Peer Review of A Schedule

By:
Raphael M. Düa FAICD, FAPE, FGPC(PC), MACS(Snr), PCP, CP, UTIL, Grad DISC
Director
Balmoral Hill Pty Ltd
11 Henry Street
Traralgon, Victoria 3844
raf@balmoralhill.com.au

&

Chris Carson FRICS, FAACE, PSP, DRMP, CEP, CCM, PMP

Enterprise Director of Program & Project Controls,
Arcadis & VP Finance AACE International
Virginia Beach, Virginia, USA
chris.carson@arcadis-us.com

1|Page
2|Page
Peer Review of a Schedule

Introduction

In a recent report by the PMI recently (February 14, 2017) released, shows that Australia has a very poor track
record, along with other parts of the world in managing large infrastructure projects. Cost blowouts and delays are
common, especially in Government funded transport, hospital and communications projects. The NBN has had to
recently obtain additional funding from the Federal Government. The new Royal Adelaide Hospital has overrun its
budget by almost thirty percent and is will be over fifteen months late when it will be delivered.

A major area that the report focuses on is that billions of dollars in wastage on major projects continues to occur
globally, but in recent years it has improved, however wastage in Australia still lags the improving global average.

Overseas the money wasted has fallen to $USD 97 million ($AUD 126 million) for every $USD1 billion invested in
projects, it used to be an average of $USD122 million per $USD1 billion. The report indicates that currently
Australian projects on average are wasting $USD108 million for every $USD1 billion spent. The report surveyed over
185 major projects in Australia.

The chief executive of the PMI, Mark Langley said that the latest survey in Australia identified a lack of talent for
project management compared with the global average. Only 33 percent of organisations had a clearly defined
career path for Project Management as opposed to 43 per cent globally.

To overcome wastage Lean Construction has been introduced in the past few years, LEAN is a manufacturing
philosophy that removes non-value adding activity and changes all stakeholders in the value chain. LEAN
Construction is the adaption of LEAN to project delivery. It is an excellent framework with which to deliver a
transformation in construction productivity for major Australian large dollar value projects

Whilst it is true that many major projects do establish proper project management plans and schedules and follow
the standard structured methodologies to ensure the project is viable, many do not. The most successful projects
have invariably had “Peer” reviews of their project management proposals to ensure that a third party has validated
those plans etc. and that they will truly deliver the project.

On investigating those which have failed, it was noted than many of them did not perform the necessary in depth
project planning and scheduling as management did not see the value of spending the time and or the funding. No
peer reviews or audits had taken place and as such any scheduling or cost shortcoming failed to be observed and so
another project failure occurs. However it is well known that taking the time and properly funding the project
management, planning and scheduling and perform independent peer reviews do deliver successful projects.

The ASC construction of the Collins class is a case in point when a full in depth project definition study was
performed over a three year period which were heavily peer reviewed throughout that time ensured that before
actually starting the construction phase it would be successful. These peer reviews (audits) meant all the likely

3|Page
problems that would occur on a $5.4 billion project (in 1991) were in the main resolved and that the project would
achieve its goals which it did.

The use of Lean Construction techniques to prevent wastage and with a proper duration allowed to provide in depth
planning and scheduling and cost controls with appropriate peer reviews and audits for all major projects will no
doubt improve the rate of success in delivery.

Peer Reviewing a Schedule

Establishing the peer review it has been assumed that the client is using Primavera P6, with versions running from
V6.3 to 17.1. The peer review undertakes to examine the most common

Establishing the review

Goals

• Examine and Confirm that the schedule is reasonable and attainable

• Determine that the Contractor’s Means and Methods understandable
• Establish a good baseline for monitoring
• Verify and Validate durations
• Verify and validate logic and sequencing
• Identify claims positioning issues
• Identify risks in schedule and assumptions
• Document concerns

Baseline Schedule Review

• Review Scheduling Specification

• Confirm Submittal Completeness
• Develop familiarity with the Project (review the contract)
• Import Schedule & verify
• Review Schedule Architecture
• Review narrative of project description
• Review Sequencing
• Evaluate Metrics and Statistics
• Perform Analysis
• Write Report

Baseline Schedule Review

Review Scheduling Specification

4|Page
 • Section Numbers 101230 or 10.1.23.0
• Check Related Specifications Sections or special provisions
• Software Requirements
• Data Exchange requirements
• Master dictionaries / reports
o Activity Codes requirements
o ID coding requirements
• Preconstruction meeting
• Experience and qualifications of the scheduler
• Required submittal contents
• Client Contracted milestone dates and deliverables
• Determine Total Float ownership and document
• CPM network requirements
• Definition of Durations and Restrictions
• Initial Schedule Submission
• Fully detailed project schedule (baseline) submission
• Schedule updates
• Delay and extension of time
o Notification requirements
• Early Completion schedules
• Final as-built submittal
• Resource and Cost loading
• Project Description requirements
• Prohibitions on manipulation

Baseline Schedule Review

Gaining Familiarity with the project

• Review Plans and Specification

• Review project specific documents and manuals
• Visit project site
• Review construction methodology
• Bring in subject matter experts if ne cessary

Baseline Schedule Review

Confirm Submittal Completeness

• Compare to schedule specification requirements

• Notify Contractor at once if not complete
• Do not start the review until submittal is complete
• Characteristic missing items
5|Page
 o Schedule Methodology description
o Electronic Files
o Define explanation of Calendars, Lags, Activity Codes, Constraints, Resources, Costs
o Milestones and Definitions of Milestones
• If costs and / or resources are missing perform review in phases

Baseline Schedule Review

Import Schedule & Verify

• Keep original submittal file, create copy to review

• Review in Original software if possible
• Recognize any issues with import in various software packages
• Create checklist to identify potential import issues
• Example – Microsoft MPX to Primavera 6 V8.4
o Calendar Issues
o Duration Issues
o Blank Lines in MPX
o Remove the Summary Task
o Remove Summary Logic
o Date Impositions
• Ensure and verify that imported schedule used to review and analyse is identical to the original submitted
schedule
• Create Checklist for reviews

Baseline Schedule Review

Review Schedule Architecture

• Validate Schedule Rules and settings

• F9 – Recalculate Schedule
• Review Organizational Tools

Review Schedule Construction

• Evaluate Activities – check against contractual requirements

• Review logic
o Check for Missing Predecessors
o Check for Missing Successors
o Check for Open Ends
o Check for superfluous logic
• Determine Validity of the Critical Path

6|Page
Baseline Schedule Review
Review Schedule Architecture

• Retained Logic vs Progress Override – Note Progress Override is not acceptable

o Will not affect Baseline, but may cause optimistic predictions during status reporting
• Resource and Cost Rules
o Estimate to Complete setting may allow Estimate at Completion to change
• Validate and understand influence of all settings and how they impact Earned Value Management
and reports
• Evaluate how the Critical Path is calculated
o Longest Path – Primavera
o Total Float – zero value

Baseline Schedule Review

Review Schedule Architecture

• Recalculate Schedule – ensure no changes to dates

• Validate all Completion Dates, validate against Contractual requirements
• Validate all intermediate milestones dates
o Ensure Start Milestones are properly indicated
o Ensure Finish Milestones are properly indicated
• Review Organizational Tools
o Validate Activity Code Dictionaries
o Validate Resource Code Dictionaries
o Validate calendars – Global and User
o Validate EPS
o Validate WBS
o Check for UDF’s (P6)

Baseline Schedule Review

Review Schedule Construction

• Evaluate Activities
o Sort by Activity Description (Name in MS Project)
The AACEi Publication No 29R-02, is the guide used, as it is the recommended
practice for Identification of Activities
Ensure all descriptions are consistent and unique and can stand alone
7|Page
 Ensure that all items which may the project are visible as activities, procurement
especially, contracted deliverables, design drawings and other admin work
Determine that the activity description does capture the full scope of work
Compare descriptions for reasonable and comparable to the original duration
o Sort by original Duration
Review Contract for specification of maximum times
Ensure that the Original Durations are reasonable (no longer than “two status
periods”)

Baseline Schedule Review

Review Schedule Construction

• Review Logic
o Use of AACEi Publication No. 24R-03, the Recommended Practice for Developing Activity
Logic for Guidelines
o Check Open-ended relationships (Dangles)
There must only be two, the start and the end of the Critical Path Logic
Dangles caused inaccuracies in the critical path calculations and generates false
Critical Paths
Beware of “dangling” activities resulting from SS or FF dependency lags
Negative durations on SS, FF or FS dependencies which will cause Predecessor open-
ended after a status update
o Evaluate Relationships (dependencies)
Check on all Lags
Filter by Trade, check same-trade relationships
Filter by Contractor, check those relationships

Baseline Schedule Review

Review Schedule Construction

Evaluate Critical Path

o Is it reasonable and follow industry typical standards
o Does it start at the beginning of the project and run to completion
o Is there an appropriate level of detail
o Have there been any manipulations driving the critical path?
Sequestering Float where everything has been made critical
Manipulation where the Critical Path runs inappropriately through the clients
responsibilities
The Critical Path is the only highly detailed string of activities in the project

8|Page
 Nothing is Critical due to heavy use of constraints
Numerous lags, maybe not identified, inserted in the Critical Path forcing it through
specific activities
Has there been any weather planning been included in Critical Path activities or will
adverse weather cause slippage

Baseline Schedule Review

Review Schedule Construction

• Evaluation of Near Critical Paths

o Determine how much total float constitutes “near critical path”
o What is the volume of work just off the Critical Path?
o Review Longest Path and Lowest Total Float paths
Recommended review of Total Float is < ½ Reporting Period
o Sort by Total Float
Validate reasonableness of high Float items
Is there a consistent range of TF?
Many activities with high Total float indicates under developed logic
All low Total float indicates inappropriate logic
o Sort by Late Start
As expected this is the worst case scenario of work flow
Start at end of schedule and see if reasonable
Sort by Late Start, Order Week Ascending, check if the amount of work is
possible
Review the Resources piling (view Histograms) can they fit into the spaces
o Sort by Early Start
Sequence by Early Start, Order Week Ascending, once again review the amount
of work planned each week is feasible and reasonable
How many resources are piling up?
o Sequence by Early start, Sort by Late Start
Summarize to early Start, review the overlaps by each week
Focus the review on strong overlaps (indicates missing relationships)
Focus on small segments of project working concurrently
• Review Resources
o Review for resource “soft” logic used to control flow of workers from area to area
o Schedules without reasonable soft logic will be most likely to show a lot of high Total
Float values (more than 5% is out of range as per DCMA)
o Overuse of soft logic can sequester Total Float and forces Critical Path

9|Page
 o Durations should be resource-based, that is it is calculated by Production Rate x
Quantity, so resource planning is essential to project delivery success

Combating Wastage
As previously stated combating wastage in major or indeed any project can be aided by the
effective use of Lean Construction Techniques.

What are “LEAN” Construction Techniques?

It is “A way to design production systems to minimize waste of materials, time, and effort in order to
generate the maximum possible amount of value." Koskela, L., Howell, G., Ballard, G., and Tommelein, I.
(2002). "The Foundations of Lean Construction." Design and Construction: Building in Value, R. Best, and G.
de Valence, eds., Butterworth-Heinemann, Elsevier, Oxford, UK.

10 | P a g e
 Peer Review Checklist
As per DCMA and GAO scheduling best practice guides

• All construction activities must have at least one predecessor and successor. Only “Start Project” and the
“End Project” are open ended.
• Must have a proper EPS and an applicable WBS & Cost Coding Structure
• Must have applicable Procurement activities to material activities
• Must have detailing, spooling and prefabrication to support construction installation.
• The “As-Planned” CPM network is based on conditions known on bid-day.
• Must be able to indicate work flows (trade crew movement requirements) and work packages
• The total work scopes as defined by the WBS must have at least one work activity package.
• All necessary logic restraints are clearly established within the schedule.
• Can occur without interruption from other activities.
• Do not stop an activity so that other trades can work, then resume; multiple trades per activity should
further detailed.
• Has a usable metric for measuring, e.g. (1000 mtrs. of pipework or 400 M³ of Concrete, or 650 globes,
etc...).
• Construction activity durations should be between 10-15 work days.
• Relationships are Finish-to-Start, or Start-to-Start AND Finish to Finish. SF relationships are not used.
• No Negative lags (leads) used.
• Should be resource loaded with direct labour workhours to forecast labour requirements
• Should be cost loaded to forecast cash flow throughout the project.
• Procurement, Submittals, Reviews, and material deliveries are identified.
• Relationship Lags do not exceed the Predecessor Duration.
• Weather sensitive work is properly assigned to a Weather sensitive calendar.
• Normal weather is programmed into the CPM network calendar.
• All holidays and Union RDO’s are present in the calendar
• Contract milestones are calculated using a Finish On or Before constraint so that backward pass
calculations are properly determined.
• No hard constraints used i.e. “Must Start or Finish On”
• Must include QA/QC activities as well as Testing and Commissioning.
• Each activity is assigned to a responsible foreman.
• All UDF’s have been specified and identified in a dictionary
• Obtain input and gain formal commitment (buy-in) from all project team members (foreman,
superintendents’, etc.).
• Signed off by the Stakeholders as being “Fair and acceptable”

11 | P a g e