Download as PDF, PPTX
Uploaded byPMA Consultants
Top Five Metrics for Measuring Schedule Reliability
The presentation by Mike Brown discusses the importance of schedule metrics for enhancing schedule reliability in complex projects. It highlights common problems in project management such as inadequate planning and inexperienced personnel, while introducing the Schedule MD application for analyzing schedule reliability. Key concepts include the Schedule IQ score and the four pillars and twenty traits that affect schedule health.
More Related Content
Similar to Top Five Metrics for Measuring Schedule Reliability
Top Five Metrics for Measuring Schedule Reliability
- 1. Using Schedule MD™for Schedule Reliability Presented by: Mike Brown, PMP
- 2. Presentation Agenda Problem statement1 Top5 metrics revealed5The importance of metrics2 Schedule MD overview3 2 Pillars and traits4
- 3. Speaker Bio 3 Mike Brown,PMP Managing Director Denver, Colorado mbrown@pmaconsultants.com About the Presenter Mike has extensive experience in program and project management, quality management, engineering, and program and project controls. Mike has managed responsibilities that include strategic planning, engineering, construction, regulatory permitting and compliance, resource planning and management, quality audits and reviews, closeout, and other related administrative oversight functions.
- 4. The Problem(s) Inadequate Planning / Engagement Complex Projectsand Systems Inexperienced Project Controls Managers “Inadequate planning is one of the major reasons why projects spin out of control.” Discenza, R. & Foreman, J.B. (2007). Seven causes of project failure 4 “The world's private and public sector leaders believe that a rapid escalation of ‘complexity’ is the biggest challenge confronting them. They expect it to continue — indeed, to accelerate — in the coming years Hass, K.B. & Lindbergh, L.B. 2010. Paper presented at PMI Global Congress “Too Many Projects, Not Enough Experienced Managers.” CIO from IDG / ESI International
- 5. Why are schedulemetrics important? StakeholderEngagement Increase communication and understanding Simplification Reduce complexity through technology ImprovedUnderstanding Resources and tools increase schedulers understanding and awareness Better Schedules Codification allows for simpler best practice conformance 5
- 6. What is ScheduleMD? A companion application to NetPoint® for analyzing and determining the reliability of schedules. 6
- 7. What is theSchedule IQ™ Score? A value between 0 to 100 – comprised of 42 independent, weighted calculations derived from the 20-Trait Protocol – for communicating how reliable a schedule is. 7
- 8. Comprehensive Credible WellBuilt Controlled ALIGNED PREDICTIVE HIERARCHICAL WEATHERED Narrative Score Schedule Sign-offs Critical Activities Schedule Margin Hidden Delay Inadequate Float Missing Hammocks Milestone Density Actual Weather Index COMPLETE RISKED PHASED FORENSIC Missing WBS Missing Codes Completion Likelihood Benchmark Frequency Hidden Forensic delay Breached Gaps CONFORMING WEATHER-FIT LOGICAL RE-BASELINED Breaching Finish Dates Breaching Start Dates Off-base Delays Planned Weather Index PDM logic Constraints Redundant Logic Extreme Logic Improper Leads Completion Likelihood Index FORMULAIC RESOURCE-FLOWING CONNECTED TRENDED Improper Detail Subjective Durations Abnormal Resource Logic Dangling Ends Open Ends Logic Index Paired Activities Inhibiting Logic Questionable Logic Earned Schedule Index RESOURCED FLEXIBLE CALENDAR-FIT STATUSED Missing Resources Upcoming Overages Schedule Gap Index Secondary Calendar Use Improper Status Impractical Starts Out-of-sequence work 4 pillars 20 traits 42 indicators 8
- 9. The 4 pillars •Activities and their durations • Contract dates • Resource, code, and WBS assignments Comprehensive 9
- 10. The 4 pillars •The critical path • Total floats • Risk • Weather Credible 10
- 11. The 4 pillars •Milestones • Logic • Constraints • Calendars Well Built 11
- 12. The 4 pillars •Progress • Forensics • Out-of-sequence activities • Remaining durations Controlled 12
- 13. 4 pillars 20 traits 42indicators 13
- 14. The Data Survey Response 41%53% 71% 65% 59% Breaching Finish Dates Critical Activities Open Ends ConstraintsOut of Sequence Work 100% 75% 50% 0% 25% Top 5 Metrics – Percentage of Respondents 14
- 15. Comprehensive Credible WellBuilt Controlled ALIGNED PREDICTIVE HIERARCHICAL WEATHERED Narrative Score Schedule Sign-offs Critical Activities Schedule Margin Hidden Delay Inadequate Float Missing Hammocks Milestone Density Actual Weather Index COMPLETE RISKED PHASED FORENSIC Missing WBS Missing Codes Completion Likelihood Benchmark Frequency Hidden Forensic delay Breached Gaps CONFORMING WEATHER-FIT LOGICAL RE-BASELINED Breaching Finish Dates Breaching Start Dates Off-base Delays Planned Weather Index PDM logic Constraints Redundant Logic Extreme Logic Improper Leads Completion Likelihood Index FORMULAIC RESOURCE-FLOWING CONNECTED TRENDED Improper Detail Subjective Durations Abnormal Resource Logic Dangling Ends Open Ends Logic Index Paired Activities Inhibiting Logic Questionable Logic Earned Schedule Index RESOURCED FLEXIBLE CALENDAR-FIT STATUSED Missing Resources Upcoming Overages Schedule Gap Index Secondary Calendar Use Improper Status Impractical Starts Out-of-sequence work 4 pillars 20 traits 42 indicators 15
- 16. Open Ends 16 Well-Built What activitiesthat have either no predecessors or no successors Why unreliability associated with what-if, risk, delay and/or disruption Metric # of activities with open ends / total # activities Threshold <1%
- 17. Credible What incomplete activitieswhose criticality factor is < threshold Why a schedule with too many critical activities is more susceptible to delay (and potentially claims) Metric # of critical activities / total # activities Threshold 15-30% acceptable range Critical Activities 17
- 18. Comprehensive What finish milestonesor benchmarks that fall after their respective contract dates Why contract breach; false critical path Metric binary Threshold every contractual milestone Breaching Finishing Dates 18
- 19. Well-Built What activities withspecific limitations that regulate start or finish dates Why float ruiners; unreliability associated with what-if, risk, delay/disruption Metric # of activities with constraints / total # of activities Threshold <5% Constraints 19
- 20. Controlled What actualized critical/near- criticalactivities whose actual dates breach the logic type Why flawed actualized logic could render the schedule unreliable for delay/disruption Metric # of OSW / total # activities Threshold <2% Out of Sequence Work 20
- 21. Q & ATime Thank you – Any Questions? 21
- 22. Mike Brown, PMP ManagingDirector, PMA Consultants 720-624-2401 mbrown@pmaconsultants.com