1. 1 Program Management Systems Committee (PMSC) Scheduling Work Group May 22, 2009 David Treacy dtreacy@mcri.com 703-623-4534

2. Overview o Status o Issues o Activities Cost and Schedule Integration Affect of DCMA Trip Wires on Schedule Schedule Margin o Best Practice Research o Key Challenge

3. Status o Schedule working group continues to be ad hoc and requires continued outreach to obtain input and comment o Continuing to examine issues related to the practice of scheduling in context of program and project management o Collecting and assessing standards and practices across domain

4. Overarching Issues o Scheduling and EVM Relationship o Requirements Consistency o Aligning standards, best practices & requirements o Roles and Responsibilities of schedulers vs CAMs o Affect of Program Characteristics on Scheduling (phase, contract type, etc.) o Integration of cost and schedule o Management use of schedules o Scheduling discipline maturation and career progression o EV engine and schedule software integration and constraints

5. Scheduling Practice Issues o Treatment of risk and uncertainty in schedule development (SRA, 3pt estimates) o Impact of DCMA Tripwires on scheduling o Appropriate use of constraints in schedule development o Reporting and visibility level for Critical Path o Appropriate baselining techniques (early vs late dates) o Risk Assessment Frequency vs. Schedule Margin Management o Schedule update frequency o Reporting thresholds for task slips

6. Cost and Schedule Integration Issue Incomplete cost and schedule integration affects schedule realism and utility Discussion 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 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

7. 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

8. Impact of DCMA Trip Wire Metrics on Schedules Issue What is impact of the Trip Wires on Schedules? Discussion 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 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?

9. 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.

10. DCMA 14 Point Assessment Metrics MetricWhat it isGoal Logic Predecessors and Successors 1 ea. task Leads Overlap/Concurrency between tasks (negative lag) 0 Lags Delay between linked tasks <=5% Relationship Types Other than Finish to Start (FS) >= 90% Hard Constraints Must start or finish & no later than <=5% High Float Float > 2 months <=5% Negative Float Float < 0 days 0 High Duration Tasks > 2 months <=5% Invalid Dates Forecast dates prior to or actual dates after current status date 0 Resources Hours/Dollars for each tasks All resource loaded Missed Tasks Negative completion variance <=%5 Critical Path Test Broken logic due to missing dependencies No large neg. float 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

11. Identification of Schedule Margin in Schedules Issue No consistent definition of schedule margin Discussion 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

12. Identification of Schedule Margin in Schedules Impact Unfavorable schedule evaluations result from the use of buffer tasks Status White paper in development. Peer reviews conducted. Final review of draft prior to release for community review

13. Best Practice Research Status o Association for Advancement of Cost Engineering International (AACEI) publishes Recommended Practices (RP) and Professional Practice Guides (PPG) on scheduling o 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

14. 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?

15. To Summarize