Best Practice 9 - Updating the Schedule Using Actual Progress and Logic
In Best Practice 9, we discuss statusing the schedule and how it generally takes the form of updating either activity durations or work. Updating an activity’s actual and remaining duration is the most common method of recording progress because it is the easiest to do; however, duration updates can be easily misconstrued. Because an update is in terms of activity duration, it denotes the passage of time from the start date, not the amount of work performed. Some program managers may wish to update work by resources to track actual effort. This practice takes more time than updating duration but provides better forecasts of remaining effort.
EVM Guidelines 7 and 22 address statusing the schedule and measuring performance. Under EVM, updating activity status requires identifying objective measures for use in statusing activity progress. Using objective measures, rather than updating durations, allows for measuring work accomplished and permits an accurate comparison to the work planned. These measures allow for developing variances that provide visibility into project performance that helps the project manager properly focus attention on areas requiring improvement. The three types of measure are discrete effort, level of effort, and apportioned effort. Discrete effort measures are used with tasks that can be directly measured and are related to the completion of specific end products. Some discrete effort methods are described in table 8.
Table 8: Seven Measures of Effort
| Method | Description |
|---|---|
| 0/100 | No performance is taken until a task is finished |
| 50/50, 25/75, etc. | Half the earned value is taken when the task starts, the other half when it is finished; other percentage combinations can be used |
| Percentage complete | Performance is measured by percentage of work completed. This should be based on underlying, quantifiable measures as much as possible (e.g., number of drawings completed) and can be measured by the statusing of the resource loaded schedule. The percentage complete for each work package is the cumulative value of the work accomplished to date divided by the total value of the work package |
| Weighted milestone | Performance is taken as defined milestones are accomplished; objective milestones (weighted by importance) are established monthly, and the budget is divided by milestone weights; as milestones are completed, value is earned |
| Units complete | Performance is measured by counts of similar products. This method is used in construction and manufacturing |
| Equivalent units | Performance is taken for completed units or the fractional equivalent of completed full units. This method is used in construction and manufacturing |
Source: DOD | PMI | GAO-16-89G
As described in Best Practice 1, level-of-effort activities are related to the passage of time and have no physical products or defined deliverables. One example is program management.
Apportioned effort is effort that by itself is not readily divisible into short-span work packages but is related in direct proportion to an activity or activities with discrete measured effort. Apportioned effort work packages can be defined as discrete work packages, but apportioned effort tasks are unique because they are closely dependent on another discrete work package. Examples include quality control (QC) responsibilities associated with pipefitting or pouring concrete. These QC activities should be hammocked with their related activities, and their earned value should be based on the related activities’ earned value.
Additional discussion of objective measures for earned value is in Chapter 18 of the GAO Cost Guide. The auditor should be able to clearly understand how earned value is being calculated and whether the method used is appropriate for adequate statusing of the true effort performed.