Most construction work is carried out by mid range firms who do not have a planner - let alone a planning department.
The level of expertise that you are promoting should be targetted at the large companies on the large projects.
At the mid range level I am trying to promote basic but essential programming methods - the bare minimum that a young manager who has to do his / her own planning can get by with.
These are:
1. Put together a properly linked Bottom up Programme from Level 4 to Level 2.
2. Apply resource modelling from the cost plan / boq.
3. Put together a set of callendars that are fit for purpose.
4. Set in motion a realistic regime of progress reporting.
This is simple planning.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Member for
20 years 7 months
Member for20 years7 months
Submitted by Stephen Devaux on Sat, 2009-03-14 12:56
Mike, I completely respect your motives -- keeping things simple is important.
Unfortunately, as much as some (not you, Im sure!) might consider scheduling to be simple, we know its not! Perpetuating the myth that scheduling is simple hurts our profession, and, unfortunately, people die every day because of bad project scheduling. And ignorance about scheduling is rife.
Obviously, many knowledgeable people may disagree with me -- but I believe it is our duty to spread the word that scheduling is:
1. HUGELY important.
2. Complex.
To that end, giving advice that simplifies a problem might feed a man for day, but we also need to be teaching people to become The Compleat Project Manager. And I believe that that requires making it clear, whenever we give simple advice, that we are only scraping the surface of what a scheduler needs to know how to do. Maybe, that way, more and more people will be inspired to become more educated about the practice.
"Especially Judge Dred - I would like to see him in Drag."
Careful! He might play some RAD BE-BOP on your head with a CLUB! (Especially if the judge is my cousin.)
(Someone once mentioned that my methods made them think of Sylvester Stallone meets Priscilla, Queen of the Desert!)
Good advice from Mike. Id say two steps missing, and one amendment:
"3. Reschedule and note the changes on the critical path - if any.
4. Investigate what can be done to shorten the delay after the event - anything that will not cost any money should be considered."
3A. Compute the new DRAG totals on each CP activity.
3B. Compute the new DRAG Cost totals on each CP activity.
4. Investigate what can be done to reduce the DRAGs and DRAG Costs. Anything that will not cost any money should be considered first unless there is significant increase in risk or reduction in quality/value. But anything which costs money, but less than the amount by which the DRAG Cost is reduced should be a very serious candidate.
If you have DREDs (doubled resource estimated durations) for the CP activities, that can be a great place to start.
There is already an approve baseline programe. the assume duration is 2 weeks but it reality it is 6 weeks.
Ok.
First you have to perform an ALV - Activity level variance. For this example, it is very easy. the variance is 4 weeks.
Having known the variance, you have to investigate what cause the variance. In this example, it is very clear that the assumption is wrong since as you said, the 2 weeks is not possible, what should have been reasonable is 6 weeks.
There could be an underlying scenario which is not known at the time of investigation, so this should be look at. After exhaustive investigation and it is still the dominan cause, then, the relationship maybe change to reflect the reasonable duration.
Cheers,
Happy Planning and Scheduling
Member for
17 years 3 months
Member for17 years3 months
Submitted by Samer Zawaydeh on Thu, 2009-03-12 18:23
The progress at site should correlate with the Program of Works. If depends on the Contract that you have. If it is under FIDIC, then under clause 8/3, if the program of works is not representing the works, then it must be revised.
Member for
19 years 10 monthsRE: Extension of Time
Hi Stephen
Most construction work is carried out by mid range firms who do not have a planner - let alone a planning department.
The level of expertise that you are promoting should be targetted at the large companies on the large projects.
At the mid range level I am trying to promote basic but essential programming methods - the bare minimum that a young manager who has to do his / her own planning can get by with.
These are:
1. Put together a properly linked Bottom up Programme from Level 4 to Level 2.
2. Apply resource modelling from the cost plan / boq.
3. Put together a set of callendars that are fit for purpose.
4. Set in motion a realistic regime of progress reporting.
This is simple planning.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Member for
20 years 7 monthsRE: Extension of Time
Mike, I completely respect your motives -- keeping things simple is important.
Unfortunately, as much as some (not you, Im sure!) might consider scheduling to be simple, we know its not! Perpetuating the myth that scheduling is simple hurts our profession, and, unfortunately, people die every day because of bad project scheduling. And ignorance about scheduling is rife.
Obviously, many knowledgeable people may disagree with me -- but I believe it is our duty to spread the word that scheduling is:
1. HUGELY important.
2. Complex.
To that end, giving advice that simplifies a problem might feed a man for day, but we also need to be teaching people to become The Compleat Project Manager. And I believe that that requires making it clear, whenever we give simple advice, that we are only scraping the surface of what a scheduler needs to know how to do. Maybe, that way, more and more people will be inspired to become more educated about the practice.
"Especially Judge Dred - I would like to see him in Drag."
Careful! He might play some RAD BE-BOP on your head with a CLUB! (Especially if the judge is my cousin.)
(Someone once mentioned that my methods made them think of Sylvester Stallone meets Priscilla, Queen of the Desert!)
Fraternally in PM,
Steve D.
Member for
19 years 10 monthsRE: Extension of Time
Hi Stephen
The idea was to keep it simple.
You have now confused the poor chap completely.
When I do a delay anlysis I keep in mind that the presentation should be so simple that even a Judge can undesratnd it.
Especially Judge Dred - I would like to see him in Drag.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Member for
20 years 7 monthsRE: Extension of Time
Good advice from Mike. Id say two steps missing, and one amendment:
"3. Reschedule and note the changes on the critical path - if any.
4. Investigate what can be done to shorten the delay after the event - anything that will not cost any money should be considered."
3A. Compute the new DRAG totals on each CP activity.
3B. Compute the new DRAG Cost totals on each CP activity.
4. Investigate what can be done to reduce the DRAGs and DRAG Costs. Anything that will not cost any money should be considered first unless there is significant increase in risk or reduction in quality/value. But anything which costs money, but less than the amount by which the DRAG Cost is reduced should be a very serious candidate.
If you have DREDs (doubled resource estimated durations) for the CP activities, that can be a great place to start.
Fraternally in PM,
Steve D.
Member for
19 years 10 monthsRE: Extension of Time
Hi Samad
To put it simply.
1. Save the file in a different name.
2. Change the delivery period from 2 weeks to 6 weeks and change the colour code to repesent a changed activity - bright red is good.
3. Reschedule and note the changes on the critical path - if any.
4. Investigate what can be done to shorten the delay after the event - anything that will not cost any money should be considered.
5. Write up a short report and submit to the Engineer.
That is a simple Impacted As Planned delay analysis that can be uded when work is in progress.
Good luck & Best regards
Mike Testro
Member for
20 years 4 monthsRE: Extension of Time
Dear Samad,
There is already an approve baseline programe. the assume duration is 2 weeks but it reality it is 6 weeks.
Ok.
First you have to perform an ALV - Activity level variance. For this example, it is very easy. the variance is 4 weeks.
Having known the variance, you have to investigate what cause the variance. In this example, it is very clear that the assumption is wrong since as you said, the 2 weeks is not possible, what should have been reasonable is 6 weeks.
There could be an underlying scenario which is not known at the time of investigation, so this should be look at. After exhaustive investigation and it is still the dominan cause, then, the relationship maybe change to reflect the reasonable duration.
Cheers,
Happy Planning and Scheduling
Member for
17 years 3 monthsRE: Extension of Time
Dear Samad,
The progress at site should correlate with the Program of Works. If depends on the Contract that you have. If it is under FIDIC, then under clause 8/3, if the program of works is not representing the works, then it must be revised.
Best Regards,
Samer