Schedule Integrity - The Key to Successful Project Management

Technical Integrity of the Project Schedule
MEETING NATIONAL NEEDS
SCHEDULE TECHNICAL INTEGRITY
THE KEY TO SUCCESSFUL PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Shane Forth Msc, FAPM, FACostE
Costain Natural Resources - PMO Director
APM North West Event at University of Manchester - 16TH March 2016

Technical Integrity of the Project Schedule 2
Introduction
Alumni of Manchester University
www.costain.comContact Tel:
Mobile:
Email:
Follow us on:
01642 664155 0161 910 3369
07812 961901
shane.forth@costain.com
‘I received high quality support throughout
from the Universities MACE School, course
co-ordinators, programme team, academic
staff, course administrators and especially, my
dissertation supervisor Therese Lawlor-
Wright, who provided excellent support and
guidance.’
2

Costain Group plc
Securing a future energy
supply…
…maintaining a safe and
reliable water supply
…upgrading the transport
infrastructure
Infrastructure
Natural Resources

Costain Group plc
Natural
Resources
LISTED ON THE
London
Stock Exchange
SECURED BUSINESS UK EMPOLYEES
35382014
Female 681
Male 2857
Costain Group plc
is one of the UK’s largest and most respected Engineering Solutions Providers
Infrastructure
Rail Highways
Power Water
Nuclear
Oil & Gas

Costain Natural Resources
 Established over 60 years ago
 UK & Internationally focused
 Full project lifecycle delivery
 Driven by technology & innovation
 Focus on advisory & design services
 Improvement & development of
customer facilities
Advisory & Concept Development
Specialist Design
Programme Management
Complex Project Delivery
Technology Integration
Asset Optimisation & Support
Our Natural Resources division supports
the Oil & Gas, Power, Water and Carbon Management sectors.

Costain Oil & Gas
Project Delivery Centres
Manchester Delivery Centre
870 people across process
sectors
Immingham
CORE CAPABILITIES
– FULL PROJECT
LIFE CYCLE
 Concept, feasibility
and FEED
 Detailed design,
engineering,
procurement
and project
management
services
 Construction
Management
 Asset management
& industrial services
180
Head Office
Maidenhead
450
Leeds170
Teesside30
Aberdeen130

Project Management Office (PMO)
‘
‘ To develop, implement and continuously improve
our processes and tools for project controls and
information management to help our project teams
improve delivery outcomes on new projects to
benefit both Costain and our customers
Our customers recognise the industry leading
processes and tools we provide for project controls
and information management that strongly support
our project teams and ensure predictable project
delivery in all our target markets

Integrated Project Delivery Solution
(IPDS)
http://costain.com/media/597674/ipds‐2pp.pdf

IPDS System Offering

Project Controls Technician
Trailblazer Apprenticeship

Agenda
1. Schedule Technical Integrity - What is it and How Big is the Problem ?
2. Common Problems in the Development of Project Schedules
3. A Review of Good Practice in Preparing the Project Network
4. Real World Case Studies
5. 5-Step Solution
6. Emerging Trends in Industry
7. Why is Planning & Scheduling Important?

Technical
relating to a particular subject, art, or craft, or its techniques
Integrity
the condition of being unified or sound in construction
http://oxforddictionaries.com/
Schedule Technical Integrity
What is It?

Technical Assurance
The monitoring of the technical integrity of products.
Technical
Pertaining to the application of specific principles and/or reasoning to the
resolution of project management issues or problems.
Integrity
In dealings between parties, firm adherence to a code of moral values
including completeness, honesty, honor, forthrightness,
straightforwardness and entirety.
Wideman Comparative Glossary of Project Management Terms v3.1 http://www.maxwideman.com/pmglossary/index.htm
What is It?

After: Ernest & Young 2014
How Big is the Problem?

 ENR, May 2003, reported on a meeting at which four
scheduling experts lamented the state of scheduling and
what they saw as widespread abuse of powerful software to
produce badly flawed schedules, that look good but lack
mathematical coherence or common sense. They described
this as:
 The article included a quote from Russell J. Lewton,
construction manager for the Weitz Co LLC, Des Moines:
Korman et al (2003)
‘Among the young guys, computers
have made it east to slap together
something that looks right, but there
is a thought process that must be
involved, and it is hard to tell in many
contemporary schedules if the
thinking has happened or not.’
Critics can't find the logic in many of today's CPM schedules
Users want software with flexibility, but is it true CPM?

We might liken the current condition of schedule analyses to fruit we buy at the market.
We have all had the experience of buying fruit that looks to be in excellent condition, only
to get home and find it is rotten to the core. In the era of Enron we have seen this trend
carry over to accounting reports not worth the paper on which they are written.
Unfortunately the field of construction planning today presents a landscape that is littered
with too many ‘rotten banana’ schedules. Whilst the majority of schedules in use today
present tools for planning and scheduling projects, too many of today’s schedules fall into
the ‘rotten bananas’ category.
Frequently these ‘rotten banana’ schedules appear to be in excellent condition from the
outside. However when we look at the actual content of these documents and files, we
find that the schedules are flawed, if not useless.
Wickwire et al, 2003
‘Rotten bananas in a Software Paradise

Common Problems in the Development of
Project Schedules
1. Open ended activities - no predecessor or no successor
2. Use of constraint dates
3. Negative Lags
4. Incorrect software settings can affect calculations
5. Excessive detail
These five problems lead to project networks with incorrect float calculations and
invalid or absent critical path. Credibility is lacking, predictability and forecasts
are poor and this not acceptable to customers

Project Schedules
Open ended activities occur as a result of decisions (or errors) made by the
project planner when creating the project schedule. To illustrate the impact of the
problem, we can consider the impact on a very simple project network.
1. Open ended activities - no predecessor or no successor
3. Negative Lags
5. Excessive detail

Project Schedules
A B F I J
C D E
G H
 
A B F I J
C D E
G H



Project Schedules

Project Schedules
The FS dependency between Activity C & D has been removed or missed by the planner below, what are the effects?

Project Schedules

Project Schedules
The FS dependency between Activity B & C has been removed or missed by the planner below, what are the effects?

Project Schedules
Computerised project management systems have various constraint date types, which can
be assigned to activities as imposed dates – but beware, this will override the calculation
and results of a natural forward and backward pass.
1. Open ended activities – no predecessor or no successor
3. Negative Lags
5. Excessive detail

Project Schedules

Project Schedules
Computerised project management
systems offer various types of
constraint dates which can be assigned
to activities as imposed dates,
overriding the calculation and results of
a natural forward and backward pass

Project Schedules
Activity C
Start On or After 28 Aug

Project Schedules
Look what’s
happened
to the Project
Finish date ?
Activity C
Start On or After 28 Aug

Project Schedules
Constraint Types (Primavera P6)
 Start On or After
 Finish On or After
 Start On or Before
 Finish On or Before
 Mandatory Start
 Mandatory Finish
Constraint Types (Microsoft Project)
 Start No Earlier Than
 Finish No Earlier Than
 Start No Later Than
 Finish No Later Than
 Must Start On
 Must Finish On

Project Schedules
31
Extract from CPM Network without Imposed
Restraints
(Adapted from Ahujah, 1976: 54, Figure 3-8)
Figure ‐ Extract from CPM Network with Imposed Restraints
(Adapted from Ahujah, 1976: 54, Figure 3‐9)

3. Negative Lags
5. Excessive detail
Project Schedules

Project Schedules

Activity B needs to Start 20 days before Activity A finishes
Dur = 50 days
Dur = 40 days

Project Schedules

Activity B needs to Start 20 days before Activity A finishes
Dur = 50 days
Dur = 40 days
This suggests that the finish of a future activity will determine the start
of an activity in the past which is neither logical nor possible
Better options are
 Use an SS relationship with a positive lag of 30 days from Activity A
to Activity B
 Use more detailed activities (with smaller durations) and an FS 0
relationship between them

Project Schedules
3. Negative Lags
5. Excessive detail

Project Schedules
Some Examples of the complexity in software settings Include:
 Activity Duration Types
– Fixed Duration and Units
– Fixed Duration and Units/Time
– Fixed Units/Time
– Fixed Units
 Scheduling Options
– Make open ended activities critical
– When scheduling progressed activities use Retained Logic or Progress Override
or Actual dates
– Calculate Start to Start Lag from Early Start or Actual Start
– Use Expected Finish Dates
– Ignore dependencies (relationships) to and from activities in other projects
– Compute Total Float as Start Float, Finish Float or smallest of Start and Finish
Float
– Calculate Float based on Finish Date of Each Project or Opened Projects

Project Schedules
Some Examples of the complexity in software settings Include:
 Activity Duration Types
– Fixed Duration and Units
– Fixed Duration and Units/Time
– Fixed Units/Time
– Fixed Units
 Scheduling Options
– Make open ended activities critical
– When scheduling progressed activities use Retained Logic or Progress Override
or Actual dates
– Calculate Start to Start Lag from Early Start or Actual Start
– Use Expected Finish Dates
– Ignore dependencies (relationships) to and from activities in other projects
– Compute Total Float as Start Float, Finish Float or smallest of Start and Finish
Float
– Calculate Float based on Finish Date of Each Project or Opened Projects
If the planner changes the activity duration manually, the
software automatically changes the resources (manhours)

Project Schedules
3. Negative Lags
5. Excessive detail

Project Schedules
Excessive activity detail in the project network has been a problem
since the very first use of the critical path method. (CPM)
 1957-58 - during testing in first use of CPM by Du Pont US on a new chemical
plant facility, a team of six engineers went into far more detail than expected
(Kelley & Walker, 1959)
 Early 1960s - the USAF Dyna Soar rocket missile program had a network of
250,000 activities that had to be simplified for contractors (Battersby, 1964)
 Early 1960s - Bristol Aircraft ran into difficulties with a 3000 activity network in
Concorde, encountering incomplete logic, loops and incorrect event numbering
(Battersby, 1964)
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

Project Schedules
Excessive network activity detail causes the following problems:
 Many stakeholders are overwhelmed and don’t understand the plan, or ignore it
 Need for taller organisation with increased levels of management and slower decisions
 Difficulties in keeping the project schedule current
– Progress update is a high maintenance chore, the network quickly becomes out of date
– Difficulties adding authorised changes into the network, another high maintenance chore
– Progress status reports are late and inaccurate
 Abortive and inefficient schedule development work
– As the more distant planned work moves towards the upcoming time horizon, the schedule
activity detail that was planned too early, before the prerequisite level of scope definition and
information was available, has to be reworked

The convenience of PC, modern project management software and speed of data entry that
can easily lead the planning engineer and project team into temptation to develop the project
network in more detail than the availability of the prerequisite information supports
A long list of authoritative sources cite the problem of excessive activity as the single
most problem in the development of robust and usable project networks
(e.g. PMI, 2007, Andersen, 1996; Lockyer & Gordon, 1996; Drigani, 1989; Laufer & Tucker, 1988; Lockyer, 1984; Morton,
1983b; Lester, 1982 (citing NEDO, 1976); Woodgate, 1977; Ahuja, 1976
Project Schedules

Project Schedules
In addition to the convenience of the PC, organisational and
behavioural issues influence come into play:
 Whilst some project team members or stakeholders complain there is too
much detail in the project schedule
 … it is often assumed that more thought must have been put into project
schedule development and that more detail provides more certainty as to
the outcome
 … many find this a comfort, it give them a (false) sense of security
 … I would suggest to you that this is a confusion in thinking that quantity is
equal to quality.

A Review of Good Practice in
Preparing the Project Network
2015 - APM - Planning, Scheduling, Monitoring
and Control: The Practical Project
Management of Time, Cost and Risk
2014 - CPM Scheduling for Construction
Best Practice and Guidelines
2010 - American Association of Cost Engineers
- Identifying the Critical Path
- Schedule Level of Detail
- Forensic Schedule Analysis
2007 - Project Management Institute (PMI)
PMBOK
2002 - Society of Construction Law
Delay and Disruption Protocol
Standards and Guidelines that contain statements of good practice concerning
the project network include:

2011 - Chartered Institute of Builders (CIOB)
- Review for schedule integrity
2010 - Association for Project Management (APM)
- The scheduling maturity model
2010 - Government Accountability Office (GAO)
- 9 point schedule analysis
2009 - Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMS )
- 14 point schedule assessment
Standards and Guidelines - As awareness of problems have increased,
government organisations and professional bodies have introduced specific
standards and guidelines for the checking of schedule integrity

A B F I J
C D E
G H
 

A B F I J
C D E
G H
 


Open Ends

Open Ends

Use of Constraint Dates

FS - 20

SS 30
FF 20
Negative Lags

Negative Lags

Most professional bodies recommend the ‘rolling wave method to address the
issue of excessive detail (as do Costain procedures)
 APM advocates the ‘rolling wave’ method
 PMI acknowledge that too much detail can mean a schedule which is difficult
to manage and suggest that the level should be sufficient for the assigned
person to carry out the task without requiring further sources of guidance
 AACEI recommend Level 3 detail, which is not too high-level and not too
detailed and support the ‘rolling wave’ method whereby Level 3 may apply o
the detailed engineering/design phase, but the later phases for procurement
and construction phases might only be detailed to Level 1 or 2.
 GAO Best Practice number 3 specifies the ‘rolling wave’ method
 Society of Construction Law guidance is that activities should not exceed
28 days duration
 Costain specify a maximum 3,000 activities for the project
network and recommend the ‘rolling wave’ method
Level of Detail

CIOB (2011a :30). Graph of schedule density in relation to predictability
Level of Detail

Level of Detail
CIOB (2011b :36). WBS levels and schedule density

Real World Case Study 1
All eight networks would all fail the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA ) 14
Point Schedule Assessment, which recommends a 5% limit for open ends, constraints
and negative lags
Project
A
Project
B
Project
C
Project
D
Project
E
Project
F
Project
G
Project
J
Max Avg
# Activities 4067 3597 3528 2792 1933 1526 923 522 2361
# Open Ends 5.3% 10.6% 9.2% 7.5% 4.4% 29.1% 33.3% 36.4% 36.4% 11.4%
# Constraints 1.1% 12.6% 11.3% 4.3% 6.5% 2.4% 1.1% 1.3% 12.6% 6.4%
# Negative Lags 0.1% 3.6% 1.8% 2.1% 1.0% 8.9% 1.6% 11.1% 11.1% 2.6%
Project
A
Project
B
Project
C
Project
D
Project
E
Project
F
Project
G
Project
J
Max Avg
# Activities 4067 3597 3528 2792 1933 1526 923 522 2361
# Open Ends 5.3% 10.6% 9.2% 7.5% 4.4% 29.1% 33.3% 36.4% 36.4% 11.4%
# Constraints 1.1% 12.6% 11.3% 4.3% 6.5% 2.4% 1.1% 1.3% 12.6% 6.4%
# Negative Lags 0.1% 3.6% 1.8% 2.1% 1.0% 8.9% 1.6% 11.1% 11.1% 2.6%
Project
A
Project
B
Project
C
Project
D
Project
E
Project
F
Project
G
Project
J
Max Avg
# Activities 4067 3597 3528 2792 1933 1526 923 522 2361
# Open Ends 214 380 325 209 86 444 307 190 444 269
# Constraints 46 454 399 121 126 36 10 7 454 150
# Negative Lags 6 130 64 58 20 136 15 58 136 61
Project
A
Project
B
Project
C
Project
D
Project
E
Project
F
Project
G
Project
J
Max Avg
# Activities 4067 3597 3528 2792 1933 1526 923 522 2361
# Open Ends 214 380 325 209 86 444 307 190 444 269
# Constraints 46 454 399 121 126 36 10 7 454 150
# Negative Lags 6 130 64 58 20 136 15 58 136 61

 Some Possible Causes
– Lack of time to prepare plan (leads to
shortcuts)
– Too much detail (high maintenance)
– Lack of checking
– Computer functionality
– Bad habits
– Laziness/easy way out
– Unlearned what we did before
– Lack of training and procedures
– Lack of experience or capability
– GiGO

 Some Possible Causes
– Lack of time to prepare plan (leads to
shortcuts)
– Too much detail (high maintenance)
– Lack of checking
– Computer functionality
– Bad habits
– Laziness/easy way out
– Unlearned what we did before
– Lack of training and procedures
– Lack of experience or capability
– GiGO
 Some Definite Impacts
– Float calculations wrong
– Critical path invalid or absent
– Plan lacks credibility
– Plan not realistic
– Plan not accepted by client
– Poor predictability or forecasts
– Poor reputation
– Plan not recognised in
adjudication or arbitration
– People may not realise there’s a
problem
(ignorance is bliss)
– GIGO

The Good
Semi-Structured Interviews
13 Project Controls and Planning Managers from 11 companies
with significant experience in energy industry

The Good

The Bad

… and the Ugly

5 Step Solution
Steps 1 to 4
1
Rules
Procedures, practices
& work instructions
- Procedures and practices
prohibit or discourage actions
which cause problems in
project network development
- Detailed work instructions for
Primavera P6
2
Schedule integrity check
3
Schedule Narrative
4
Risk analysis
Independent
99 point checklist
(before baseline issued)
Eight topics covered including:
- Network Logic & Constraints
- Scheduling Method
- Critical Path/ Float
- Primavera P6 Practice
compliance
- etc.
Basis of Schedule
- WBS & activity detail
- Clarifications & assumptions
- Schedule method statement
- Use of constraints
- Critical path,
- Key issues
- Calendars, and seasonal
implications
- Resource availability
- Resource levelling
Schedule optimisation
- More realistic schedule,
- 3 point estimate of
completion date rather than
deterministic schedule
- May be applied to separate
standalone schedules if
program//project network
is too large.

5 Step Solution
Step 5
5
Project team review the plan (content and constructability) before issue
Includes project management team and key stakeholders

5 Step Solution
Technical Integrity Audit of Project Network

Independent
99 Point Checklist
(before Baseline
issued)
Items on Checklist include:
 Guidance Notes
 Findings
 Recommended Actions
Eight Topics Covered:
1.Project Setup
2.Project Details
3.Network Logic & Constraints
4.Scheduling Method
5.Critical Path/Float
6.Resource Management
7.Progress
8.Primavera P6 Practice
compliance
Summary Report Produced
for Senior Management
5 Step Solution
Technical Integrity Audit of Project Network

5 Step Solution
Typical Results (Project X)
Date / # Activities
17 Dec
2010
1340
Qty %
11 Jan
2011
1340
Qty %
10 Feb
2011
1358
Qty %
Open Ends –
No Predecessor or
No Successor
204 15.2% 172 12.8% 24 1.8%
Constraints 246 18.4% 97 7.2% 83 6.1%
Negative Lags 35 2.6% 35 2.6% 31 2.3%
Date / # Activities
17 Dec
2010
1340
Qty %
11 Jan
2011
1340
Qty %
10 Feb
2011
1358
Qty %
Open Ends –
No Predecessor or
No Successor
204 15.2% 172 12.8% 24 1.8%
Constraints 246 18.4% 97 7.2% 83 6.1%
Negative Lags 35 2.6% 35 2.6% 31 2.3%

5 Step Solution
Typical Results (Project Y)
Date / # Activities
09 Nov
2010
2965
Qty %
03 Dec
2011
2394
Qty %
25 Jan
2011
2392
Qty %
Open Ends –
No Predecessor or
No Successor
388 13.1% 113 4.7% 60 2.5%
Constraints 41 1.4% 26 1.1% 21 0.9%
Negative Lags 16 0.5% 24 1.0% 20 0.8%
Date / # Activities
09 Nov
2010
2965
Qty %
03 Dec
2011
2394
Qty %
25 Jan
2011
2392
Qty %
Open Ends –
No Predecessor or
No Successor
388 13.1% 113 4.7% 60 2.5%
Constraints 41 1.4% 26 1.1% 21 0.9%
Negative Lags 16 0.5% 24 1.0% 20 0.8%

5 Step Solution
Feedback
Project Director – Project X
‘I welcome your input to ensure we have best practice on the project in line with
governance’
Project Director – Project Y
‘I really appreciate your time spent on auditing the schedule. Always good to
have an outside view on the content. While the results are encouraging, I still
believe we have a way to go on making this schedule robust. I am aware that
this audit is usually undertaken on a 6 monthly cycle, but I would appreciate if
you could take time out before the xmas holiday break to check the progress
against the actions, and ensure they are closed out.’
Project Sponsor – Project Y
‘Thanks team, great work’

5 Step Solution
Looking Forward
Indications from feedback are that benefits are being realised
Schedule technical integrity 5-step solution has been incorporated into Costain
project management plans and procedures
Continued recruitment of new practitioners at all levels, and the development and
training and retention of these and existing is happening
The level of checking required for technical integrity of project schedules can
gradually be relaxed, as improved practice is embedded
The strong likelihood that customer requirements will include the need to the
ensure schedule technical integrity will help implement the solution

Emerging Trends in Industry
Further to the recent trend in issuing specific standards and guidelines, the
number of software applications are coming onto the market for checking the
schedule integrity of project networks is increasing
2007
Steelray
Project Analyzer
2010
Acumen
Fuse
2004
Pertmaster
Risk
2003
Schedule
Analyzer for
the Enterprise
2010
Primavera
P6 v 8
2010
Schedule
Cracker
1999
Schedule
Analyzer
Pro

Why is Planning & Scheduling Important ?
A 2009 report by Independent Project Analysis (IPA) benchmarking
organisation for the UK Government found that better scheduling and
cost estimating methods lead to better engineering and construction
labour productivity and cost performance

The same report found that in the UK, less than 20% of projects have
resource loaded schedule at project sanction, compared to over 40%
in US Gulf Coast, but use of critical path techniques is 40% in UK
compared to just over 30% in US Gulf Coast. The paradox is that UK
projects tend to be cost rather than schedule driven

Projects not using
network analysis
techniques had an
average 26%
schedule overrun
this includes projects
using project
management software but
with over-constrained
project networks
Almost 50% of
projects use
network analysis
techniques with an
average 14%
schedule overrun

References
Association for Project Management (2010: 17-18). The Scheduling Maturity Model. High Wycombe, UK: APM Publishing
Association for Project Management (2008: 15). Introduction to Project Planning. High Wycombe, UK: APM Publishing
AACE International (2010a: 76). Recommended Practice No. 29R-03 Forensic Schedule analysis. AACE International: Morgantown, WV.
AACE International (2010b: 4-6). Recommended Practice No. 49R-06 Identifying the Critical Path. AACE International: Morgantown, WV
AACE International (2010c: 2 & 4). Recommended Practice No. 37R-06 Schedule Level of Detail – As Applied in Engineering, Procurement
and Construction. AACE International: Morgantown, WV
Bendix Corporation (1955 :1). The Bendix G-15 CPM/PERT Program http://www.computerhistory.org/collections/accession/102646275
[Accessed 31 January 2010]
CIOB (2011a :30). Guide to Good Practice in the Management of Time in Complex Projects. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell
CIOB (2011b :36). Guide to Good Practice in the Management of Time in Complex Projects. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell
Drigani, F. (1989 :149). Computerized Project Control. New York. Marcel Dekker Inc
Foxley, E. (2005), Computers 1960 to 1965.
http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~ef/ComputerXHistory/FirstComputers-2/1963-ICT1500-GeneralView.htm [Accessed 31 January 2010}
Moder, J. et al (1983 :64). Project Management with CPM, PERT and Precedence Diagramming.3rd Edn.Wisconsin, USA. Blitz Publishing
Company (Reprinted 1995)
Moder, J. et al (1983 :356). Project Management with CPM, PERT and Precedence Diagramming.3rd Edn.Wisconsin, USA. Blitz Publisghing
Mosaic Project Service Pty Ltd. (2009b :21). Seeing the Road Ahead
http://www.mosaicprojects.com.au/PDF_Papers/P106_Seeing_The_Road_Ahead_PMOZ.pdf [Accessed 2nd February 2011]
Project Management Institute.(2007) 18). The Practice Standard for Scheduling. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute
Project Management Institute.(2007) 19). The Practice Standard for Scheduling. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute
Society of Construction Law (2002: 40). Delay and Disruption Protocol. Wantage. Society of Construction Law (Reprinted October 2004)
Society of Construction Law (2002: 68). Delay and Disruption Protocol. Wantage. Society of Construction Law (Reprinted October 2004)

Bibliography
AACE International (2010a). Recommended Practice No. 29R-03 Forensic Schedule analysis. AACE International: Morgantown, WV.
AACE International (2010b). Recommended Practice No. 49R-06 Identifying the Critical Path. AACE International: Morgantown, WV
AACE International (2010c). Recommended Practice No. 37R-06 Schedule Level of Detail - As Applied in Engineering, Procurement and
Construction. AACE International: Morgantown, WV
Acumen Fuse. http://www.projectacumen.com/fuse/industry-standards/dcma-14-point-assessment/ [Accessed 7th December 2010]
APM PMC SIG (2015). Planning, Scheduling, Monitoring and Control: The Practical Project Management of Time, Cost and Risk. High
Wycombe, UK: APM Publishing
Association for Project Management (2010). The Scheduling Maturity Model. High Wycombe, UK: APM Publishing
Association for Project Management (2008: 15). Introduction to Project Planning. High Wycombe, UK: APM Publishing
Association of Cost Engineers, Book Review, Project Control Professional, Vol 49 No 1, 26
Bendix Corporation (1955). The Bendix G-15 CPM /PERT Program http://www.computerhistory.org/collections/accession/102646275
[Accessed 31 January 2010]
Binafore, B. (2007 :69). Microsoft Project 20007: The Missing Manual. USA. O’Reilly Media, Inc.
Buttrick, R. (1997). The Project Workout. London. Pitman Publishing
Carson, C, Oakander, P., Relyea, C. (2014). CPM Scheduling for Construction Best Practice and Guidelines. Newtown Square, PA: Project
Mangement Institute
CIOB (2011). Guide to Good Practice in the Management of Time in Complex Projects. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell
CIOB (2008). Managing the Risk of Delayed Completion in the 21st Century. Ascot: CIOB
Cornish. J. (2008). A Brief History of Project Scheduling. http://www.microplanning.co.uk/downloads.htm#Papers [Accessed 28th January
2011]
Douglas III, E.E., Calvey, T.T., McDonald Jr, D. F., & Winter, R. M. The Great Negative Lag Debate.
http://www.calveyconsulting.com/files/PS02_Great_Negative_Lag_Debate.pdf [Accessed 7th December 2010]
Drigani, F. (1989). Computerized Project Control. New York. Marcel Dekker Inc
Gray, C.F. and Larson, E.W. (2011). Project Management: The Managerial Process. 5th Ed. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill
Kerzner, H. (1992). Project Management A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling and Controlling. 4th Edn. London, Chapman and Hall

Korman, Richard & Daniels, Stephen H. (2003). “Critics Can’t Find the Logic in Many of Today’s CPM Schedules,”
http://enr.construction.com/features/bizLabor/archives/030526.asp [Accessed 1st December 2010] . PlP
Lester, A. (2005). Project Planning and Control. 4th Edn. Bodmin, MPG Books Ltd.
Minor Richards Associates (2001). An evaluation of the projected future evolution of the workforce and key skills needs within the engineering
contractors sector of the Oil Gas and Chemical Industry URN/01/1066. June 2001.
Moder, J. et al (1983). Project Management with CPM, PERT and Precedence Diagramming.3rd Edn.Wisconsin, USA. Blitz Publishing
Mosaic Project Service Pty Ltd. (2009a).Improving Schedule Management http://www.mosaicprojects.com.au/Resources_Papers_081.html
[Accessed 2nd February 2011]
Mosaic Project Service Pty Ltd. (2009b). Seeing the Road Ahead
http://www.mosaicprojects.com.au/PDF_Papers/P106_Seeing_The_Road_Ahead_PMOZ.pdf [Accessed 2nd February 2011]
O’Brien, J. & Plotnick, F.L. (2010). CPM in Construction Manaagement. 7th Ed. USA, McGraw-Hill Professional
Pacelli, L. (2004). The Project Management Advisor: 18 Major Project Screw-ups, and How to Cut Them off at the Pass. New Jersey. Prentice
Hall
PC User NSTL Lab Report (1992). NSTSL Lab Report. PC User. 179, March. p134-140
Pinto, J. K. (2010). Project Management Achieving Competitive Advantage. 2nd Edn. New Jersey, USA. Prentice Hall
Primavera P6 Professional Project Management. http://www.oracle.com/us/products/applications/042374.htm [Accessed 7th December 2010]
Primavera Risk Analysis. .http://www.oracle.com/us/products/applications/042371.htm [Accessed 7th December 2010]
Project Management Institute.(2007). The Practice Standard for Scheduling. Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute
Reiss, G. (1998). “Project Management Demystified. 2nd Edn. London, E & FN Spon
Schedule Analyzer Professional for the Enterprise. http://scheduleanalyzer.com/ [Accessed 7th December 2010]
Schedule Analyzer Professional. http://scheduleanalyzer.com/ [Accessed 7th December 2010]
Society of Construction Law (2002). Delay and Disruption Protocol. Wantage. Society of Construction Law (Reprinted October 2004)
Steelray Project Analyzer. http://www.steelray.com/spafeatures.html [Accessed 7th December 2010]
Bibliography

Stretton, A. (2007). A Short History of Modern Project Management. http://www.pmforum.org/library/second-edition/2007/PDFs/Stretton-10-
07.pdf [Accessed 27th January 2010]
Wikipedia (2011). Critical Path Method http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_path_method#History [Accessed 27th January 2010]
Wickwire, J. (2004). An Interview with Jim O’Brien – December 1, 2004. http://www.pmicos.org/jointerview.asp
Bibliography

Technical Integrity of the Project Schedule
IMPROVING PROJECT SCHEDULE OUTCOMES
HOW EFFECTIVE ARE YOUR PROJECT SCHEDULES
AND CRITICAL PATH ANALYSIS METHODS IN MANGING TIME
Shane Forth - PMO Director

Two Hour Workshop
To Help You Improve Your Project Planning

This presentation was delivered
at an APM event
To find out more about
upcoming events please visit our
website www.apm.org.uk/events

Schedule Integrity - The Key to Successful Project Management

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Similar to Schedule Integrity - The Key to Successful Project Management

More from Association for Project Management

Recently uploaded

Schedule Integrity - The Key to Successful Project Management