Program Management Systems Committee (PMSC)
Scheduling Work Group
May 22, 2009
David Treacy
dtreacy@mcri.com
703-623-4534
1
Overview
o
o
o
Status
Issues
Activities



o
o
Cost and Schedule Integration
Affect of DCMA Trip Wires on Schedule
Schedule Margin
Best Practice Research
Key Challenge
Status
o
o
o
Schedule working group continues to be
ad hoc and requires continued outreach to
obtain input and comment
Continuing to examine issues related to
the practice of scheduling in context of
program and project management
Collecting and assessing standards and
practices across domain
Overarching Issues
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Scheduling and EVM Relationship
Requirements Consistency
Aligning standards, best practices & requirements
Roles and Responsibilities of schedulers vs CAMs
Affect of Program Characteristics on Scheduling
(phase, contract type, etc.)
Integration of cost and schedule
Management use of schedules
Scheduling discipline maturation and career
progression
EV engine and schedule software integration and
constraints
Scheduling Practice Issues
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Treatment of risk and uncertainty in schedule
development (SRA, 3pt estimates)
Impact of DCMA Tripwires on scheduling
Appropriate use of constraints in schedule
development
Reporting and visibility level for Critical Path
Appropriate baselining techniques (early vs late
dates)
Risk Assessment Frequency vs. Schedule Margin
Management
Schedule update frequency
Reporting thresholds for task slips
Cost and Schedule Integration
Issue
• Incomplete cost and schedule integration affects
schedule realism and utility
• Reporting (EV) does not require budgets/resources
to be in schedule
• DI MGMT 81650 does not require resource loaded
schedules or inclusion of all tasks which consume
resources (LOE)
• Other methods capture resources (CAPs) but “what
if” scenarios difficult to accomplish without full
Discussion integration
• Hours are most effective unit for identifying finite
resources
• Intent Guide identifies characteristics of an
integrated network scheduling system: “Resource
estimates from the budget plan are reasonable and
resources are available to support the schedule.”
• Does not require resources to be identified in
schedule
Cost and Schedule Integration
Impact
• Reduces value of schedule. Decisions without full
understanding and visibility of relationships
between triple constraints.
Status
• General consensus that effective schedules will be
resource loaded where resources are finite and
resource loading is good scheduling practice (is
also a DCMA 14pt metric)
Recommend
• Consider revision to Intent Guide to clarify
resource loading characteristics and attributes
Impact of DCMA Trip Wire Metrics on Schedules
• What is impact of the Trip Wires on
Issue
Schedules?
• Assessed DCMA Trip Wire Metrics (BEI,
CPLI), expanded to include DCMA 14 Point
Metrics
• 14Pt metrics are goals and not scores,
exceptions need to be understood and
explained
Discussion
• Metrics appear reasonable and based on
sound practice
• Includes resource loading metric, but DID
does not require resource loading
• Discourages leads in schedule but why
wait if you can get a head start and
resources are not constrained?
Impact of DCMA Trip Wire Metrics on Schedules
Impact
• No apparent negative impact, although use can
be either negative or positive (just like EV data)
Status
• Continuous improvement opportunity (CIO) schedule margin metric
Recommend • Collaborate with DCMA to identify possible
.
schedule margin metric and revisit lead metric.
DCMA 14 Point Assessment Metrics
Metric
What it is
Goal
Logic
Predecessors and Successors
1 ea. task
Leads
Overlap/Concurrency between
tasks (negative lag)
0
Lags
Delay between linked tasks
Relationship Types
Other than Finish to Start (FS)
Hard Constraints
Must start or finish & no later
than
<=5%
High Float
Float > 2 months
<=5%
Negative Float
Float < 0 days
High Duration
Tasks > 2 months
Invalid Dates
Forecast dates prior to or actual
dates after current status date
Resources
Hours/Dollars for each tasks
All resource loaded
Missed Tasks
Negative completion variance
<=%5
Critical Path Test
Broken logic due to missing
dependencies
Critical Path Length Index
(CPLI)
Critical Path Length + Total Float
Critical Path Length
>= 1.00
Baseline Execution Index (BEI)
Ratio of completed tasks to tasks
planned to be complete
>= 1.00
<=5%
>= 90%
0
<=5%
0
No large neg. float
Identification of Schedule Margin in Schedules
Issue
Discussion
• No consistent definition of schedule margin
• Multiple methods of identifying schedule margin
• Delta between constraint and deadline milestones
or inclusion of buffer tasks are the two most
common methods
• No consistent requirements across Government
• Buffer tasks accepted by NASA and DOE
• Buffer tasks (feeding buffers) key element of
Critical Chain Method (CCM)
• DI-MGMT-81650 defines schedule margin as
difference between contractual and planned
milestones
• Also defines “Task” as element of work with
duration
• DID language as written appears to not recognize
CCM as a valid scheduling method
Identification of Schedule Margin in Schedules
Impact
• Unfavorable schedule evaluations result
from the use of buffer tasks
• White paper in development. Peer
Status
reviews conducted. Final review of draft
prior to release for community review
Best Practice Research Status
o
o
Association for Advancement of Cost Engineering
International (AACEI) publishes Recommended
Practices (RP) and Professional Practice Guides
(PPG) on scheduling
Assessing PPG#20 Forensic Schedule Analysis as
an authoritative independent source for schedule
analysis



FSA is an unifying technical reference for the forensic analysis
of scheduling primarily for use in legal proceedings
Describes uniform procedures that increase transparency of
the analysis method and increase accountability and testability
Purpose is to reduce subjectivity and ensures that analysis is
based on diligent factual research and analyses whose
procedures can be objectified
Key Challenge

Engaging planners/scheduler in an organization
focused on EVM/PM


PMSC focus is on integration, policy, and other broad
issues
Attendees not primarily planners/schedulers
Lack of a formal forum/community is a challenge
to continued evolution of the practice’s
integration with EVM and examination and
resolution of issues
 Investigated PMI College of Scheduling – more
construction/claims oriented – only game in town
at the moment
 Exploring other possible communities of interest
(AACEI)
 Other alternatives?

To Summarize