Meeting Project Schedule Compliance Standards


Published on

Acumen teamed up with PT&C for this seminar presentation which covered the standards and best practices for project scheduling and using the proper framework to analyze schedules.

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Meeting Project Schedule Compliance Standards

  1. 1. Mee#ng  Project  Schedule   Compliance  Standards    Dr.  Dan  Pa:erson  &  Brad  Arterbury,  Acumen   Mike  Nosbisch,  PT&C    
  2. 2. 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  
  3. 3. 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        
  4. 4. 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)  
  5. 5. Project  Scheduling  Standards  /  Best  Prac#ces  •  Government  agency   – Government-­‐wide   – Department  of  Defense  (DoD)  •  Non-­‐government  specific   – AACE  Interna#onal  
  6. 6. 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)  
  7. 7. 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      
  8. 8. 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    
  9. 9. 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)  
  10. 10. 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”  
  11. 11. Project  Scheduling  Standards  /  Best  Prac#ces  (cont’d)   •  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  
  12. 12. 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    
  13. 13. 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  
  14. 14. 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)    
  15. 15. 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    
  16. 16. 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  
  17. 17. 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  
  18. 18. 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  
  19. 19. 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          
  20. 20. 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  
  21. 21. Acumen  Introduc#on    •    Project  analy#cs  leader   World  Renowned    •  Author  of  Acumen  Fuse   Risk  Assessment  •  Oracle/Microsoq  Partner   Workshops  •  Pertmaster  “go-­‐to-­‐ resource”   Oracle  accredited  •  PT&C  partnership   Training  Partner    •  HQ  in  Aus#n,  TX  •  Europe,  Asia  &   Australian  local   Acumen  Fuse®   resellers/partners   Metric  Analysis  &   Visualiza#on  
  22. 22. Introducing  a  Schedule  Maturity   Framework   • Non-­‐Cri9qued  S1   • Non-­‐validated,  buffered?,  ques#onable  realism,  target  driven?   • Cri9qued  Schedule  using  Metric  Analysis  S2   • Structurally  sound,  no  built  in  con#ngency,  sound  logic   • Risk-­‐Adjusted  Schedule  S3   • Es#mate  uncertainty,  risk  events,  calculated  con#ngency   • Op9mized  Target  Scenario  S4   • Reduced  hot  spots,  lower  cri#cality,  higher  confidence   • Team  Validated  Op9mized  Model  S5   • Buy-­‐in  on  S4  op#mized  model   Acumen S1 > S5TM Maturity Model
  23. 23. S1  >  S5TM  Schedule  Maturity  
  24. 24. Who  Should  Conduct  Schedule  Analysis?  •  Internal  (contractor)     –  External  compliance   Planning   –  Internal  valida#on  •  External  (gov.  agency)   –  Compliance   Closeout   Execu#on   –  Trending  •  Metrics/thresholds  vary  for  each    
  25. 25. Introducing  Acumen  Fuse  Enterprise Project •  Metric  Analysis   •  Schedule  quality  Analysis & Visualization •  •  Cost/Performance/EV   Compliance   •  Logic  Analysis   •  Missing  or  redundant   •  Mul#  Project   •  Forensics   •  Variances   •  Trending   •  Snapshot  comparison   •  Visualiza9on   •  Ribbons   •  Dashboard   •  Analyst  repor#ng     Integra#on  with  MSP,  Primavera,  Open  Plan,  Cobra,  Excel,  Ares,  Pertmaster,  UNCEFACT  
  26. 26. Metric  Analysis   •  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
  27. 27. Fuse  Metrics   Slide 27
  28. 28. 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  
  29. 29. Compliance  Scenarios  
  30. 30. Compliance  Metrics  
  31. 31. Example  Compliance  Analysis  100%   80%   60%   40%   20%   0%  
  32. 32. 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  
  33. 33. Analyzing  Risk  Exposure   Back-­‐end  risk   exposure  
  34. 34. 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  
  35. 35. Ques#ons?  •  Dr.  Dan  Pa:erson    •  Brad  Arterbury  •  Mike  Nosbisch