SUCCESSFUL STRATEGIES FOR SCHEDULING PROJECTS TO FINISH ON TIME

1. SUCCESSFUL STRATEGIESFOR SCHEDULING PROJECTS TO FINISH ON TIME Presented by Christopher J. Payne, PE, CCM McDonough Bolyard Peck

2. BACKDROP • Projects are frequently late • Delays are contentious • Schedules are contentious • Not used properly • Difficult to manage

3. WHAT WE ALL KNOW…or think we know • CPM is the best tool out there • Highly defined requirements will encourage contractor compliance • Schedules don’t build jobs, people do

4. So… How do we use the schedule successfully to ensure the project is completed on time?

5. AGENDA • Specifications • Building the Schedule • Partnering • Sub Buy-in • Cost Loading • Resource Loading • Updating the Schedule • Resolving Problems with the Schedule

6. Building the Schedule

7. BUILDING THE SCHEDULE UNLESS… • Specifications have too many rules WHAT WORKS • Clear Specifications

8. BUILDING THE SCHEDULE • Good • Activity Code Structure • Maximum durations • How time will be extended • Use for Payment • Bad • Minimum activity requirements • Numbering rules • Restrictions on relationships • Onerous reports

9. BUILDING THE SCHEDULE UNLESS… • People don’t partner WHAT WORKS • Partnering the Schedule

10. BUILDING THE SCHEDULE • Good • Jointly working on schedule • Making sure subs are present • Understanding philosophy of how job will be built • Making a complete schedule (all activities) • Bad • Dictatorial review comments • Contractor creating a submittal to fulfill a requirement • Pre-claim posturing • Mismatched subcontractor input

11. CHALLENGE • How to intelligently involve subs? • Subs not on board at beginning • G.C.’s practicing “mushroom” philosophy • G.C.’s running two schedules • One Solution… • Keep schedule on the table at all meetings with subs

12. BUILDING THE SCHEDULE UNLESS… • It becomes an unwieldy mess WHAT WORKS • Cost-loading the Schedule

13. BUILDING THE SCHEDULE CHALLENGE How do you get the Schedule of Values to agree with the CPM? • Build together • It takes work • Don’t duplicate work

14. BUILDING THE SCHEDULE UNLESS… • The purpose isn’t clear WHAT WORKS • Resource-loading the Schedule

15. BUILDING THE SCHEDULE • Good • Resource loading to identify manpower needs, smooth peaks, corroborate with bid • Bad • Hard to get real data • Is it necessary to update? • Sub reluctance • Use as a weapon

16. Updating the Schedule

17. UPDATING THE SCHEDULE UNLESS… • Still waiting for/arguing over baseline • Schedule is unwieldy/lack of contractor help in updating WHAT WORKS • Update at the date of the pay requisition

18. STRATEGIES • Accurate Updates • Get into a rhythm • Have a substantive but informal review meeting • Agree on progress first, acknowledge status • Understand implications and deal with later • Two-part process

19. Resolving Problems with the Schedule

20. OBSERVATIONS • Delay is inevitable. • Disagreement is inevitable. • Communication and resolution are not inevitable.

21. RESOLVING PROBLEMS WITH THE SCHEDULE UNLESS… • Process gets behind • Process is unwieldy • Disagreement over impacts WHAT WORKS • Time Impact Analysis

22. TIME IMPACT ANALYSIS APPROACH • Develop fragnet of impact • Run schedule before impact • Run schedule with impact PITFALLS • Too many changes • Requires time to develop • How to address an ongoing change

23. TIME IMPACT PITFALLS – DISCUSSION • Can you agree on an impact without agreeing on entitlement? • Forward-looking mindset vs. backward-looking • Typical scenario may take 2-3 months to resolve…what to do about project in the meantime?

24. Owner worried about this… … …but not ready to agree on this … TYPICAL SCENARIO $ DELAY TIA 1 TIA 2 DD PROJECTION PLAN TIME

25. TIME IMPACT STRATEGIES • Acknowledge Delay Quickly • Do TIA’s but pick milestones to cut off analysis and assess globally • Tolerate negative float (for a while) • Continue to insist on performance • Allow (but discuss) minor logic changes

26. SAMPLE SITUATION Two-year project, $40 million • Baseline schedule submitted 4 weeks after NTP • Owner comments 7 weeks after NTP • Resubmit 10 weeks after NTP • Approval 12 weeks after NTP 1st update 14 weeks after NTP, shows project 6 weeks behind

27. SAMPLE SITUATION Contractor’s narrative: • We were delayed by bad weather, late approval of drilling plan, late availability of east access. • We anticipate recovering time by working six-day drilling schedule and in later work.

28. EXAMPLE What should Owner do? • Schedule unacceptable. All delays are contractor’s. Resubmit with recovery plan. • Acknowledge receipt of schedule, but do nothing else. • Dialogue, discussion, concession, analysis…

29. EXAMPLE Outcome No. 1: • Contractor disagrees, asserts right to file a claim, brings up constructive acceleration… • Schedule is now a “claims football”…but is no longer useful as a communication tool on the project.

30. EXAMPLE Outcome No. 2: • Contractor submits the next update, now nine weeks late. Cites more vague causes of delay… • Claims are brewing… • Job tracking late…

31. EXAMPLE Outcome No. 3: • Grant 5-day EOT for late pile approval. • Pay limited acceleration cost to overcome delay. • Cite lack of progress on other paths. • Job in good shape going forward.

32. SUMMARY • Schedule is a necessary tool too often overlooked. • Cost implications are huge. • Proper use of tool limits intimidation and ignorance.

33. SUMMARY Schedule should be a communication tool, not a communication barrier