This McLaughlin & McLaughlin<\/b><\/a> post is the thirteenth (13th<\/sup>) in a series<\/strong><\/a> \u00a0of discussions regarding various aspects of time management as it relates to the risk of delay<\/span>.\u00a0 This post addresses managerial considerations for dealing with schedules prepared by contractors and submitted to owners or their agents (construction managers, managing contractors, advisors, etc.).<\/p>\n Recently, Mr. Chris Carson authored an excellent article titled \u201cDealing with Contractors Schedules That Cannot be Approved.<\/i>\u201d<\/strong>\u00a0 This fine article was published in COST Engineering<\/b><\/i>(September\/October 2013).<\/p>\n This article contains excellent advice for project teams regarding schedule management.<\/p>\n Mr. Carson\u2019s article is, in reality two articles in one.\u00a0 While Mr. Carson\u2019s article presents a methodology for problematic situations (which he calls DSAB), the preamble and initial discussion for this article is highly useful and applicable to project management teams as they address the frontend of project planning and execution.\u00a0 This post summarizes the sage advice provided by Mr. Carson regarding frontend project management challenges as they relate to scheduling and time management.<\/p>\n In order to summarize the article, we will follow Mr. Carson\u2019s structure.<\/p>\n Introduction<\/span><\/strong> \u2013 Here the author observes that an approved contractor schedule (as well as updates) is in the best interests of the project.\u00a0 This contributes to alignment between stakeholders and serves to implement contractual requirements.\u00a0 Otherwise, owners and other stakeholders are increasing their risks relative to time performance on the project.<\/p>\n Risks of Failing to Approve Schedules<\/span><\/strong> \u2013 Mr. Carson points to claims, manipulations and other undesirable outcomes.\u00a0 Further, her notes the problem for the contractor since there is not a baseline to measure project performance.\u00a0 (Sound project management requires solid baselines \u2013 Project Professionals comment).<\/p>\n Reasons for Failure to Approve Schedules<\/span><\/strong> \u2013 The notion here is that the owner may not approve due to the failure of the schedule to model the project plan.\u00a0 Misalignments can be many and the article includes nine examples.\u00a0 These include:<\/p>\n Recommended Process for Project Controls<\/span><\/strong> \u2013 Here, Mr. Carson has several steps that should be followed.\u00a0 These include:<\/p>\n Mr. Carson continues with SCHEDULING REQUIREMENT RECOMMENDATIONS<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Staff Requirement Recommendations<\/span><\/strong> \u2013 Mr. Carson recommends that the contractor be required to use professional scheduling support.\u00a0 Experience levels and criteria are presented.\u00a0 The concept of the project manager performing the scheduling responsibilities is discouraged.\u00a0 Use of a certified AACE International Planning and Scheduling Professional (PSP) scheduler is recommended.<\/p>\n Project Planning Recommendations<\/span> <\/strong>\u2013 Allow more time for project planning.\u00a0 One technique is to allocate some time between contract award and Notice to Proceed.\u00a0 This provides a period for (among other things) enhancing planning and scheduling.\u00a0 Since many contractors have separate groups for estimating \/ bidding and procurement \/ execution \/ construction, there is time needed for handoff and planning considerations.<\/p>\n Scheduling and Contract Specification Suggestions<\/span><\/strong> \u2013 Mr. Carson suggests a two step schedule submission process.\u00a0 The notion is to get a short term interim schedule in place while the detailed schedule is prepared and vetted.<\/p>\n Please see Project Professionals Subject Series, Time Management <\/span><\/i>\u2013<\/span><\/i> Schedule Specification Implementation<\/span><\/i><\/strong><\/a> on this topic.<\/p>\n Scheduling Meetings to Improve Ability to Approve Schedule<\/span><\/strong> \u2013 Prompt review of preliminary schedule submissions facilitates both upgrade actions and team work (collaboration included).\u00a0 Similarly, risk workshops and scheduling planning meetings are suggested.\u00a0 Generate a collaborative effort and a team work approach to identifying and resolving schedule-related issues.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The balance of Mr. Carson\u2019s article deals with actions (by the owner) when the contractor\u2019s schedule cannot be approved.<\/p>\n Good luck and let us all attempt to approach the issue of contractor schedule management in particular and Time-Management in general, with all the factors in an integrated manner (critical path progress, bulk progress or EVM, and productivity) relative to other related aspects of program and project execution planning.\u00a0 In planning for these practices, consideration must be given to progress measurement, schedule updates, progress assessment and professional forecasts.<\/p>\n It is important to note that McLaughlin and McLaughlin [M&M]<\/b><\/a> is not a law firm and is not intending to provide legal advice.\u00a0 M&M<\/strong> <\/a>is a consulting firm providing (among other services) non-legal expertise in dispute resolution and litigation support.\u00a0 The Resource Center<\/a> is for the convenience of blog visitors and M&M<\/b> <\/a>does not offer this for commercial purposes.\u00a0 For further information on M&M<\/b><\/a> services, please see<\/i> <\/i>www.McLaughlinandMcLaughlin.com<\/i><\/b><\/a>.<\/i><\/p>\n <\/p>\n This McLaughlin & McLaughlin post is the thirteenth (13th) in a series \u00a0of discussions regarding various aspects of time management as it relates to the risk of delay.\u00a0 This post addresses managerial considerations for dealing with schedules prepared by contractors and submitted to owners or their agents (construction managers, managing contractors, advisors, etc.). Recently, Mr. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":1555,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_s2mail":"yes"},"categories":[9,49,8,1],"tags":[25,162,161,48,241,80,240,38,97,127,112,105,175,81,64,111,176,78,79,181],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/projectprofessionals.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/09\/MH900340946.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/projectprofessionals.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1548"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/projectprofessionals.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/projectprofessionals.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/projectprofessionals.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/projectprofessionals.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1548"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/projectprofessionals.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1548\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1557,"href":"https:\/\/projectprofessionals.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1548\/revisions\/1557"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/projectprofessionals.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1555"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/projectprofessionals.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1548"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/projectprofessionals.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1548"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/projectprofessionals.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1548"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}\n
\n
\n