Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Favorite Delay Analysis Methodologies Town Hall SEI

3,877 views

Published on

Presentation from a Town Hall session to discuss favorite forensic schedule analysis methodologies, based on the Forensic Analysis Recommended Practice from AACE International. The Best Practices and Guidelines for Schedule Impact Analysis project is discussing methods.

Favorite Delay Analysis Methodologies Town Hall SEI

  1. 1. Favorite Delay Analysis Methodologies Best Practices and Guidelines for Schedule Impact Analysis Volume 1 Chris Carson, PSP, CCM, PMP Corporate Director of Project Controls, Alpha Corporation Managing Director, Scheduling Excellence InitiativeAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  2. 2. Based on AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R-03, Forensic Schedule Analysis”AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  3. 3. Observational 3.1 Static – Gross (As-Planned v. As-Built, Single Base) 3.2 Static - Periodic (As-Planned v. As-Built, Multiple Base) 3.3 Dynamic – Contemporaneous “as-is” (Contemporaneous Period Analysis) 3.4 Dynamic – Contemporaneous “Split” (Bifurcated Contemporaneous Period Analysis) 3.5 Dynamic – Contemporaneous “Recreated” (Contemporaneous Period Analysis, Recreated)AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  4. 4. • 3.1 Static – Gross (As-Planned v. As-Built, Single Base) • Applicable only to simple projects, short in duration, with a CP that’s unlikely to shift • Easy to understand, inexpensive to create • Not suitable to long or complicated projects because the projects change and the measuring point does not. • Use when no update schedules available • Need as-planned schedule and as-built dataAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  5. 5. • 3.1 Static – Gross (As-Planned v. As-Built, Single Base)AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  6. 6. • 3.1 Static – Gross (As-Planned v. As-Built, Single Base)AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  7. 7. • 3.2. Static - Periodic (As-Planned v. As-Built, Multiple Base) • Similar to Single Base version • Measuring it in periods adds little since no new data? • May find updates useful – but if validated updates available, may use other methods that assess CP changes • Need as-planned schedule and as-built data • May provide for better presentationAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  8. 8. • 3.2. Static - Periodic (As-Planned v. As-Built, Multiple Base)AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  9. 9. • 3.2. Static - Periodic (As-Planned v. As-Built, Multiple Base) Continued next slideAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  10. 10. • 3.2. Static - Periodic (As-Planned v. As-Built, Multiple Base) Continued from previous slideAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  11. 11. • 3.3. Dynamic – Contemporaneous “as-is” (Contemporaneous Period Analysis) • Applicable on complicated projects • Uses contemporaneous updates as new baselines • If done monthly, then it could be called a “Windows” analysis • Handles many problems like concurrency wellAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  12. 12. • 3.3. Dynamic – Contemporaneous “as-is” (CPA)AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  13. 13. • 3.3. Dynamic – Contemporaneous “as-is” (CPA)AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  14. 14. • 3.4. Dynamic – Contemporaneous “Split” (Bifurcated Contemporaneous Period) • Applicable on complicated projects • Uses contemporaneous updates as new baselines • If done monthly, then it could be called a “Windows” analysis • Handles many problems like concurrency well • The “split” separates Logic-type changes from Actual ProgressAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  15. 15. • 3.4. Dynamic – Contemporaneous “Split” (Bifurcated CPA) Continued next slideAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  16. 16. • 3.4. Dynamic – Contemporaneous “Split” (Bifurcated CPA) Continued from previous slideAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  17. 17. • 3.4. Dynamic – Contemporaneous “Split” (Bifurcated CPA)AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  18. 18. • 3.5. Dynamic – Contemporaneous “Recreated” (Contemporaneous Period Analysis) • Applicable on complicated projects • Uses RECREATED updates as new baselines • If done monthly, then it might be called a “Windows” analysis • Handles many problems like concurrency well • However – virtually all of the baselines are created by the analystAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  19. 19. • 3.5. Dynamic – Contemporaneous “Recreated” (Recreated CPA)AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  20. 20. • 3.5. Dynamic – Contemporaneous “Recreated” (Recreated CPA) Continued next slideAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  21. 21. • 3.5. Dynamic – Contemporaneous “Recreated” (Recreated CPA) Continued from previous slideAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  22. 22. • Modeled • 3.6 Additive – Single Base (Impacted as-planned) • 3.7 Additive – Multiple Base (Retrospective TIA) • 3.8 Subtractive – Single Simulation (Collapsed as-built) • 3.9 Subtractive – Multiple SimulationAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  23. 23. • 3.6 Additive – Single Base (Impacted As-Planned) • Accuracy very dependent on inclusiveness of fragnets and accuracy of as-planned schedule. • Also dependent on changes in Critical Path from As-Planned • Easy to understand • Can be purely hypothetical, generally does not prevail in litigation • Concurrency not addressedAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  24. 24. • 3.6 Additive – Single Base (Impacted As-Planned)AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  25. 25. • 3.6 Additive – Single Base (Impacted As-Planned)AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  26. 26. • 3.7 Additive – Multiple Base (Retrospective TIA) • Accuracy dependent on inclusiveness of fragnets and accuracy of updates – however more likely to include both owner and contractor issues • Easy to understand • No as-built required (although still useful) • Updates useful if used (failure to correlate creates problem) • Associated with actual events • Concurrency easily addressed by a two step processAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  27. 27. • 3.7 Additive – Multiple Base (Retrospective TIA)AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  28. 28. • 3.7 Additive – Multiple Base (Retrospective TIA)AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  29. 29. • 3.8 Subtractive – Single Simulation (Collapsed As- Built) • Accuracy dependent on creation of after the fact logic • Easy to understand • Uses actual events • Can be viewed as hypothetical • Critical path can be difficult to identifyAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  30. 30. • 3.8 Subtractive – Single Simulation (Collapsed As-Built)AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  31. 31. • 3.8 Subtractive – Single Simulation (Collapsed As-Built)AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  32. 32. • 3.9 Subtractive – Multiple Simulation • Only known practitioner – Long International? • Accuracy still dependent on creation of after the fact logic • Uses actual Events • Can be viewed as hypothetical • Critical path can be difficult to identifyAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  33. 33. • 3.1 Static – Gross (As-Planned v. As-Built, Single Base)AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  34. 34. • 3.1 Static – Gross (As-Planned v. As-Built, Single Base)AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  35. 35. Forensic Use of METHOD Analysis 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 Non-Compensable OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK Time Extension Compensable Delay OK OK OK OK OK OK Right to Finish Early OK Compensable Delay Entitlement to Early OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK Completion Bonus Disruption Without OK OK OK OK OK OK OK Project Delay Constructive OK OK OK AccelerationAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  36. 36. AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  37. 37. AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  38. 38. •AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  39. 39. • • Must allow the source data to bear on the selection process • Cannot predetermine a technique based on personal preference • Balance client needs, budget, and time with sound analysis philosophyAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  40. 40. • Observational? • Count • Modeled? • CountAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  41. 41. • Observational • Observational • 3.1 Static – Gross • Count • 3.2 Static - Periodic • Count • 3.3 Dynamic – Contemporaneous “as-is” • Count • 3.4 Dynamic – Contemporaneous “Split” • Count • 3.5 Dynamic – Contemporaneous • Count “Recreated”AACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis
  42. 42. • Modeled • Modeled • 3.6 Additive – Single Base • Count • 3.7 Additive – Multiple Base • Count • 3.8 Subtractive – Single Simulation • Count • 3.9 Subtractive – Multiple Simulation • CountAACE International Recommended Practice No. 29R03,Forensic Schedule Analysis

×