The document discusses effective dispute resolution strategies using Acumen Fuse enterprise project analysis, highlighting case studies involving owner/contractor and joint venture disputes. It emphasizes the importance of accurate project planning, risk assessment, and the tools used for forensic analysis of project schedules to diagnose issues and optimize outcomes. Acumen Fuse offers various analytics modules tailored to improve project execution through enhanced scheduling and real-time insights into performance metrics.

1. Successful Dispute Resolution
using Acumen Fuse
enterprise project analysis
Dr. Dan Patterson PMP | CEO & Founder Acumen

2. 2
Agenda
! Introductions
! Fuse & forensics overview
! Case study #1: Owner/Contractor Dispute
! Case study #2: JV Dispute
January 24, 2012

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
Why 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
Forensics & 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. Planning Forensics 6
Framework
• 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
Introduction to Fuse
Enterprise 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
Analysis Three Analysis Modules
Metric Analysis
Benefit:
Pinpoint shortcomings
!
Metric
! Slice and dice Analysis
About:
! 250+ metrics
! Industry Standard
! Unique-to-Fuse metrics
! Customizable
January 24, 2012

9. 9
Metric Analysis
January 24, 2012

10. 10
Analysis Three Analysis Modules
Logic Analysis
Benefit:
Identify & remove flaws
!
Metric
! Simplify complexities Analysis
About:
! Recognizes multi-project
relationships
Logic
Analysis
January 24, 2012

11. 11
Logic Analysis

12. 12
Analysis Three Analysis Modules
Forensic Analysis
Benefit:
! 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
Forensic Analysis
As planned V
Key is not just what changed but
Half Step V As
the impact of the change
Built

14. Case Study #1
Execution 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
Schedule 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. Fuse Schedule Quality 16
Index™
! 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
Logic Density
! Indicator as to the quality of logic
! Highlighted extreme schedule complexity
in early phase of execution

18. 18
Driving 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
Additional Logic Analysis
January 24, 2012

20. 20
Variance Analysis
! Pinpointed changes to plan on monthly basis
! Isolated owner of change
! Determined planned or unplanned
January 24, 2012

21. 21
Baseline 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. Compliance Scenarios

23. Compliance Metrics

24. Baseline Compliance™
Analysis
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Looked at correlation with
changes/correlation analysis

25. 25
Summary 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. Case Study #2
Joint 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
Detailed Risk Analysis
! Hidden critical paths
! Risk Hotspots
! Risk exposure over time
January 24, 2012

28. 28
True Risk Profile
100
90
Team Perception
80
True Risk Exposure
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15
January 24, 2012

29. 29
Accelerated Scenario
! Choose
! Target date
! Duration acceleration
! Best possible
! Cleansed schedule
! Specific criteria
January 24, 2012

30. 30
Project 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
Scenario #1 Analysis Results

32. Schedule 32
Acceleration 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
Results: Risk & Acceleration
! Balance between risk & acceleration
! Able to achieve12 month acceleration
! P50 dates reflected 10 month acceleration
January 24, 2012

34. Want to Avoid Dispute
Resolution?
120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Fuse Quality Index™

35. More information:
White papers: www.projectacumen.com
Software Trial: www.projectacumen.com/trial
Twitter: @projectacumen
Email: info@projectacumen.com