6. A Research Project
• Hypothesis
– Is there a correlation between sound project
scheduling and successful, on-time completion?
• Projects Surveyed
– 100’s of major CapEx projects
– Ranged in size from US$15MM – US$30B
– Both owner and contractor involved
7. Approach
• Quantitative modeling
– Quality of the plan
– Quality of the execution
• Challenges
– Multiple standards
– Binary measurements of execution
8. Schedule Quality Measurement
• Fuse Schedule Index™
– Used across industries
– Metrics combined with applicable thresholds
• Metrics
– Logic Density™
– Insufficient Detail™
9. Project Execution Measurement
• Traditional methods
– Issues of granularity
• Baseline Compliance Analysis™
– Acumen-developed method
10. Baseline Compliance
• More than just a date comparison
• Measures period-compliance
• Included in Acumen Fuse® library
Compliance Scenarios
On-Time Start,
On-Time Finish
On-Time Start,
Finishes Late
Starts Late,
Finishes Late5
4
//33
Started Early,
Finished Early
Started Early,
On-Time Finish2
1
15. Case Study #3
Realistic Scheduling
Critiqued
The Base
Risk-Adjusted
Optimized
Team-AlignedS5
S4
S3
S2
S1
Schedule Acceleration/Risk Reduction
• GasCom
– LNG Pipeline & Facility Owner
– Early FEED stage
• Project Details
– Readying for sanction approval
– Expected First Gas Date: Dec. 2013
– Gas sales contract already established
– Using Primavera P6
16. S1 > S2
Realistic Scheduling
Critiqued
The Base
Risk-Adjusted
Optimized
Team-AlignedS5
S4
S3
S2
S1
Schedule Review
• Sanction Board Requirements
– Risk-adjusted forecast P75
– Fuse Schedule Index 75+
• Project Status
– S1 showing Dec 13 first gas
– Risk assessment not yet conducted
17. S1 > S2
Schedule Critique
• Validated multiple sub-projects
• Test to ensure true path to First Gas
• Analysis showed break in path around
Early Works
• Fixing this, First Gas moved to the right
by 2 months
18. GasCom Logic Density™
Planning Consistency
• Determine Logic Hotspots™ in schedule
• Level of detail was lacking towards the
end of the project – mainly around
interfaces & integration
More definition
needed
20. S1 > S2
Realistic Scheduling
Critiqued
The Base
Risk-Adjusted
Optimized
Team-AlignedS5
S4
S3
S2
S1
Summary
• S2 First Gas date: May 2014
– Risk-adjusted forecast P75
– Fuse Schedule Index 75+
• Project Status
– S1 showing Dec 13 first gas
– Risk assessment not yet conducted
5 months S2: May 2014S1: Dec 2013
21. Float Analysis
• S1 showed high float in early stage of project
• S2 resolved schedule showed the opposite
• Early acceleration opportunity went away
0
50
100
Q1
2011
Q2
2011
Q3
2011
Q4
2011
Q1
2012
Q2
2012
Q3
2012
Q4
2012
Q1
2013
Q2
2013
Q3
2013
Q4
2013
Q1
2014
Q2
2014
Q3
2014
Q4
2014S1 Average Float S2 Average Float
Originally perceived
opportunity for making up
lost time through float
Resolved schedule not
offering early stage
schedule acceleration
22. S2 > S3
Realistic Scheduling
Critiqued
The Base
Risk-Adjusted
Optimized
Team-AlignedS5
S4
S3
S2
S1
Risk Analysis
• Objective:
– Determine a P75 First Gas date
• Conducted a Risk Workshop
Uncertainty
Risk
Events
Schedule
23. Perception of Risk
Uncertainty Factor Best Case (Optimistic) Worst Case (Pessimistic)
Very Conservative 50% 100%
Conservative 75% 105%
Realistic 90% 110%
Aggressive 95% 125%
Very Aggressive 100% 150%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Q1
2011
Q2
2011
Q3
2011
Q4
2011
Q1
2012
Q2
2012
Q3
2012
Q4
2012
Q1
2013
Q2
2013
Q3
2013
Q4
2013
Q1
2014
Q2
2014
Q3
2014
Q4
2014
Team Perception
Actual Risk Hotspots
24. Risk Insight: Inputs
Aggressive
• Skew to the right
Conservative
• Skew to the left
Broad Risk Range
• Range <> duration
Questionable
Range
• Accidently includes risk
events
No Risk
• Missed ranging
Average Risk Range
• Degree of uncertainty
No upside
• Can only be later
No Downside
• Can only be earlier
Wrong
• Inputs don’t align
25.
26. Risk Insight: Exposure
High criticality
• Risk indicator
Hidden critical
paths
• Unique insight
Risk Hotspots™
• Risky & complex
logic
Schedule risk
drivers
• True risk metric
High Contingency
• How much buffer
needed?
Average Risk
exposure
• Risk Trending/path
27.
28. S2 > S3
Realistic Scheduling
Critiqued
The Base
Risk-Adjusted
Optimized
Team-AlignedS5
S4
S3
S2
S1
• P75 risk-adjusted First Gas: Oct 2014
– 10 months later than board expectations
• Identified key risk hot spots
– Long Lead procurement items
• Hidden path identified
– Driven by land acquisition delaying
pipeline early works
S1:
Dec 2013
S2:
May 20145
S3:
Oct 201410
29. S3 > S4
Realistic Scheduling
Critiqued
The Base
Risk-Adjusted
Optimized
Team-AlignedS5
S4
S3
S2
S1
Getting back to Dec. 2013
• Risk Mitigation:
– Response plan identified for key risks
– Response plans added to schedule
– Assessed cost/benefit of mitigation
– $100MM investment to save 1 month
30. S3 > S4
Realistic Scheduling
Critiqued
The Base
Risk-Adjusted
Optimized
Team-AlignedS5
S4
S3
S2
S1
Getting back to Dec. 2013
• Schedule Acceleration details:
– LNG Pipeline ready for hookup: Feb 13
– LNG Facility ready to receive gas: Nov 13
• Focus needed:
– Accelerating the LNG facility
• Could afford to slow down
pipeline/field work by months…
31. LNG Facility
• Criteria set drives acceleration
– Reduce duration
• More resources
– Changed calendars
• Contractor incentive
– Delay Train 2
LNG Facility
Script Objective
“accelerate Facility by 6
months”
Step 1
Accelerate
Jetty
construction
Step 2
Delay Train
2 activities
Step 3
Introduce 6
day working
week/larger
camp
32. How did this work?
Fuse 360 Acceleration
• CPM simulation
• Critical path focus
• Incremental push
• Prioritize
– Earliest/latest
– Longest durations
– Least resistance
33. S3 > S4 > S5
Realistic Scheduling
Critiqued
The Base
Risk-Adjusted
Optimized
Team-AlignedS5
S4
S3
S2
S1
Summary
• LNG Facility
– Accelerated sufficiently
– No longer the driving path
• S4 Deterministic First Gas: Aug 2013
– 4 months earlier than S1
– 12 months earlier than S3
– P75 risk-adjusted: Feb 2014
• S5 Team Buy-in
– Final 2 months achieved through more
aggressive mitigation
34. The Results
• Fully vetted, bought-into schedule
• Risk-adjusted
• LNG Facility accelerated to align with pipeline
• Mitigation plan sponsored by board
• Sanction awarded!
S4: Accelerated
Aug 1 2013
S1: Target 1st Gas
Dec 1 2013
S2: Resolved Schedule
May 1 2014
S3: Risk-Adjusted
Oct 1 2014
P75 S4: Feb 2014
S5: Mitigated
Dec 1 2013
