Schedule levels-as-presented  02-may11
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Schedule levels-as-presented 02-may11






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds


Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Schedule levels-as-presented  02-may11 Schedule levels-as-presented 02-may11 Presentation Transcript

  • 02 May 11 1
  • Scheduling a Project At Different Levels Gui Ponce de Leon PhD, PE, PMP, LEED AP Philip Spittler PMP PMA Consultants, LLC May 2, M 2 201102 May 11 2
  • Schedule Level Resources02 May 11 3
  • Scheduling a Project at the Right Level at the Right Time Level, An important consideration in planning and scheduling During management planning When executive and senior managers are involved Project-level schedules prevail Schedules become detailed as the planning horizon switches from the whole of the project to stages or phases With assumptions tested and information firmed-up Management can engage in detailed planning Various participants have different levels of interest Some consensus but yet to reach standard status y02 May 11 4
  • Protocols Considered Jelen’s schedule levels The CII schedule levels Guide to the Forensic Scheduling Body of Knowledge Part I (FSBOK Guide) AACE International Recommended Practice No. 37R-06 Schedule Levels of Detail─As Applied in Engineering, Procurement and Construction (RP 37) ( ) The Chartered Institute of Building Guide to Good Practice in the Management of Time in Complex Projects (CIOB Guide) Mosaic’s Schedule Levels─Major Projects DOE Schedule Planning and Development Guide 1.802 May 11 5
  • Jelen s Jelen’s Levels02 May 11 6
  • Varying Interpretations of Level 2 Schedules in Construction S h d l i C t ti02 May 11 7
  • Recent Developments RP 37 describes a 5-level method based on schedule level requirements, levels of interest and the intended use of each schedule level This RP 37 method is based on Stephenson’s levels The CIOB Guide advocates five schedule reporting levels le els Levels 1 - 3 accomplished through summarizations Activity duration ranges vary within a schedule based on planning h i l i horizon Neither the PMBOK Guide nor The Practice Standard for Scheduling deals with schedule levels Weaver/Mosaic offers a hierarchy of Level 1–5 schedules, from summary- to detailed- level schedules Activity duration ranges may vary either based on schedule y g y y level or planning horizon within a schedule02 May 11 8
  • The CSI Approach to Construction WBS Hierarchy The Construction Specifications Institute publishes the MasterFormat, a master list th t classifies project work M t F t t li t that l ifi j t k by deliverables and components and by construction practices General Requirements Division 01 Facility Construction Divisions 02-19 Facility Services Divisions 20-29 Site and Infrastructure Divisions 30-39 Process Equipment Divisions 40-49 The MasterFormat is one scheme that can be used to organize the project WBS, detail cost accounts and activity codes02 May 11 9
  • Guide to the Forensic Scheduling Body of Knowledge A schedule hierarchy for coherent summary and detailed detailed- level schedules intended for mega contracts and major contracts, but scalable to other contracts; it advocates: Network-based Network based level 1 4 schedules 1–4 Maintaining the Level 1 schedule and Level 2 schedule─both in time-scaled network format─current for the duration of the project Limiting rolling wave planning techniques to Level 4 schedules Suitable to top-down and roll-up integration Top-down─base a lower-level schedule on the next higher level Roll-up─carry re-baselining and updating to higher levels By way of example, the hierarchy is aligned with the MasterFormat approach to construction WBS hierarchies02 May 11 10
  • FSBOK Guide Level 1 Executive Schedule E ti S h d l General Intent and Format Establishes Contractual Milestones (if Included with the Request for Bids) or Demonstrates Conformance to Contractual and Other Milestones (if Included with the Bid and/or the Contract) Time-Scaled Network Diagram─Commonly One g y Sheet Kept Current with Level 2 Compares t RP 37 L C to Level 1 Wi k i et al. L l 1, Wickwire t l Level 1 l and Mosaic Level 102 May 11 11
  • FSBOK Guide Level 1 Executive Schedule E ti S h d l Scheduling Objective Portrays Controlling, Summary-Level Activity(ies) Between Milestones at CSI Division Grouping Level Key Procurement Scope and Overall Commissioning Sequence Included Empirical Mega Construction Activity Duration: 20% to 40% of Contract, Generally 6 to 18 Months Empirical Major Construction Activity Duration: 10% p j y to 30% of Contract, Generally 3 to 12 Months02 May 11 12
  • FSBOK Guide Level 2 M Management S h d l t Schedule General Intent and Format Project Manager Input and Sign-Off Developed with the Bid or Before Mobilization Time-scaled Network Diagram Establishes the Critical Path, Near-Critical Paths and Key Target Dates for the Initial (Rev. 0) Progress Schedule Conforms to the Construction Plan, Including Constructability, Targeted Means and Methods, Craft Levels and Shared-Resource Dependencies Mostly Finish-to-Start Logic Ties Roll-Up of Level 3 Re-Baselining and Updating Compares to RP 37 Level 2 and Mosaic Level 202 May 11 13
  • FSBOK Guide Level 2 M Management S h d l t Schedule Scheduling Objective Driving Path for Structures & Major P D i i P th f St t M j Process S t Systems at CSI t Division Level (e.g., Earthwork, Foundations, Framing, etc.) May Subdivide Into Area Grouping or Tier Grouping Constructability and Normal Adverse Weather-Validated Long-Lead Equipment & Material Procurements and Critical Commissioning Sequences Empirical Construction Activity Duration: Mega contracts: 10% to 20% of Contract, Generally 3 to 9 Months Major Contracts: 5% to15% of Contract, Generally 2 to 6 Months Lower end is for activities for which hard logic applies Upper limit is for activities scoping bulk commodities02 May 11 14
  • FSBOK Guide Level 3 P Progress S h d l Schedule General Intent and Format Site/Construction Manager Input and Sign-Off Time-scaled Network Diagram or Bar Chart with Logic Drives the Updating Process Integrates Vendor Design, Fab/Delivery, Construction, System Completion and Commissioning May be Craft Loaded (Typically, Critical Crafts) and Rely on Critical Shared-Resource Dependencies (e.g., Shared Crane) ) Activity Cost Loading, if Contractually Required Compares to RP 37 Level 3, Wickwire et al. Level 2 and Mosaic Level 302 May 11 15
  • FSBOK Guide Level 3 P Progress S h d l Schedule Scheduling Objective Grouping of CSI Divisions in Areas or Elevations for Structures and Major Process Systems Level 2 Earthwork, Foundation, Framing etc Subdivided Earthwork Foundation Framing, etc. into Component Chunks Normal Adverse Weather-Validated Detailed Delivery Sequences and Integrated, Detailed Commissioning Sequence Formula Mega Construction Activity Duration: 2% to 5% g y of Contract, Generally 3 to 12 Weeks Formula Major Construction Activity Duration: 1% to 3% of Contract, 2 to 6 Weeks Contract02 May 11 16
  • FSBOK Guide Level 4 W ki S h d l Working Schedules General Intent and Format Supervision Input and Sign-Off Developed Before Starting a Phase or Area Often Developed as Separate Schedules p p Time-scaled Network Diagrams or Bar Charts with Logic Coordinated with Field Supervision (Contractor) and Subcontractor Input Trade Coordination May be Craft Loaded and Detail Crew Movements and other Means & Methods May be Done on a Rolling Wave Basis (e.g., Every 3 Months) Compares to RP 37 Level 4, Wickwire et al. Level 3 and Mosaic L M i Level 4 l02 May 11 17
  • FSBOK Guide Level 4 W ki S h d l Working Schedules Scheduling Objective Groups CSI Sections Within Elevation or Area for Structure or Process System Level 3 Earthwork, Foundation, Framing Enclosure MEP Earthwork Foundation Framing, Enclosure, & Process Installations Subdivided into Fragnets; Activities Biased Towards a Subcontractor or Trade Normal Ad N l Adverse W th V lid t d Weather-Validated Working-Level Detail in Procurement and Commissioning Formula Mega Construction Activity Duration: 1% to 3% g y of Contract, Generally 2 to 6 Weeks Formula Major Construction Activity Duration: 1% to 2% of Contract, Generally 2 to 4 Weeks Contract02 May 11 18
  • FSBOK Guide Level 5 L k Ah d S h d l Look-Ahead Schedule General Intent and Format Subdivide Progress and Upcoming Level 3 or Level 4 Activities into Tasks for the Next 2 to 3 Weeks Developed by Crew Foreman Typically in Bar Charts or Similar Format Tasks are Crew Loaded Reviewed in Site Progress Meetings g g Compares to RP 37 Level 5 and Mosaic Level 502 May 11 19
  • FSBOK Guide Level 5 L k Ah d S h d l Look-Ahead Schedule Scheduling Objective Work Assigned to Crews Broken Down by Specific Components, Based y p p on Verification That Work Can Proceed and That Materials, Design Documentation and Other Installation Information are Packaged and Made Available to Crew Foremen Task Duration: From a Few Days to Three y Weeks02 May 11 20
  • FSBOK Guide Advocates Network- Based Level 1 4 S h d l B dL l 1-4 Schedules Absent Contrary Contractual Language: y g g Level 2 schedules and Level 3 schedules are appropriate forecasting tools to evaluate: Timely performance Delay and disruption, and Time extension requests Whether When Wh such ih issues arise, or i Where the evaluation is undertaken post-completion02 May 11 21
  • FSBOK Guide View of Level 2S h d l Schedules g A Relevant and Reliable Forecasting Tool if: In a time-scaled network format It portrays the contractor’s plan at contract award at an appropriate granularity t i t l it It remains current and in conformance to the contract It establishes the critical/near-critical paths based: On contract dates On the construction plan, e.g., means and methods, etc. On normal adverse weather On key deliveries02 May 11 22
  • FSBOK Guide View of Level 3S h d l Schedules As Source Document for Forensic Modeling g Depending on the analysis method used, a Level 3 schedule may be overly detailed, particularly where not relevant to the facts of the case t l t t th f t f th Forensic analysis using a Level 3 schedule may divert attention to non issues and detract from the non-issues issues in dispute without gaining analysis accuracy Where this compromises analysis accuracy, an p y y, acceptable protocol is to generate a reliable summarization of the Level 3 schedule02 May 11 23
  • FSBOK Guide View of Level 4 and L d Level 1 S h d l l Schedules The subdivisions of Level 3 schedule activities existing in a Level 4 schedule are often suitable bases for time impact analysis at the fragnet level A Level 1 schedule i a time-scaled network f L l h d l in i l d k format that is coherent with the Level 2 schedule is a valid source for a forensic demonstrative provided: demonstrative, It portrays controlling summary activities between milestones at the CSI Division Grouping Level or equivalent indenture in another WBS scheme It includes critical procurement activities, commissioning activities and, possibly, schedule reserve02 May 11 24
  • Example of a Level 1 Schedule02 May 11 25
  • Schedule Granularity vs. Schedule Density When the Wh th project i scheduled i multi-level schedules j t is h d l d in lti l l h d l For instance, where separate rolling wave Level 4 schedules are generated, it is practical to design Level 2 and Level 3 schedules with uniform activity duration ranges Where duration range is uniform for the duration of level 2-3 schedules, appropriate to the level in the hierarchy The Th term activity or schedule granularity i used rather than i i h d l l i is d h h schedule density CIOB Guide schedule density implies varying duration ranges within a schedule ithi h d l FSBOK Guide schedule granularity prescribes a uniform duration range for each schedule g02 May 11 26
  • Recapping the FSBOK Guide Hierarchy Main Points Network-based schedules at all levels but for look-ahead Better ensures relevant and reliable forecasting tools ALLevel 2 schedule k t current f th project d ti l h d l kept t for the j t duration promotes continuing executive and senior management involvement when re-baselining schedule performance Derive a lower-level schedule from the next higher-level Limit use of rolling wave planning techniques to Level 4 Hold schedule granularity uniform as opposed to varying schedule density with planning horizon Interplay between WBS and Schedule level02 May 11 27
  • The Downside of Schedules that Become Massive as D M i Density I it Increases When the schedule multiplies in the number of activities as schedule density increases from update to update, its usefulness as a relevant reliable forecasting tool degrades relevant, Schedule integrity is affected by data machinations the scheduler may have engaged in to attain realistic dates and critical paths Ever-growing multi-thousand activity schedules trend toward a highly-disordered schedule document02 May 11 28
  • FSBOK and CIOB Guidance on Activity Duration R A i i D i Ranges02 May 11 29
  • FSBOK Guide Schedule Hierarchy in Summary02 May 11 30
  • The Sayonara Conclusion The time has come to bid farewell to bar chart techniques for Level 1 and Level 2 schedules, as well as Level 4 schedules This will not only promote more coherent p planning, but will allow all contemporaneous g, p schedules to play a role in forensic scheduling02 May 11 31
  • The TMI Conclusion An alternative to working with Level 3 schedules that become massive as schedule density increases is to approach the scheduling of a project in a multi-level schedule sequence that involves Deriving a lower-level schedule from the next higher-level schedule Limiting reliance on rolling wave planning techniques to the network-based Level 4 schedules For any schedule in the hierarchy, maintaining granularity unniform, from beginning to end, better ensures a highly-ordered network of realistic dates and reasonable floats, ergo a relevant and reliable forecasting document02 May 11 32
  • The Less is More… You Had Me at Level 2 Conclusion The activity granularity designed into a Level 2 schedule is likely to yield a relevant and reliable source document for forensic schedule analysis Because of the activity granularity typically followed, a Level 3 schedule may detail paths not relevant to the facts of the case; analyzing non- non issues may detract from and confuse the issues in dispute without gaining analysis accuracy The d t il i Th detail in a Level 3 schedule used i f L l h d l d in forensic i schedule analysis should be made proportionate to the facts at issue by means of reliable summarizations02 May 11 33
  • The New Standard Conclusion Favor approaching the scheduling of a project in separate but coherent summary- and detailed-level schedules, each schedule with uniform granularity Note ─the principles discussed are adaptable to schedule level approaches that are based on pp one schedule designed at different levels of detail by varying schedule density based on planning horizon02 May 11 34
  • Thank You For Attending!02 May 11 35