Successful Dispute Resolution

1,343 views

Published on

Presented at the 2012 Construction CPM Conference, this presentation walks through the challenges of owner/contractor and JV disputes and reviews solutions and prevention techniques using Fuse.

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

  • Be the first to like this

Successful Dispute Resolution

  1. 1. Successful Dispute Resolutionusing Acumen Fuse enterprise project analysis Dr. Dan Patterson PMP | CEO & Founder Acumen
  2. 2. 2Agenda! Introductions! Fuse & forensics overview! Case study #1: Owner/Contractor Dispute! Case study #2: JV Dispute January 24, 2012
  3. 3. Acumen: Proven Project Analytics! Project Management Software Company! Improving CPM scheduling & analysis! Thought leader in Analytics S1 > S5™ Framework Acumen Core Offerings S5: Acumen Fuse® Validate S4: Optimize S3: Risk- S2: Adjust Risk Assessment Workshops Critique S1: Build Software Training
  4. 4. 4Why do Disputes Arise?•  “Planning the work” and “working the plan”! Causes of failure •  “Unrealistic & inadequate planning” or “Poor Execution” •  Poorly contracted terms, Misaligned expectations •  Loosely defined scope/ High degree of change! The challenge of CAPEX projects ! Large projects are inherently complex to model ! Gantt charts/CPM tools don’t lend themselves to team insight! The Solution: Project metric analysis & Forensics ! Pinpoint root-cause of schedule flaws & true risk exposure ! Resolution of cost/schedule/risk/performance issues through optimization ! Study of event interaction using CPM… … to understand significance of deviations from a baseline for potential use in a legal proceeding.! Hindsight vs. Foresight approach January 24, 2012
  5. 5. 5Forensics & Metric Analysis! Objective: to align plan & execution! Planning ! Quality of schedule basis ! Realism of estimates ! Accuracy of sequence ! Risk-adjusted! Execution ! Comparison of scenarios e.g. as planned V as built ! Windows analysis e.g. absorption of float ! Non-progress revisions – changes… ! Baseline compliance January 24, 2012
  6. 6. Planning Forensics 6Framework •  Schedule Basis EPA LANL URS •  Reflects latest scope/contractor S1 updates •  Critiqued Schedule SAIC Shaw NASA •  Structurally sound, no contingency, S2 sound logic General DCMA Fluor Dynamics •  Risk-Adjusted Schedule •  Estimate uncertainty, risk events S3 L3 GAO Battelle •  Optimized Target Scenarios •  Reduced hot spots, higher confidence S4 Dow Chemical ConocoPhillips NAVAIR •  Team Validated Scenario •  Buy-in on mitigation plans S5 SRS US Navy Bechtel January 24, 2012
  7. 7. 7Introduction to FuseEnterprise Project Analysis! Fuse: analytics platform ! Improves schedule quality ! Insight into performance & forensics! Fuse 360: goal-based acceleration ! Schedule Acceleration ! Decision-support January 24, 2012
  8. 8. 8Analysis Three Analysis ModulesMetric Analysis Benefit: Pinpoint shortcomings! Metric! Slice and dice Analysis About:! 250+ metrics! Industry Standard! Unique-to-Fuse metrics! Customizable January 24, 2012
  9. 9. 9Metric Analysis January 24, 2012
  10. 10. 10Analysis Three Analysis ModulesLogic Analysis Benefit: Identify & remove flaws! Metric! Simplify complexities Analysis About:! Recognizes multi-project relationships Logic Analysis January 24, 2012
  11. 11. 11Logic Analysis
  12. 12. 12Analysis Three Analysis ModulesForensic AnalysisBenefit:! Schedule comparison Forensic Metric ! Calculate variances Analysis Analysis ! Identify changes About:! Any attribute or field Any number of schedules Logic Analysis! January 24, 2012
  13. 13. 13Forensic Analysis As planned VKey is not just what changed but Half Step V As the impact of the change Built
  14. 14. Case Study #1Execution Delay Dispute ! Project incurred massive schedule delays ! Disagreement as to root cause of delay ! Ongoing financial exposure was huge ! As expert witness, Acumen asked to: 1.  Determine realism of schedule(s) 2.  Give insight into highly complex plan 3.  Perform schedule risk analysis 4.  Pinpoint delay drivers (root cause) 5.  Offer acceleration scenarios
  15. 15. 15Schedule Critique! Developed a library of core metrics to give insight into schedule basis quality! Drivers ! Missing logic ! Constraints ! Use of Lags Became the basis! Effect of the 300 ! Negative float metrics built into ! Logic Density™ Fuse ! Float ratio™ January 24, 2012
  16. 16. Fuse Schedule Quality 16Index™! Overarching schedule quality score! Helped with assessing multiple versions of the schedule! Enabled trending of schedule quality! Pinpointed shortcoming by contractor January 24, 2012
  17. 17. 17Logic Density! Indicator as to the quality of logic! Highlighted extreme schedule complexity in early phase of execution
  18. 18. 18Driving Path Analysis! Pinpoint driving path(s)! Specific Activity ! Trace forwards, backwards! Two Activities ! Path between them! Link visualization ! Show movement! Highlighted breaks in the driving path!
  19. 19. 19Additional Logic Analysis January 24, 2012
  20. 20. 20Variance Analysis! Pinpointed changes to plan on monthly basis! Isolated owner of change! Determined planned or unplanned January 24, 2012
  21. 21. 21Baseline Compliance™! Used to determine how close a schedule was planned and executed against it’s baseline! Measure of well the plan was being executed! More than just date comparison! Looked at period-compliance January 24, 2012
  22. 22. Compliance Scenarios
  23. 23. Compliance Metrics
  24. 24. Baseline Compliance™ Analysis100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Looked at correlation with changes/correlation analysis
  25. 25. 25Summary of Analysis! Pinpointed specific shortcomings in schedule! Determined areas of repeated scope change! Determined owner/driver of unplanned change! Unique insight into true risk expousre January 24, 2012
  26. 26. Case Study #2Joint Venture Dispute•  Oil & gas CAPEX project•  Completion Nov 2018 (year later than JV board willing to sanction)•  Pre-FEED already slipped by 6 months•  Determine true first production date•  Understand & agree P50/P75 risk exposure•  Identify scenario to get project back to original target completion Risk exposure Acceleration Realism (S2) (S3) (S4)
  27. 27. 27Detailed Risk Analysis! Hidden critical paths! Risk Hotspots! Risk exposure over time January 24, 2012
  28. 28. 28True Risk Profile10090 Team Perception80 True Risk Exposure70605040302010 0 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 January 24, 2012
  29. 29. 29Accelerated Scenario! Choose ! Target date ! Duration acceleration ! Best possible! Cleansed schedule! Specific criteria January 24, 2012
  30. 30. 30Project Criteria Set! Defined series of steps! Steps contained rules ! Duration reduction ! Calendar adjustment ! Lag reduction ! Constraint elimination! Set priority ! Earliest/latest ! Longest ! Easiest/least resistance! Targeted activities ! e.g. exclude procurement January 24, 2012
  31. 31. 31Scenario #1 Analysis Results
  32. 32. Schedule 32Acceleration Efficiency™Example 1 Example 2! 2 day project acceleration ! 2 day project acceleration! requires 2 days of reduction ! requires 2 days of reduction! Acceleration Efficiency =2/2 100% ! Acceleration Efficiency=2/3 67% 2 day activity reduction 2 day activity reduction 1 day activity reduction 2 day project 2 day project acceleration acceleration January 24, 2012
  33. 33. 33Results: Risk & Acceleration! Balance between risk & acceleration! Able to achieve12 month acceleration! P50 dates reflected 10 month acceleration January 24, 2012
  34. 34. Want to Avoid DisputeResolution?120%100%80%60%40%20% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Fuse Quality Index™
  35. 35. More information:White papers: www.projectacumen.comSoftware Trial: www.projectacumen.com/trialTwitter: @projectacumenEmail: info@projectacumen.com

×