Meeting Project Schedule Compliance Standards

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)


•  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


•  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


•  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)


•  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


•  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


•  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



•  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)


•  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


•  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]

Meeting Project Schedule Compliance Standards

Business

Transcript of Meeting Project Schedule Compliance Standards