Total Float Management Renovating a Misused and Abused

Total Float Management: Renovating a Misused and Abused Approach By: Dr. Anamaria Popescu, P. E, PMP, President CPM Consulting Inc. Co-Author: John Jerz, Vice President CPM Consulting Inc. AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting and ICEC’s 6 th World Congress on Cost Engineering, Project Management, and Quantity Surveying

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress Agenda • Background • Introduction to Topic • Detailed Procedure & Example • Difficulties in Implementation • Conclusion 2

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress Background • This paper does NOT try to establish who owns the float • Global competitive environment-projects MUST complete ontime and within budget • Sound project control practices-KEY • Realistic, integrated CPM project schedule-success of the project • Presents a new approach-proactive total float management @ Project Level • Routinely monitor total float to mitigate project delays • Trend Monitoring and Change Management 3

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress Background • Papers published on proactive total float management. – One method - Pre-allocate float 50/50 between parties at the beginning of the project – Another method - Distribute the float within individual schedule activities based on their durations – Alternative proposed method - Contingency “buckets” & Management of Change (MOC) process. 4

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress Procedure 1. CPM Network Development 2. Duration Ranges 3. Critical Path Validation & Acceptance 4. Contingency Buckets 5. Percentage Allocation 6. Management of Change Process 5

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress 1. CPM Network Development • Development of a credible and functionally accurate CPM network schedule • Project team “buy-in” • Characteristics of a Credible Schedule: – – – – Minimum 1 activity per Work Item-lowest level of WBS No open ends Activity durations should be no longer than the reporting period Constraints are minimized-contractual requirements only Develop a schedule basis document Ties should be Finish-to-Start (FS) Lags should be used at a minimum and no longer than five days. 6

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress 2. Duration Ranges • • • Part of developing the schedule is the determination of the activity durations. This is the step most often rushed through. 3 durations: optimistic, most likely, and pessimistic. Document Assumptions behind ranges. Neutralizes overly optimistic or pessimistic mindsets. Revisit assumptions several months after baseline established. – May need to transfer durations (ML to Ps. ) – May need to re-baseline schedule • • • ID 10 Description ML (OD) Ps. Op. Pour Concrete 5 12 3 Develop Activity List in Spreadsheet w/range. ML-OD & Ps. & Op. in custom data item columns. Flexibility for “What-If” or PERT Analysis 7

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress 3. Critical Path Validation & Acceptance • CP is the driving path to the project completion date. • The path needs to be realistic and accepted by the project team AND upper management • All assumptions on the critical path should be clearly documented and presented • The project will have two completion dates: – a finish date without contingency (the early date) – a finish date with contingency (the late date). • Paradigm shift for most companies, usually manage to only one finish date with no or “hidden” contingency 8

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress 4. Contingency Buckets • This step is based on the organizational structure of the project and the company. • Persons with decision making authority on project need to be assigned a contingency box. • These buckets are represented as activities in the scheduletied in series • The schedule will now have two finish dates: – the early target finish date, preceding the contingency – the late target finish date that succeeds the boxes. 9

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress 4. Contingency Buckets (Continued) + + + = *Calendar: 5 Day Work Week 10

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress 5. Percentage Allocation • Choose the % of Project Contingency to Allocate based on: – – – – • • The corporate risk culture Project risk management plan Monte Carlo Simulation (PERT) of the baseline schedule using the three durations “What-If” Scenarios using all 3 durations Benchmark Data from past projects “Cutting Edge Technology” vs. “Tried and True” Projects Length of Project Phase of Project Calculate contingency amount based on Total Duration of Longest Path x %PC Contingency distributed to each bucket. DOES NOT HAVE TO BE EQUALLY APPORTIONED. Early Finish and Late Finish Dates of Project Established and Constrained Project Float = Total duration of contingency activities 11

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress 5. Percentage Allocation • EF of Project=11/30/07 • 15% Project Contingency • 300 Day Project Duration • Contingency=45 days PM: 60% PGM: 30% PD: 10% “Drop Dead Date” 12

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress 6. Management of Change (MOC) • • MOC-Tool for Formal Float Distribution Two Components of MOC-Trend Monitoring and Change Management Trends are Monitored and Changes are Implemented. Trend Management – activity with positive float loses a portion each update – Extrapolate to determine when it will become critical – Mitigate before it becomes negative • • • Decision needs to be made on the % slippage of TF to become a trend. Trends become Changes when action is taken. Include MOC change forms with the updated schedule Assign specific codes to activities affected by changes. Project Controls Manager records the cost and schedule impacts of the change in the Change Register 13

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress 6. MOC - Change Management Negative Float Changes are Reviewed at the Weekly PM Meeting and 1 of 2 decisions made: 1. MITIGATE Negative Float-Early Finish Date Stays the Same – Change register needs to record: (1) how this mitigation will occur (overtime, additional resources, activity splitting, logic changes), (2) the cost impact, and (3) the responsible party – NO EASY SCHEDULE FIXES THAT WILL NEVER BE FOLLLOWED! OR 2. Use Contingency-Early Finish Date Increases/Late Finish Date Stays the Same • • • Extract duration from the 1 st contingency activity to bring the float back to 0. Document in MOC Register Late Finish Should ALWAYS Revert back to Original Late Finish Date (Contractual Finish Date) if there is Contingency Left 3. Use a combination of both mitigation and contingency allocation “Balancing Act”- Schedule Accounting 14

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress 6. MOC Procedure Implementation-Before Contingency Distribution 20 d to 25 d TF: 0 to -5 DELAY Original EF Date: 30 Nov 07 Original LF Date: 06 Feb 08 15

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress 6. MOC Procedure Implementation-After Contingency Distribution (1) New Early Finish Date = Old EF (30 Nov 07) + 5 Days (2) PM Contingency: -5 Days From 27 to 22 (3) Late Finish Date: Back to Original Late Finish Date 16

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress Contingency Allocation Process NO Duration Gone? Yes Yes PGM now involved in Contingency Distribution Contingency Allocation Process NO Director now involved in Contingency Distribution LF< EF Duration Gone? Total Float becomes negative Mitigate NO PM use Contingency or Mitigate? Contingency PM distributes Contingency from box Mitigate PGM use Contingency or Mitigate? Contingency PGM distributes Contingency from box Mitigate Director use Contingency or Mitigate? Mitigate or Change Contractual Completion Date Contingency Director distributes Contingency from box Finish 17

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress MOC Process - Example BEFORE CHANGE IMPLEMENTATION Identify Schedule float change Fill out Trend Form or Review at Weekly Status Meeting Record in Change or Trend Register Fill out Change Form Implement in Schedule & Cost Mgt System ≤ 7 cd Decision to Accelerate or Move Early Finish Date CO Register Originator Project Services Manager AFTER CHANGE IMPLEMENTATION Leadership Team Record actual cost & schedule impacts of change Schedule Cost Mgmt Sys 18

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress Difficulties in Implementation • “You will never have upper management buy-in to this implementation. ” • “It is difficult enough to come up with one duration and now you except three durations. ” • “The float is to be used on a first come first serve basis by the project. It is not fair to create a dictatorship where the PM or PGM distributes the float. ” • “It is not reasonable to expect negative float to be reduced in one reporting cycle. ” • “You will never get the contractors to participate. ” 19

AACE International’s 52 nd Annual Meeting & ICEC’s 6 th World Congress Conclusions • Float is managed at project level not activity level • Focus is on mitigating delays in a timely matter. • Float management using contingency activities is not only feasible, but realistic, being implemented on actual projects with success. • Key Elements to Total Float Management – Organizational buy-in – Realistically accurate baseline schedule – Strictly enforced MOC procedure that focuses on Trends and Changes 20