We offer support services to foster accurate and effective project planning and control. These services include:
- Production and implementation of project programmes (schedules) and progress measurement systems utilising various proprietary CPM planning software including Primavera, Microsoft Projects and Asta Powerproject;
- Earned Value Analysis;
- Project progress and programme reviews /audits followed up with recommendations and support to improve a projects existing planning and measurement systems;
- Programme risk analysis.
It is well known that projects rarely materialise exactly as planned, however to increase the chances of less disparity between planned and actual outcomes, it is important that the programme, or schedule, in order to increase the project's chances of success and to facilitate better control, should possess the following characteristics:
- Structure – the programme should be logical, appropriately balanced, in terms of duration and risk, between the different phases of execution. For example the risk of exceeding the planned durations of the critical design, procurement, construction and commissioning work flows should be similar and proportionate. Making particular portions of the programme more aggressive and risky than others, particularly within the baseline at commencement, prior to any delay being incurred, under normal circumstances, is not recommended.
- Logic – the logic connecting the activities in the programme should be task driven and of a start to finish nature, where at all possible. Resource driven logic should be avoided. Open ended activities, i.e. activities with either their start or finish not connected to another activity, should be restricted to just two activities that mark the start and finish of the project. In addition we consider it crucial that all predecessors required to actually start an activity are included in the programme as direct predecessors to that activity and not included elsewhere in the programme, as frequently is the case, and their true impact on the programme consequently lost. For example the commencement of the erection of a specific piece of specialist equipment, for example a high pressure water pump, should normally possess the following four directý connected predecessor activities, as a minimum, prior to installing the pump:
- foundation complete and ready to receive water pump;
- water pump available at location;
- approved water pump erection documentation available; and
- specialist pump erection vendor contractor mobilised.
It is not uncommon, in certain sectors, for activities ii, iii and iv to be excluded and consequently the impact of their deferment may be lost right up until the point in time at which the pump is due for erection, up to which time it may have appeared that its installation be "on programme". It will then progressively become delayed on day by day and possibly on a week by week basis until the point in time at which the three ommitted predecessor activities are actually physically complete. Ensuring all predecessors are included in the schedule and properly connected will significantly increase its accuracy and help better manage expectations throughout the delivery process.
- Level of Detail - the programme should contain a sufficient number of activities to capture as a minimum those logic changes which also include a change in responsibility for the execution of the work flow. A simple example is the production and submission of erection shop drawings for a particular component, by a vendor or contractor. This should appear as a separate activity to that of the Engineer’s subsequent review of the same. This is because if the production and review are combined as one activity, as they unfortunately often are on many programmes, it becomes challenging to determine the true status of the activity, because it is unclear who is responsible for and driving its completion, and difficult to determine an accurate remaining duration. Repeated such instances of ignoring and not introducing new activities, at responsibility change points within specific work flows across the programme, will render the update process little more than a guessing game and the programme's accuracy and that of its forecasts, will be significantly diminished.
- Resources – the programme should be resource and cost loaded to facilitate accurate and meaningful measurement and monitoring of physical progress and earned value, if there is no such loading it becomes extremely difficult and time consuming, if indeed possible, to assess whether periodic progress is aligned to that required and to take appropriate corrective action if it is not.
- Coding of Activities – the programme should be coded to a recognised orthodox structure at activity level, with unique code field values and unique values in each code field. This will facilitate more uniform and meaningful reporting formats and fuller and better access to all activities within the programme.
- Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) – the programme should possess an appropriate and logical, yet not overly complicated work break down structure, which follows, at a high level, execution logic. Note, in many P6 and other proprietary CPM software generated programmes produced in the last ten years or so, it is a common phenomenon to see several hundred and sometimes more than 1000 positions in the WBS. Such is unnecessary, unsightly and overly cumbersome. A simpler and more effective method for activity selection and reporting, which will promote better control, is achieved by implementing an orthodox activity coding system with unique fields and values.
- Cost Breakdown Structure (CBS) - ideally the cost break down structure should be synchronised with and follow, as far as is possible, the WBS but be of slightly lesser detail. A prime reason for this synchronisation is that, if the CBS and WBS are compatible, comparisons of earned value and certified value are simpler to create for detailed portions of the scope. This will make it possible to drill down with ease to identify the cause(s) of low certified value and also to assess the future impact on revenue of low physical progress trends that are prevailing in certain portions of the works.
Finally it is worth noting that most Delay and Disruption Claims are usually both easier to demonstrate and defend if project planning and control is as accurate as possible.
We encourage parties involved in project delivery, to better protect their interests by adopting the above and other recommended project planning and control practices, to consider contacting us.
