Construction Planning and Scheduling
Schedule Analysis Method
Schedule analysis is the process of identifying facts and issues that can exist as a result of intentional and unintentional actions. Work rarely goes as planned and when activities are delayed or extended, results to an overall delay of the project. There are several methods of schedule analysis; the most appropriate for this case is as planned vs as built. It involves the comparison of the baseline schedule against the schedule reflecting progress; for example, these are the daily reports prepared by subcontractor and superintendent. It is a reliable method because it relies on the baseline and schedule information but not the monthly updates. The difference between the duration on the daily reports and the duration on the baseline schedule is assumed to be a period of delay to which the contractor is eligible for an extension of time caused by the delayed event (Hishona, John and Christopher 45).
Daily reports will allow easy access of the projects information and its analysis against the history of events that have influenced the project performance. The process involves the comparison of each activity’s planned start and finish date with actual start and finish date. The results will show any delay or acceleration in each activity. It clearly shows those activities that affected project progress by identifying any deviation from the original plan.
In addition, all the activities in the case are in a critical path. It is indicated that all the works completed or in progress match the baseline schedule; therefore, there is no slack activity which can be delayed. Also, since it does not rely only on the planned work, the error found in the planned work will not affect the results. It constitutes a reliable basis for evaluating a delay as it shows what happened; therefore, it can be used for time extension entitlement.
Extension of time entitlement
As planned vs. as built shows the difference between the duration of the baseline schedule and the as built. This is done by determining how many days or weeks a schedule activity is ahead or behind the planned schedule. However, it is better to compare late date than early date because delay of an activity cannot be measured unless activity is delayed. These differences are used as the time of delay; therefore, the contractor will be entitled to a time extension as a result of justifiable delay event or events.
Requirement for additional time
The activity or activities should be in the critical path; therefore, any critical activity delay would automatically lead to a delay of the project. Delay of an activity in the slack path will not affect the completion date of the project. Then, determine whether there are two simultaneous delays on the critical path activities. Also, determine the period they started and whether the owner was responsible (Hullet 274).
In addition, the delay event or events should be clearly identified. The different increment delay along the critical path should be clearly identified. Moreover, differentiate the cause from effect of the delay. Also, identify and explain all delayed start and extended time of the activities in the critical path and evaluate whether there were enough resources allocated for each activity.
Lastly, no other delay events to the activities in question that are non-excusable delay event or events. The different activities to show that were the responsibility of the owner who led to delayed project completion and were not concurrent with the contractor’s responsibility (Mir and Ashly 213). Otherwise, if the events were non-excusable, the contractor will be responsible for the delay of the project; therefore, the contractor will be not eligible for compensation.
Hoshino, Kenji P., John C. Livengood, and Christopher W. Carson. “Forensic Schedule Analysis.” AACE International Recommended Practice 29.Forenscic Performance Assessment, 2011: 45. Print.
Hulett, David. Practical Schedule Risk Analysis. Farnham: Ashgate Pub., 2009. Print.
Mir, Farzana Asad, and Ashly H. Pinnington. “Exploring the value of project management: Linking Project Management Performance and Project Success.” International Journal of Project Management 32.2, 2014: 202-217. Print.