (cont’d)
• GAO’s 10 Scheduling Best Prac#ces (cont’d) 6. Establishing cri9cal path for all ac9vi9es: Cri#cal path should be
iden#fied so that any delay on it can be examined for effects on schedule end date
7. Iden9fying float between ac9vi9es: Schedule should iden#fy float #me so that schedule flexibility can be determined
8. Conduc9ng schedule risk analysis: An SRA should be used to predict level of confidence in mee#ng a program’s comple#on date
9. Upda9ng schedule using logic and dura9ons to determine the dates: Schedule should use logic and dura#ons in order to reflect realis#c start and comple#on dates for program ac#vi#es
10. Crea9ng a baseline schedule (new)
Project Scheduling Standards / Best Prac#ces (cont’d)
• Government agency – DoD
• DCMA – As DoD’s “execu#ve agent” for EVMS, responsible for performing EVMS valida#on reviews for contracts mee#ng policy thresholds » An integrated master schedule (IMS) is required by policy when EVMS is required
» Uses 14 Point Assessment to perform “an objec#ve and thorough analysis of the IMS”
• DCMA’s 14 Point Assessment Criteria 1. Logic: Helps iden#fy how well or poorly schedule is linked together 2. Leads: Use of leads distorts total float in schedule and may cause
resource conflicts 3. Lags: Cri#cal path and any subsequent analysis can be adversely affected
by using lags 4. Rela9onship Types: Finish-‐to-‐Start (FS) rela#onship type provides logical
path through program and should account for at least 90% of rela#onship types being used
5. Hard Constraints: Using hard constraints will prevent tasks from being moved by their dependencies and, therefore, prevent schedule from being logic-‐driven
Project Scheduling Standards / Best Prac#ces (cont’d)
• DCMA’s 14 Point Assessment Criteria (cont’d) 6. High Float: If percentage of tasks with excessive total float exceeds 5%,
network may be unstable and may not be logic-‐driven 7. Nega9ve Float: Tasks with nega#ve float should have an explana#on and
a correc#ve ac#on plan to mi#gate nega#ve float 8. High Dura9on: Helps to determine whether or not a task can be broken
into two or more discrete tasks rather than one 9. Invalid Dates: Tasks should have forecast start and forecast finish dates
that are in the future rela#ve to status date of IMS 10. Resources: Provides verifica#on that all tasks with dura#ons of at least
one day have dollars or hours assigned
Project Scheduling Standards / Best Prac#ces (cont’d)
• DCMA’s 14 Point Assessment Criteria (cont’d) 11. Missed Tasks: Helps iden#fy how well or poorly schedule is mee#ng
baseline plan 12. Cri9cal Path Test: If project comple#on date (or other milestone) is not
delayed in direct propor#on to amount of inten#onal slip (600 days ~ 3 years) that is introduced into the schedule as part of this test, then there is broken logic somewhere in network
13. Cri9cal Path Length Index (CPLI): Measures cri#cal path “realism” rela#ve to forecasted finish date
14. Baseline Execu9on Index (BEI): Measures number of tasks that were completed as a ra#o to those tasks that should have been completed to date according to original (baseline) plan
Project Scheduling Standards / Best Prac#ces (cont’d)
Project Scheduling Standards / Best Prac#ces (cont’d)
• Government agency – DoD (cont’d)
• NDIA – Industrial Council for Program Management (ICPM)
» Program Planning and Scheduling Subcommi:ee (PPSS) § Planning & Scheduling Excellence Guide (PASEG)
• Generally Accepted Scheduling Principles (GASP)
Project Scheduling Standards / Best Prac#ces (cont’d)
• Government agency – NDIA’s Generally Accepted Scheduling Principles (GASP)
1. Complete: Schedule captures en#re, discrete, authorized project effort from start through comple#on
2. Traceable: Schedule logic is horizontally and ver#cally integrated with cross-‐references to key documents and tools
3. Transparent: Schedule provides visibility to assure it is complete, traceable, has documented assump#ons, and provides full disclosure of program status and forecast
4. Statused: Schedule has accurate progress through status date
Project Scheduling Standards / Best Prac#ces (cont’d)
• Government agency – NDIA’s GASP (cont’d)
5. Predic9ve: Schedule provides meaningful cri#cal paths and accurate forecasts for remaining work through program comple#on
6. Useable: Schedule is an indispensable tool for #mely and effec#ve management decisions and ac#ons
7. Resourced: Schedule aligns with actual and projected resource availability
8. Controlled: Schedule is built, baselined, and maintained using stable, repeatable and documented process
Project Scheduling Standards / Best Prac#ces (cont’d) • Non-‐government specific
– AACE Interna#onal • Professional associa#on dedicated to furthering concepts of cost engineering and total cost management (TCM) – “TCM Framework” developed that encompasses scheduling within overall project lifecycle
– Created and currently administers “Planning and Scheduling Professional” (PSP) cer#fica#on
– Has published 14 “Recommended Prac#ces” (RPs) related to project scheduling
Project Scheduling Standards / Best Prac#ces (cont’d) • AACE’s Scheduling Recommended Prac#ces
– 14R-‐90: Responsibility and Required Skills for a Project Planning and Scheduling Professional
– 23R-‐02: Iden#fica#on of Ac#vi#es – 24R-‐03: Developing Ac#vity Logic – 27R-‐03: Schedule Classifica#on System – 29R-‐03: Forensic Schedule Analysis – 37R-‐06: Schedule Levels of Detail: As Applied in Engineering,
Procurement and Construc#on – 38R-‐06: Documen#ng the Schedule Basis
Project Scheduling Standards / Best Prac#ces (cont’d) • AACE’s Scheduling Recommended Prac#ces (cont’d)
– 45R-‐08: Scheduling Claims Protec#on Methods – 48R-‐06: Schedule Constructability Review – 49R-‐06: Iden#fying the Cri#cal Path – 52R-‐06: Time Impact Analysis: As Applied in Construc#on – 53R-‐06: Schedule Update Review: As Applied in Engineering,
Procurement, and Construc#on – 54R-‐07: Recovery Scheduling -‐ As Applied in Engineering,
Procurement, and Construc#on – 57R-‐09: Integrated Cost and Schedule Risk Analysis Using Monte
Carlo Simula#on of a CPM Model
Reviewing / Analyzing Project Schedules • Role of Project Time & Cost
– Currently provides schedule support services to government agencies and government/commercial contractors • AACE cer#fied staff with in-‐depth knowledge of industry standards/best prac#ces presented earlier
– Through partnership with Acumen, can provide staff experienced in the use of Fuse • Can assist in development of related procedures and training materials
• Can augment func#onality of Fuse in performing SRA that is called out by GAO
World Renowned
Risk Assessment Workshops
Oracle accredited Training Partner
Acumen Fuse® Metric Analysis & Visualiza#on
Acumen Introduc#on • Project analy#cs leader
• Author of Acumen Fuse • Oracle/Microsoq Partner • Pertmaster “go-‐to-‐resource”
• PT&C partnership • HQ in Aus#n, TX • Europe, Asia & Australian local resellers/partners
Introducing a Schedule Maturity Framework
S1 • Non-‐Cri9qued • Non-‐validated, buffered?, ques#onable realism, target driven?
S2 • Cri9qued Schedule using Metric Analysis • Structurally sound, no built in con#ngency, sound logic
S3 • Risk-‐Adjusted Schedule • Es#mate uncertainty, risk events, calculated con#ngency
S4 • Op9mized Target Scenario • Reduced hot spots, lower cri#cality, higher confidence
S5 • Team Validated Op9mized Model • Buy-‐in on S4 op#mized model
Acumen S1 > S5TM Maturity Model
S1 > S5TM Schedule Maturity
Who Should Conduct Schedule Analysis?
• Internal (contractor) – External compliance – Internal valida#on
• External (gov. agency) – Compliance – Trending
• Metrics/thresholds vary for each
Planning
Execu#on Closeout
• Metric Analysis • Schedule quality • Cost/Performance/EV • Compliance
• Logic Analysis • Missing or redundant • Mul# Project
• Forensics • Variances • Trending • Snapshot comparison
• Visualiza9on • Ribbons • Dashboard • Analyst repor#ng
Enterprise Project Analysis & Visualization
Introducing Acumen Fuse
Integra#on with MSP, Primavera, Open Plan, Cobra, Excel, Ares, Pertmaster, UNCEFACT
• Analyze schedule, cost, risk, performance – “What > So What > Now What…”
• Objec#ve of pinpoin#ng issues, shortcomings and failed tripwires – Comparison against benchmarks/thresholds/baselines
• Trending over #me – Comparisons, performance improvements
• Advanced metrics – Beyond standard ‘schedule check’ e.g. logic densityTM
• Fuse Metric Library – Over 225 metrics: DCMA 14 Point, GAO, EV, Risk, Baseline Compliance
• Metric Editor – Only commercial product to allow you to create your own criteria
7/5/11 Slide 26
Metric Analysis
Fuse Metrics
Slide 27
Baseline Compliance • Used to determine how close a schedule is planned and executed against it’s baseline
• Measure of well the plan is being executed • More than just date comparison • Looks at period-‐compliance • Library included in Fuse 2.1
Compliance Scenarios
Compliance Metrics
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
100%
Example Compliance Analysis
Path Analysis • Network analysis between any two ac#vi#es • Valida#on of true con9nuous path(s) • Insight into dura#on, cost & risk along paths
Analyzing Risk Exposure
Back-‐end risk exposure
Conclusion • Benefit of mee#ng project schedule compliance
– More than just “passing the test” – Gives visibility into the project – Drives schedule maturity – Breeds more realis#c #me/cost forecas#ng
• Effort involved can be extensive – Make the process repeatable – Automate but retain intelligence – Consider internal compliance metrics
Ques#ons?
• Dr. Dan Pa:erson dpa:[email protected]
• Brad Arterbury [email protected]
• Mike Nosbisch [email protected]