Proactive Management of Project Schedule

1. Proactive Managementof Project Schedule Shimon Zeierman Rafael Advanced Systems Ltd.

2. Background • The Critical Chain Method which is based on the Theory of Constraints (TOC) offers us the Project Buffer – A powerful schedule management tool which is able to help us to complete product design or manufacture while meeting schedule and budget goals, in a risky and uncertain environment. • Implementation of the method in the planning and execution phases faces some difficulties: • Adding a buffer into the work plan while keeping deadlines intact creates a “non-realistic” schedule which loses team confidence, • Choosing a Buffer smaller than needed as a “compromise” between the need for buffer and the available time nullifies its benefits, • Consuming buffer time in early stages further reduces confidence in the tool, • The Red/Yellow/Green method to manage buffer penetration is hard to implement, it is very difficult to return the buffer to a green state after it has gone red, • There is no general directive on how to change the buffer with time, which is especially crucial towards the end of the project.

3. Uncertainties and Risks in Development and Production • Technical: • Is the design feasible at all? • Will we achieve performance goals promised? • Programmatic: • Uncertainties in time to be allocated to each task. • Uncertainties in availability of resources on time (workers, labs etc.). • Budgetary: • Uncertainty in the effort needed to accomplish each task and task. • Uncertainty in the stability of currency exchange rates or market price. • Main issue: The information related to uncertainties, risks and their consequences is of a probabilistic nature • It may happen that part of the risks will materialize while others will not. • Risks will materialize in various and unplanned instances during project life span.

4. Method suggested: Use a single buffer • Principles suggested: • Incorporating a single project buffer into project schedule. • The buffer represents an allocation of time to cope with the effect of all uncertainties and risks in the project. • Incorporating a single buffer compensates for the lack of reliable and detailed information about the variance of each task of the project plan. • The use of a single buffer enables the project planner to draw a border line between the basic logical plan of the project and the possible impact of risks and uncertainties materialization.

5. Logical Plan RiskBuffer - Prepare Test Specimen Team A --Purchase material --Prepare specimen Team B - Plan and Perform Tests --Prepare Test Plan Team B Team B --Test in Field Both -- Analyze and Summarize - Project Buffer 30% Project Buffer Goal: Finish on Mar-15

6. Schedule planning – The proactive way • Allocate time for the whole project, from start (ARO) to finish. • Allocate time buffer in proportion to the level of all risks and uncertainties, technical, programmatic and budgetary. • Recommended value, in case of lack of further information: 20% of project time frame. • But not less than 10% (in order to be able to utilize the benefits of the buffer) • When risk and uncertainty level is high, consider a buffer of up to 40%-50%. • Allocate time for each of the project’s tasks. Expect objections from staff! • Discuss reservations made by those who carry out the task due to the short time allocated to their task. • Look for resolution, new and creative solutions which enable shortening execution time (with no penalty to project quality or cost). • Solutions will be mainly found by separation of variables, parallelizing activities and methodological risk analysis. • The schedule should conform to project goal, even in those cases where there was no resolution to reservations – While working on the project, more opportunities and new ideas will be available to the planner.

7. Proactive management of schedule • Reaction to slip in schedule: • Ineffective reactions: • Delay schedule • “Linearly” penetrate into time buffer • Shorten buffer time

8. - Prepare Test Specimen Team A --Purchase material --Prepare specimen Team B Penetrate buffer Delay Schedule Shorten Buffer - Plan and Perform Tests --Prepare Test Plan Team B Team B --Test in Field Both -- Analyze and Summarize - Project Buffer 30% Project Buffer 15% PB 30% Project Buffer 30% Project Buffer Goal: Finish on Mar-15

9. Proactive management of schedule • Reaction to slip in schedule: • Ineffective reactions: • Delay schedule • “Linearly” penetrate into time buffer • Shorten buffer time • Effective reactions: Proactive management of schedule and buffer • Reschedule project keeping planned finish date intact • Keep buffer size constant in terms of percentage out of time remaining from time-now till project finish • Shorten time allocated for activities left and resolve reservations made by those who carry our the task • Shortening buffer time is permitted only if risks are lowered and uncertainty level is reduced.

10. Project replanned from time-now till finish - Prepare Test Specimen Team A --Purchase material No change in logic. Task shorten --Prepare specimen Team B - Plan and Perform Tests No change in %Buffer --Prepare Test Plan Team B Team B --Test in Field Both -- Analyze and Summarize - Project Buffer 30% Proj Buffer 30% Project Buffer Resolve reservations Goal: Finish on Mar-15

11. Case Study

12. Kick Off - Samples Preparation Team A --Supply Material to Site B --Make Samples Team B -Testing --Preliminary Test Plan Team B Team B --Final Test Plan --Cycle I (Lab Test) Team B Team B --Cycle II (Lab & Field Test) --Test Results Evaluation Both Goal: Finish on Mar-15

13. FPR Kick Off Status Status - Samples Preparation Team A --Supply Material to Site B --Make Samples Team B -Testing --Preliminary Test Plan Team B Team B --Final Test Plan --Cycle I (Lab Test) Team B Team B --Cycle II (Lab & Field Test) --Test Results Evaluation Both --Project Buffer 40% Project Buffer Goal: Finish on Mar-15

14. FPR Kick Off Status Status Jan14 Jan27 - Samples Preparation Team A --Supply Material to Site B --Make Samples Team B -Testing --Preliminary Test Plan Team B Team B --Final Test Plan --Cycle I (Lab Test) Team B Team B --Cycle II (Lab & Field Test) --Test Results Evaluation Both --Project Buffer 40% Project Buffer 40% Project Buffer Goal: Finish on Mar-15

15. FPR Kick Off Status Status Jan27 Basic plan FIXED ON Jan 27th - Samples Preparation Team A --Supply Material to Site B --Make Samples Team B -Testing Time allocated for Team B was reduced by half Finish date doesn’t change In spite of delay in raw material supply --Preliminary Test Plan Team B Team B --Final Test Plan --Cycle I (Lab Test) Team B Team B --Cycle II (Lab & Field Test) Buffer size kept 40% of time remained to project finish --Test Results Evaluation Both --Project Buffer 40% Project Buffer Goal: Finish on Mar-15

16. Reservation: Time allocated for test is “not realistic” • Creative ideas were sought in order to answer the question: • What’s neede in order to turn the “not realistic” to “realistic”? FPR Kick Off Status Status Jan27 - Samples Preparation • Ideas raised: • Adding a second lab (contact with an external lab has been initiated) • Re-check and shorten test plan (third of test found not necessary) Team A --Supply Material to Site B --Make Samples Team B -Testing --Preliminary Test Plan Team B Team B --Final Test Plan --Cycle I (Lab Test) Team B Team B --Cycle II (Lab & Field Test) --Test Results Evaluation Both --Project Buffer 40% Project Buffer Goal: Finish on Mar-15

17. FPR Kick Off Status Status Jan27 Feb 8 - Samples Preparation Unexpected delay while clearing from customs. Shipment arrive Feb 14 Team A --Supply Material to Site B --Make Samples Team B -Testing Uncertainties have their own life… --Preliminary Test Plan Team B Team B --Final Test Plan --Cycle I (Lab Test) Team B Team B --Cycle II (Lab & Field Test) --Test Results Evaluation Both --Project Buffer 40% Project Buffer Goal: Finish on Mar-15

18. FPR Kick Off Status Status Feb 8 Feb 14 - Samples Preparation 150Kg Team A --Supply Material to Site B --Make Samples Team B -Testing --Preliminary Test Plan Team B Team B --Final Test Plan --Cycle I (Lab Test) Team B Team B --Cycle II (Lab & Field Test) --Test Results Evaluation Both --Project Buffer 40% Project Buffer 25% PB Goal: Finish on Mar-15

19. FPR Kick Off Status Status Feb 14 Basic plan FIXED ON Feb 14th - Samples Preparation 150Kg Team A --Supply Material to Site B --Make Samples Team B Finish date doesn’t change In spite of delays accumulated till now -Testing --Preliminary Test Plan Team B Team B --Final Test Plan --Cycle I (Lab Test) Team B Risk level dropped, buffer size reduced to 25% of time to project finish Team B --Cycle II (Lab & Field Test) --Test Results Evaluation Both --Project Buffer 25% PB Goal: Finish on Mar-15

20. Epilogue • Further risks and uncertainties were not materialized, test results were obtained a few days before required date. • Managing task by Team A was done using classical methods and did not meet required schedule. • Proactive management by Team B created the atmosphere suitable for a teamwork aimed at getting solutions to the various problems as well as the delays created by the task taken care of by Team A.

21. Summary • A proactive approach to the planning and controlling of projects using a single project buffer was presented. • Akey to this approach is keeping the buffer at the same level in terms of percentage of time that remains until project finishes, and in accordance to the remaining risk and uncertainty level. • The approach relies on further important keys for success: • Building a simple and stable logic plan for the project • Constant search for solutions for the time constraint and lack of resources. • Team work and cooperation

22. Thank You