Best Practice 9: Updating the Schedule Using Logic and Progress

Key Questions

  1. Is progress recorded regularly? Has the schedule been updated recently as planned? Is the status date recorded?

  2. Is at least one in-progress activity critical?

  3. Do any activities have start or finish dates in the past without actual start or finish dates? Do any activities have actual start or finish dates in the future?

  4. Is responsibility for changing or statusing the schedule assigned to someone who has the proper training and experience in CPM scheduling?

  5. Were any activities started or completed out of sequence? If so, was the logic retained, or did the scheduler use progress override?

  6. Does a schedule narrative accompany each status update and include the following?

    1. the status of key milestone dates, including the program finish date;

    2. the status of key hand-offs or giver/receiver dates;

    3. explanations for any changes in key dates;

    4. changes in network logic, including lags, date constraints, and relationship logic and their effect on the schedule time;

    5. a description of the critical paths, near-critical paths, and longest paths along with a comparison to the previous period’s paths; and

    6. a description of any significant scheduling software options that changed between update periods, such as the criticality threshold for total float, progress override versus retained logic and whether resource assignments are progressed along with duration.

  7. Is the schedule structure examined after each update to ensure that no logic is missing, constraints are necessary, and no activities impede the ability of the schedule to dynamically forecast dates?

Key Documentation

  1. The schedule narrative.

  2. The schedule shows actual and planned dates, remaining duration for in-process activities, and the status date.

  3. Copies of program management review (PMR) briefings are available to verify whether schedule status is discussed and consistent with the schedule.

Likely Effects If Criteria Are Not Fully Met

  1. If the schedule is not continually monitored to determine when forecasted completion dates differ from planned dates, then it cannot be used to determine whether schedule variances will affect downstream work.

  2. Maintaining the integrity of the schedule logic is not only necessary to reflect true status but also required before conducting a schedule risk analysis. If the schedule has not been updated, then it is impossible to tell what activities have been completed, are in progress, are late, and are planned to start on time.

  3. A schedule that has not been updated will not reflect what is actually occurring on the program and hence may have inaccurate completion dates and critical paths. When this is the case, management cannot use the schedule to monitor progress and make decisions regarding risk mitigation, resource allocations, and so on.

  4. Unless a status date is provided, the schedule cannot be used to reliably convey effort spent and remaining.

  5. An out-of-sequence activity causes degradation of the schedule and requires addressing. A schedule with progress remaining out of sequence may have the wrong logic in place and, hence, inaccurate critical paths and completion dates.

  6. If unfinished work remains in the past, the schedule no longer represents a realistic plan to complete the program, and team members will lose confidence in the model.

  7. At least one in-progress activity is critical. If not, it is most likely that date constraints or external dependencies are separating successor activities from in-progress activities. Such breaks in the critical or longest path represent weak or incomplete logic, causing a lack of credibility in the identity of the path and the schedule dates.

  8. Without a documented, consistently applied schedule change control process, program staff might continually revise the schedule to match performance, hindering the program manager’s insight into the true performance of the program. Good documentation helps with analyzing changes in the program schedule and identifying the reasons for variances between estimates and actual results, thereby contributing to the collection of cost, schedule, and technical data that can be used to support future estimates.

  9. Unless the schedule is kept updated, trend reports and analyses that highlight problems will not be useful in mitigating future delays.

  10. Unless progress records are archived, historical data necessary for resource, work, and productivity assumptions for future analogous programs will not be available. If sufficient attention is paid to recording the way work is performed, the resulting archived data will help improve the accuracy and quality control of future similar programs.