Forum Sponsor:

Portfolio Planner is software which improves portfolio, project and resource management.

Tips on using this forum..

(1) Explain your problem, don't simply post "This isn't working". What were you doing when you faced the problem? What have you tried to resolve - did you look for a solution using "Search" ? Has it happened just once or several times?

(2) It's also good to get feedback when a solution is found, return to the original post to explain how it was resolved so that more people can also use the results.

Performance Management

42 replies [Last post]
Naveen Jahagirdar
User offline. Last seen 9 years 49 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Posts: 3
Groups: None
Off late, I have been a little intrigued with Performance Management of Construction Project. Let me pu my thoughts:
OLD SYSTEM
1)During P3 days, we used something called as weightage. This is used even now in many places. (P3 had Bud Qty, Rate, EV..etc)
Project was drilled down to WBS, then activities. All the activities were assigned a certain value based on What is called Weightage. For instance, Engineering 10%, Procurement 60% and Construction 25% based on invoice value of the contract (Contract Terms of Payment).
Once these values were spread overtime, I could get monthly % of progress that should be achieved and then the S Curve.
This system although gives information on how much should be achieved and how much has been achieved, it failed miserably in actively tracking cost overruns. It gave me only only a comparitive understanding as to whether I am ahead or Behind schedule, although I was not completely sure if it can be taken as a perfect measure of performance.
Some people called this as Earned Value Method, which I disagreed.

NEW SYSTEM
2)EVM is based on following parameters:
a) Scope - Defined by quantity
b) Cost - Unit Rate of Quantity
c) Time - Days or Weeks depending on the situation.

Budgeted cost = Budget Qty X Unit Rate
You spread this BC over time, you get Planned Value.
Now, Earned Value = % completed x PV
(% completed = Qty completed / Budgeted Qty)
Then to check my cost performance, I would have Actual costs, CPI, CV..etc.

(This is my understanding. Correct me if I am wrong)

ISSUES
1) Any ERP system, follows system described in (2), to measure performance.
There is no weightage system. I ran into a section of people, who wanted to impose the above described Weightage system onto ERP. The idea is to avoid measuring Quantities, especially for Engineering and Installation where primarily labour is involved. I am not sure if this is the right way to do things.
Hence, I wanted to know views on this forum, if they have tackled such issues.
(My take on the issue is weightage (cost) does not describe Quantum of work (Scope) and hence not monitoring does not give accurate results.)

2) ENGINEERING DELIVERABLES
How does one Measure Engineering performance. For instance, we have a engineering deliverable of say design of a structure how do I set performance parameters to measure performance. Is it based on Manhours spent on that design or besed on milestone like Code A,B,C approvals.

NOTE:OLD & NEW system is just my nomenclature.

Replies

R. Catalan
User offline. Last seen 8 years 5 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 314
Groups: None
Rodel,

I have a lot of explaining to do if my son can’t find Jerry playing with Tom as he’s busy laughing at PP. Gggggrrrr!

Or maybe I could convince him to watch Voltes 5 instead.

Best regards,

R. Catalan
Rodel Marasigan
User offline. Last seen 44 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 1516
Laugh
R. Catalan
User offline. Last seen 8 years 5 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 314
Groups: None
Rodel,

The carabao/buffalo is taken care of because of his good performance in the field. But when she get older the owner/farmer will do some good management to sell her to the butcher. Some sort of betraying the good relationship between them.

This is what you call performance and management at the opposite sides.

Best regards,

R. Catalan
Rodel Marasigan
User offline. Last seen 44 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 1516
R. Catalan,

You’re absolutely correct! Have you been there before? It’s rear to have can foods because it’s to far from civilization. They still using carabao/ buffalo and sleigh made of woods as means of transportation.

Best Regards,
Rodel
R. Catalan
User offline. Last seen 8 years 5 weeks ago. Offline
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 314
Groups: None
Rodel,

One country I know is that most mountain dwellers offered their live chicken for a can of sardines so they can serve sardines it to their guests.

Best regards,

R. Catalan
Rodel Marasigan
User offline. Last seen 44 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 1516
Hi Rafael,

I think the right word is "common sense".
Common sense (or, when used attributively as an adjective, commonsense, common-sense, or commonsensical), based on a strict construction of the term, consists of what people in common would agree on[citation needed] : that which they "sense" as their common natural understanding.

By the way, in some countries they use gold to purchase something and in our provice still a common practice to use crops to purchase their food.
with kind regards,
Rodel
Rafael Davila
User offline. Last seen 1 week 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 1 Mar 2004
Posts: 4853
Vladimir,

What is the cost of a Spider license, how many man-hours? Does your Visa card accept man-hours? Is just a matter of perception, in any purchase contract you can perceive whatever you want, I guess. There are no wrong interpretations for a purchase contract is just a matter of perception, everything is about perception.

Perceptively,
Rafael
Rashid,
in Russia cost reimbursable contrracts are not used but unit cost contracts are usual. Contractor got payments not for hours but for quantities (volumes) of work. Unit cost is set for all types of work that are done under the contract. Nobody counts hours but physical units are measured.
Best Regards,
Vladimir
Rodel Marasigan
User offline. Last seen 44 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 1516
Rafael,
My Perception is different, I believed everyone has the right to name or called it the way they want a long as the message is understandable to others or as long as the communication is clear. I think it is the same reason why every country has their owned standards, every company has set there owned standard and even every person has their own standard. A very good example is language, why every country has different language and some country have different dialects on every region. Even English that we can call international language but every country still had different interpretation on one English single word, US English is different in English country and other country.

Another example is the English and metric system. What not all decide or agreed whether English system or metric system as a basis of measurement?

You can call it value, cost, man-hour or anything as long as it was communicated clear to the recipient.

Best Regards,
Rodel
Rashid Iqbal
User offline. Last seen 4 weeks 3 days ago. Offline
Joined: 7 Apr 2010
Posts: 67
Hi,

I have been working with Oil & Gas in Northern Canada for the last 7 years and everywhere here earned value (hours) is being used. Most of the contracts here are reimbursable, cost plus fixed fee, cost plus sliding fee and I think this could be one of the main reasons behind it. There was a major earthworks project where we used giant trucks (100 tons) like 777, we used equipment hours for calculating the earned value and reporting KPI’s. It worked good as well….in short the thing is this we massage the same techniques to fit for a specific project.

Thanks.

R
Rafael Davila
User offline. Last seen 1 week 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 1 Mar 2004
Posts: 4853
Vladimir,

I used EV only once before, it was at a Pharmaceutical Job and we were required to use use man-hours. Most percent complete was determined by using physical volume of work applied to budget man-hours. This was a “Cost Plus” job and the Owner wanted to track our labor performance. They supplied the expensive equipment and we installed it.

Agree it is not for every job, is not difficult though, maybe tedious, and maybe not so much tedious, but not understood by everyone because is not used very frequently. Please note that for even the simplest Design Job can be of value, therefore a good scheduling software tool must provide EV for those in need of the tool. I am not sure if I will ever use it again, but no harm to have it and understand it. I would appreciate if a better terminology is used, so in case I have the need to use EV again then these terms will make sense to others in our team.

Best regards,
Rafael
Rafael,
I agree with you.
But I am sceptical about the value of EVA in relatively small projects like construction of something.
It is most useful for analysis of huge programs that cosist of many projects at different life cycle phases.
Best Regards,
Vladimir
Rafael Davila
User offline. Last seen 1 week 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 1 Mar 2004
Posts: 4853
Vladimir,

I do not see anything wrong with the use of B to mean Budget, on the contrary is meaningful. My problem is limited to the use the term Cost when you mean other unit of measurement.

Imagine when using BCWP for man-hour resources when it mean man-hour amount and not the cost of the budgeted man-hours, is kind of misleading.

To me using the term Cost many times when you do not mean cost is wrong, use of Cost to mean quantity of man-hours, cubic yards etc. is wrong. If the guy who created the terms could not figured it out long ago it does not means we cannot figure out better names. The initial of a term should not be an excuse to use misleading descriptors.

An acronym is just a shortcut, kind of a nickname that should follow meaning when used in lieu of full technical terms.

I believe initially Earned Value was conceived as to mean only cost and on the run it was realized the concept can be applied to other units. In my little mind there is no other explanation. There is no excuse for not to make the appropriate correction, even if decades late. If Government agencies are incapable of making the corrections I was expecting that at least the PMI and others would make them, instead of merely being record keepers of what others do and write no matter if wrong, just pass it on.

Best Regard,
Rafael
If to replace BAC by VAC (Value at Completion) it may create problems to distinguish from VAC (Variance at Completion).
Is it the reason why value was rejected?
Rafael Davila
User offline. Last seen 1 week 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 1 Mar 2004
Posts: 4853
If working EV using a metric other than costs you can substitute the following acronyms in your computer using a permanent marker on your screen until the government agencies, the PMI and software developers figure it out.

Substitute Cost by Value then you will get a better language description, very simple.

BCWS = BVWS = BUDGETED VALUE OF WORK SCHEDULED
BCWP = BVWP = BUDGETED VALUE OF WORK PERFORMED
ACWP = AVWP = ACTUAL VALUE OF WORK PERFORMED
FCST = FORECAST OF REMAINING WORK
BAC = BUDGET AT COMPLETION
EAC = ESTIMATE AT COMPLETION
FTG = ESTIMATE (FORECAST) TO GO

Also on the title and the vertical axis label use the name of the value being used as the basis for EV instead of Cost.

I always wondered why the named it Earned Value and never used the term Value.
Rashid Iqbal
User offline. Last seen 4 weeks 3 days ago. Offline
Joined: 7 Apr 2010
Posts: 67
Hello Rafael and Rodel,

You got it right..this is what I meant. I was unable to attach the spreadsheet like the way you guys did it. How you did it?

We derive the weights from the estimated hrs. We can not use the estimated hrs in the spreadsheets becasue the contractor can’t share this information everywhere and so we hide it under the ’name’ of ’weightage’.

Regards
R




I have nothing against weigting if the weight has a name (cost, hours, cubic meters, anything that everybody understands the same way).
In Spider Project Earned Value can be applied to anything including user fields.
But I don’t call EV application Performance Management. It is one of many reports that may be created.
Best Regards,
Vladimir
Rafael Davila
User offline. Last seen 1 week 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 1 Mar 2004
Posts: 4853
Vladimir,

If you are using cost to measure progress then cost is your weighting.
If you are using man-hours then man-hours is your weighting.
If you are using concrete volume then concrete volume is your weighting.
If you are using “air” then “air” is your weighting.

EV is intended to accommodate for any weighting measure as not always cost can be said is the best measure of progress.

When using costs I do not like EV jargon because of communication issues, I prefer to call “a bottle of wine” “a bottle of wine” and not BQWS ( Budgeted Quantity of Work Schedule). Same when using concrete volume, same when using tons of asphalt pavement.

Because of the peculiarity of design work I consider EV using man-hours a perfect fit. Here use of “air” I do not consider appropriate, is for lazy people who do not care about communicating the logic behind their weightings, unless there is no logic at all or want to hide to the Owner the quantities.

Best regards,
Rafael
Rodel Marasigan
User offline. Last seen 44 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 1516
Hi Vladimir,
There are so many terms use like, norms, rate, unit cost...etc...

I believed it was called weigth because of the way it was presented in a progress measurement but rate or norms in cost estimating.

Best Regards,
Rodel
Now I understand but why it is called weighting?
In Spider Project we suggest our users to manage parallel budgets to be able to compare expected and actual expenses with the budget that is based on the unit costs and is frequently used for contracting.
In former USSR there were state norms for unit costs of different work types and they are still used in Russia, Ukraine, and other former Soviet countries.
So if I will apply Means data for cost calculation it will be weighting? I always thought that it will be named cost estimating.
Best Regards,
Vladimir
Rodel Marasigan
User offline. Last seen 44 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 1516
Hi Vladimir,
Yes absolutely correct. In other terms it is called unit cost per activity. But because it is high level activity – weighting is used to breakdown to detail production step and measure against it and the summation = progress.

Best Regards,
Rodel
Rodel Marasigan
User offline. Last seen 44 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 1516
Hi Rafael,
My understanding is EVM is a tool or technique to measure performance upon reading your link not about weighting. Weighting is one way of measuring a progress for a semi-detail activity which detail is represent by weightings.

EVM definition and objectives are as follows:
EVM should be able to answer management question that are critical to the success of every project, such as:
•     Is the project is ahead of or behind schedule? (SV - Schedule Variance)
•     Is the project is under or over budget? (CV – Cost Variance)
•     How efficient the project in terms of time? (SPI - Schedule Performance Index)
•     How efficient the project in terms of cost? (CPI – Cost Performance Index)
•     How much work should be done? (BCWS / PV - Budgeted Cost for Work Scheduled)
•     How much work is done? (BCWP / EV - Budgeted Cost for Work Performed)
•     How much did it cost? (ACWP / AV - Actual Cost of Work Performed)
•     What is the total Project supposed to cost? (BAC - Budget At Completion)
•     What do we now expect will be needed to finish the Project? (ETC - Estimate To Completion)
•     What do we now expect the total Project to cost? (EAC - Estimate At Completion)
•     How much do we now expect to eventually underspend/overspend (VAC - Variance At Completion)

Best Regards,
Rodel
Hi,
I understood that what Rodel calls weighting we called unit costs. Unit cost is an estimated cost of volume (quantity) unit. Estimating work quantities and applying unit costs we will get "weightings".
It is still cost. In any case weight shall be easily interpreted as cost, or work hours, or something else that can be measured.
As Rafael wrote in earlier post it is not easy to apply this approach (normed unit costs) to design and other works that is hard to measure in physical units.
Best Regards,
Vladimir
Rafael Davila
User offline. Last seen 1 week 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 1 Mar 2004
Posts: 4853
Rodel,

Here EV is preferably based on estimated man-hours or cost and these provides the weightings, a design man-hour is a design man-hour no matter how much deep the mental masturbation of the performers. EV is all about using a common value that will give you the weightings, in this sense is all about weightings, but kind of more scientific and not a value taken from the air. EV is a procedure to guide users on how to get the appropriate weightings estimate.

Take for example the following reference:

http://www.acq.osd.mil/pm/old/paperpres/wilkins_art.pdf

“These labor “budgets” can easily be used as a weighting factor in establishing the worth of the various parts. That is exactly what Earned Value does.”

Also look at the following reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earned_value_management

“The second step is to assign a value, called planned value (PV), to each activity. For large projects, PV is almost always an allocation of the total project budget, and may be in units of currency (e.g., dollars or euros) or in labor hours, or both. However, in very simple projects, each activity may be assigned a weighted “point value" which might not be a budget number. Assigning weighted values and achieving consensus on all PV quantities yields an important benefit of EVM, because it exposes is understandings and miscommunications about the scope of the project, and resolving these differences should always occur as early as possible. Some terminal elements cannot be known (planned) in great detail in advance, and that is expected, because they can be further refined at a later time.”

EV is all about weighted values, some values are more tangible others are not. But it seems like a consensus preferably use cost or man-hours.

For specific portions of your schedule you can use other metrics such as for Concrete Works use concrete Volume or for Structural Steel use weight. You can go down to the activity level and the particular metric that best fits to it. Some argue the advantage of EV over Job Costing is on how it relates both to time. I prefer to use traditional job costing for the activity level details using weekly rates, on tables that can display all values instead of displaying hundreds of graphs, one per line item. For the overall I prefer to use the traditional S Curve, which is old fashioned EV without the jargon, is more an issue of communication with field personnel.

Best Regards,
Rafael
Rodel Marasigan
User offline. Last seen 44 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 1516
Trevor,
Weighting is not just a cost or labor or work. It is a norm derived from duration, cost, equipment, labor etc…

Some use manhour to derive weighting which have the same process as I mention on my post # 13.

Example: 100m3 concrete (5m*10m*2m) or 50m2
Say Layout = (surveyor/hr *PF, instruments ..etc) = 10hr = $690/100m3 = $6.9/m3 or 0.1hr/m3
For Excavation = $12.10/cm3 (labor*FP, equipment, tools etc..) = 36hr/100m3 = 0.36hr/m3

Best Regards,
Rodel
Rodel Marasigan
User offline. Last seen 44 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 1516
Hi Rafael, My understanding of EVM is to know the performance of a project, whether gaining or losing, behind or ahead of schedule and nothing to do with weightings. As I mention weightings is a substitute of detail estimate which is derived from norm or rates. (see example on my post #13) For example a house plan and specs is available but not the detail house plan. To have an early estimate most of the builder are used their previous accumulated rates * productivity to arrived on the estimate cost (For example dollar/square meter) If the builder won then detail estimate will be done to served on more other purposes like, BOQ to purchase, to award to a subcontractor and etc…. Best Regards, Rodel
Rafael Davila
User offline. Last seen 1 week 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 1 Mar 2004
Posts: 4853
Rodel,

I understand your table as correct as per traditional EV methodology. EV as used by the inventor, the US Government, is to compare actual performance with budgeted values. For some programs they track budgeted man-hours versus actual man-hours. Is intended for jobs where estimated quantities are uncertain. Therefore for a fixed cost job is of not much use if using costs.

After your budgeting the weighting becomes a mathematical computation based on a uniform value across the board for the common reference, a man-hour is a man-hour no matter if by Vladimir or Rashid, a dollar is a dollar no matter if a dollar on activity A or a dollar in activity B.

The weighting must be based on a common metrics such as man-hours or cost but not an unknown metrics, and this is key. Therefore you might be in need to use both, keeping them separate, man-hours and cost to measure progress and performance. It is not Rice and Beans.

Here we rarely use the concept, except for US Government jobs when needed. It should be of no surprise on most of our Government jobs is not needed nor required. It is still valid and some industries like the pharmaceutical industry they monitor progress performance of their jobs based on an initial man-hour estimate. Here equipment is supplied by the corporation and the installation is either by the local plant PM and their subcontractors. They also startup their jobs on a hurry, usually fast track and initially they do not have a precise initial estimate but are still in need to monitor progress and must assign budgets to this purpose.

To my eyes as a Contractor is kind of too much trouble for something that gives us so little, we care about the details and use not a common unit to track performance across all activities but we get into the details. I always called Earned Value as Budgeting, as not even 50% of true job costing where quantities and their particular unit of measure are relevant. For our estimates on percentage complete we just use the BOQ.

We know about unit costs such as $650.00/CY of concrete (sorry no Euros spoken here) but the EV jargon is kind of foreign to the neighborhood contractor, the one that builds everyday jobs such as schools, houses, office buildings; not the one who develops the next generation “Stealth Fighter”, the kind of jobs our government was in need to standardize the EV procedure.

I believe for design jobs the EV procedure is a good fit.

Best regards,
Rafael
Rodel Marasigan
User offline. Last seen 44 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 1516
Hi Rafael,

Correct me if I’m wrong. My understanding with Rashid is to use weighting to progress activities as per sample below:
Production Steps

As I mention on my previous post, weighting are used on a high level schedule on the absence of detail estimates. Weightings is derived from norms which was accumulated from past experience base on cost, duration and productivity of specific scope of work.
Meaning if the activity is not detailed as per production steps weighting is used to substitute that detail in order the progress the work more accurately rather than rule of thumb.
Trevor Rabey
User offline. Last seen 37 weeks 6 days ago. Offline
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Posts: 528
Groups: None
So one person says that "weight" is about Cost and another says it is about Work. It’s ambiguous. No one knows what it means. The trouble with using Work is that it assumes that all Hours have the same value, but 1 Hour of one guy’s time is worth a lot more than another guy’s time. Well it may or may not be worth more and have more "value" but it definitely costs more. What’s wrong with using Cost, since the reason money was invented was to measure everything with the same ruler?
Rafael Davila
User offline. Last seen 1 week 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 1 Mar 2004
Posts: 4853
Rashid,

Under EV the weighting factor is not completely arbitrary but based on cost or budget man-hours, the real issue is on determining the % complete. On your example if using man-hours as the basis to determine EV the weighting factor as per EV procedures are just a simple mathematical computation based on the budgeted man-hours where each man hour weights the same, otherwise it can be anything you want and the purpose is lost. Similar to cost an euro is an euro, a dollar is a dollar.

EV PERCENT COMPLETE

Under EV weighting factor is not completely arbitrary but based on budget man-hours, the real issue is on determining the % complete.

On my previously provided reference you can read about alternate methods to estimate % complete. Even when using man-hours you can estimate % complete using volume of work.

Best Regards,
Rafael
Rodel Marasigan
User offline. Last seen 44 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 1516
All,
I believed that both are talking to same direction. It’s just a misunderstanding of weighting and % complete. My understanding of weighting is to simplify the method of measurement which is usually used in absence of detail estimates. Weightings is derived from norms which was accumulated from past experience base on cost, duration and productivity of specific scope of work.

Ex: Reinforced concrete foundation. To estimate the reinforced concrete foundation estimator need to know:
1)     Ground condition
2)     Layout (m2)
3)     Volume of excavation (m3) (backfill maybe optional or separate)
4)     Kilograms of rebar (kg or tons)
5)     Area of Formworks (m2)-[if required)]
6)     Embedded items (if required)
7)     Volume of concrete
8)     Curing compound (if required)

To estimate Layout
=>Area of layout (surveyor, labor, surveyor’s instrument/ equipment (level, theodolite etc…) * productivity factor due to ground condition
To estimate excavation
=>Volume of excavation * (machine, operator, labor) * productivity factor due to ground condition
To estimate Reinforcement
=> size of rebar and total length (kg or tons), steelman, tools and equipment, tie wires
and etc… etc… (same on all production steps to complete the scope)

To simplify this:
Labor * productivity factor
Materials (including handling, storing/ laydown)
Major equipment (external rates plus insurance/ internal rental rates * deprecation and insurance)
Minor tool (internal rental rate, depreciation plus insurance)
Supervision (if indirect are included) - optional

Using all of this arrived on rates or norms per specific work.
Ex: 100m3 reinforced concrete foundation (5mx2mx10m) or 50m2
Say Layout = (surveyor/hr *PF, instruments ..etc) = 10hr = $690/100m3 = $6.9/m3 or 0.1hr/m3
Excavation = $12.10/cm3 (labor*FP, equipment, tools etc..)
Formworks = $56.00/m2 (labor*FP, materials (i.e one use), tools…etc…) *50m2/100m3 = $28/m3
Rebar = $2.8/kg (labor*PF, materials, tools…etc…) say 250kg/m3 = $700/m3(defends on specs)
Concreting (Concrete, 3000 psi, footings, pump) = $179/m3
Curing compound (labour*PF, materials) = $14/m2 * 50m2/ 100m3 = $7.00/m3
(Note: dollar, hours and productivity are just an example and should not taken as correct value)

Summary           Rate/m3      Amount      Weight
1)     Layout      $ 6.90       $ 690.00     0.7%
2)     Excavation  $ 12.10    $ 1,210.00       1.2%
3)     Rebar      $700.00       $70,000.00       67.8%
4)     Formworks  $ 28.00      $ 2,800.00       2.7%
5)     Concrete    $ 179.00       $ 17,900.00       17.3%
6)     Embedded Items  $ 100.00      $ 10,000.00      9.7%
7)     Curing Compound  $ 7.00       $ 700.00      0.7%
      Total =            $103,300.00      100.0%

Standard norm is normally used for estimating a high level purpose of a job if detail estimation is not present. It makes it easier for the planner/ estimation to progress/ estimate the scope using the standard norm.
This is usually used for a level 3 schedule which details are breakdown by productivity rate or weightings.
Sorry, Rashid, I don’t understand your example.
I repeat that I will not calculate and use percent complete at all but may apply Earned Value calculations to work hours or Labour cost only (similar to work hours).
Best Regards,
Vladimir
Rashid Iqbal
User offline. Last seen 4 weeks 3 days ago. Offline
Joined: 7 Apr 2010
Posts: 67
Vladimir,

% Completion is calculated on the basis of weights and the weights will be calculated on the basis of budgeted hours. Budgeted hrs cannot be shared around everywhere so these are replaced by weights.

                        
...........................................Budget     Unit      Weightage     Status     %
1. Layout.............................10      Hrs     2           100%     2
2. Rebar Installation    200      Hrs     43           60%     2
3. Formwork                150      Hrs     32           90%     29
4. Embedded parts etc   50      Hrs     11           50%     5
5. Concrete pour           60      Hrs     13           0%     0
...............................................470     Hrs     100           62     62%

How will you calculate? Thanks.

R
Rafael Davila
User offline. Last seen 1 week 2 days ago. Offline
Joined: 1 Mar 2004
Posts: 4853
Naveen,

For Engineering Design Services I would recommend using the Earned Value Concept you mentioned in your initial posting.

One of the misunderstandings with Earned Value is that people think of it as earned cost only, when the concept can be applied to other metrics as well, such as man-hours.

http://www.acq.osd.mil/pm/old/paperpres/wilkins_art.pdf

The above reference makes use of an example of the application of EV on Design Work that should be of help.

I could not follow your statements that EV is “Old School” and EVM is “New”. Anyway hope the reference can be of help.

I do not mean the methodology is perfect, but something is better than nothing, at least the procedure is consistent and in this sense will keep its meaning to all.

Best regards,
Rafael
Trevor Rabey
User offline. Last seen 37 weeks 6 days ago. Offline
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Posts: 528
Groups: None
I’m with Vlaimir. Both "weightage" and "%" are unnecessary and, worse, serve only to obscure the true situation.

If the so-called "weightage" is just a proxy for Work (hours) or Cost ($), then it is not needed because you can just use Work or Cost instead, and then everyone will know what is being measured and how it is being measured. There are only 4 things to measure:

1) Duration
2) Work
3) Cost
4) some measure of the task (bricks laid, m3 of concrete poured, pigeons shot, holes dug, but better is "done" or "not done").

Each has an actual part, and a remaining part.
They are all that is needed to be known.
Each also has a total and a %, but since total = actual/total and total = actual + remaining, the % is not needed and is anyway less useful than knowing actual and remaining.

Rashid,
I am not a believer in % complete. We never use this estimate of the project performance.
If you know the expected durarion and quantities of the remaining work, if you know what work was done in physical and cost units, if you know what was planned to achieve in the baseline plan, why do you need the percent complete?

Imagine that at some activity 50% of physical units were done, seventy percent of materials spent, sixty percent of cost was spent, 40% of time used, what is percent complete? What it will tell you in this specific case?

For performance management we suggest to rely on the trends of project parameters like trends of expected duration, cost, probabilities to meet tragets.

Trends are more useful for decision making that project status information. If the project is 10 days ahead of schedule but one week ago it was 15 days ahead of schedule and one month ago 25 days ahead of schedule there is a meed to consider corrective actions, isn’t it?

Best Regards,
Vladimir
Rashid Iqbal
User offline. Last seen 4 weeks 3 days ago. Offline
Joined: 7 Apr 2010
Posts: 67
Vladimir,

I don’t agree to what you said but I will try to understand where you are comming from.

Example is in front of you. how will you determine the % complete for the foundation at day 4 when the layout is 100% complete, rebar fabrication is 100 %, Rebar Installation is 60%, formwork is 90%, embedded parts are 20%.

Steps
1. Layout
2. Rebar Installation
3. Formwork
4. Embedded parts etc
5. Concrete pour

I am a beleiver of a detailed weightage system that has some solid basis such as estimated hrs.

How would you want to measure the progress of ’Concrete foundation’ activtiy without measuring the completions of the interm steps?

2. What other perfomrance tools you suggest for the construction projects?

Your comments, your disagreement will be appreciated.

R
Hi Rashid,
comparing actual versus earned is one of many tools for performance measurement.
I don’t agree that weighted system is necessary.
I don’t agree that percent complete is reliable project status information.
The reliable information is something that can be meausred - physical units, work hours, costs.
Earned Value can be applied to the cost components like Labour cost, to other parameters like work hours. And this way people will know what exactly is estimated and will not wonder what wieghts were applied to what.
Best Regards,
Vladimir
Rashid Iqbal
User offline. Last seen 4 weeks 3 days ago. Offline
Joined: 7 Apr 2010
Posts: 67
Hello,
Performance management is simply comparing the actual versus the earned. Now the trick is how to get earned. Yes to get the earned value you have to use a weighted system i.e.

Foundation Concrete
Steps
1. Layout
2. Rebar Installtion
3. Formwork
4. Embedded parts etc
5. Concrete pour
Each of these steps have to have some weight so to calculate the EV of this activity. Thanks and let me know if you want to discuss it more.

R
Rodel Marasigan
User offline. Last seen 44 weeks 4 days ago. Offline
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 1516
Naveen,

Not all ERP system has the same issues. Most of the company that I work with specially Oil & Gas, Petro Chemicals, Pharmaceutical, Power Plant, Water and many others are still using weighted percentage to measure progress. Majority of them are major companies with standard Method of Measurement. It is difficult to measure progress specially to install equipments, Fab/ Erect Piping, pipe support, Structural Steel, Painting, Insulation, Instruments, Electrical cabling etc with out parameters.

Ex: Piping
Methods of Measurement
Fabrication of Spools
1)     Handling from Store to Workshop
2)     Spool set-up and alignment (Tack Weld)
3)     Welding of spools (workshop)
4)     Screwed/ Bolt-ups (Flange/ Valve/ in-line items – workshop)
5)     NDT/ Finishing final check
6)     Sent to paint yard (optional)
Painting of Spools
1)     Sandblast/ Preparation
2)     Primer (up to primer only if insulated depends on specs)
3)     1st coat
4)     2nd coat
5)     3rd coat (optional/ depends on specs)
6)     Touch-up and tag
7)     Sent to Store or Field
Erection of Spools
1)     Handling from store/ workshop/ field lay-down yard
2)     Erect to field/ Set in position (Tack Weld)
3)     Field Welding
4)     Field Bolt-ups/ Screwed/ Jointing (Flange/ Valve/ in-line items – field)
5)     Finishing/ Touch-up Paint

Imagine if items are not measured by weighted percentage each steps will shown on your program and each steps will need to have BOQ rates.

For Engineering Deliverable – I agree that this method is still debateable but it depends on management standard. We use to measure Engineering Deliverables by revisions and number required:
EX: Drawings/ Specs/ Procedures/ Vendor Data/ Data Sheets etc..
Sample Methods of Measurements;
1)     Issue for Information/ Review – IFI/ IFR
2)     Issue for Approval – IFA
3)     Issue for Quotation – IFQ (Optional)
4)     Issue for Construction - IFC
Hi Naveen,
you are right - there is a problem of measuring design, research, or engineering works. There is no universal solution. One of the option - the number of drawings of certain types. Today it may be obsolete. Different organizations use different measures but in any case they shall be quantitative.
Best Regards,
Vladimir
Trevor Rabey
User offline. Last seen 37 weeks 6 days ago. Offline
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Posts: 528
Groups: None
I’m glad you asked.
I have seen this term "weightage" used before and I regard it as crap, and confusing, useless and ambiguous as well. If those numbers expressed as a % really are the fractions of the total Cost then why not just use the Cost? In MSP, if you really wanted to use this number, and if it really is a fraction of the Cost, then it can be calculated in a spare field with a formula.

Re issue 1, you are right, it is not the right way to do things. You can’t manage what you don’t measure. There is no way to cut corners and win. Somewhere along the line, at some point, someone has to measure quantities, if only to buy them or get them trucked away. Projects do not exist in order to consume resources and rack up costs. They exist to get something achieved. Merely spending money is not achievement and only has a rough correlation to progress. I have seen projects where a lot of money is spent for very little progress.

Re issue 2, project management is about chopping up the project into small tasks and then getting the tasks done, especially the critical tasks. Progress and performance is measured by doing the tasks, nothing else.
There should be some value attached to having a good plan, that everyone can work to, and then having people who actually work to and report against the plan.