W2.1_PieroAnticona_Pros and Cos of using Discretionary Logic vs Hard or Physical Logic

1)      Step 1- Problem or Opportunity Statement-
 When working on scheduling, the schedule should reflect the reality of execution. As an example, when elaborating a working plan, one package is the submission of 25 weekly reports, one per week. The plan was that once finished a weekly report the next one could start. What logic is recommended when deliverables have to be submitted with a certain frequency and they depend on one to another?
What are the pros and cons of using each logic?  
See below Schedule Baseline

1)      Step 2 – Feasible Alternatives

The literature mentions the following types of logic:

1. Soft Logic

Soft Logic or Preferential logic is an expected sequence of activities that might be execute in a different way. It reflects management’s plan but the logic does not reflect what really happens for execution.

2. Hard Logic

Hard logic is when a sequence of activities must occur regardless of preference. More often involves physical limitations, contractual dates or restrictions.

          
         We are going to assume that weekly reports require two resources. 

2)      Step 3- Develop the outcomes for each alternative
     
    1. Soft Logic

     - Resource Chart when activities are not being done sequentially

     - Cost

    2. Hard Logic

    - Resource Chart when activities are being done sequentially

    - Cost

4)      Step 4- Selection of the acceptable criteria.
       The following attributes will be considered for the selection criteria:

-       Not overload use of a resource

-       Less cost for the sequence of activities

5)      Step 5- Compare the outcomes from each alternative analysis done in Step 3 against the minimum acceptable criteria from Step 4.
      

Results
Soft Logic
We can see in the chart at week 2, resource Piero exceeds hours available when soft logic is used. This also reflects a cost overrun
The same happens to Resource PDG in week 2.  Also, Cost Overrun
Hard Logic
We can see that if activities delay, then it will be an impact on time because activities will be delayed as previous activity. No cost overrun for this sequence. Not overload of resource. 

6)      Step 6- Selection of the “best”.

Based on results that meet acceptable criteria, Hard Logic shows that a delay will not produce an overload of resource and not cost overrun.
     Therefore, it is recommended that for this sequence of activities it is better to use a hard logic, which reflects a real situation in projects. A weekly report cannot start if the previous progress report cannot fix the previous week progress in order to determine the progress of the period.      
    
     Regarding the characteristics of weekly reports in real situations, we can conclude that the best option is to use a hard logic for this type of deliverables.

7)      Step 7- How to plan on tracking/reporting on the recommended choice. 

A good plan to track which logic we should use to reflect reality is to do simulations or analysis "what if" to determine if our schedule shows a real situation based on scheduler experience or best practices in construction.  

8)      REFERENCES.

Guild of Project Controls Compendium and Reference (CaR). (2015, November 01). M07-4_create_the_logical_relationships__sequence_activities_-_rev_1.02.pdf  

GAO (United States Governance Accountability Office), 2015, GAO-16-89G Schedule Assessment Guide. Appendix III: Standard Quantitative Measurements for Assessing Schedule Health. Pages 184-189

Project Schedule Management. (2017). In Project Management Institute (Ed.), A Guide to the PROJECT MANAGEMENT BODY OF KNOWLEDGE: (PMBOK® guide) (6th ed., p. 191). Newtown Square, Pennsylvania: Project Management Institute.

W2_PieroAnticona_Pros and Cos of using Discretionary Logic vs Hard or Physical Logic

1)      Step 1- Problem or Opportunity Statement-
     When working on scheduling, the schedule should reflect the reality of execution. When elaborating my working plan, one package is the submission of 25 weekly reports, one per week. The plan was that once finished a weekly report I could start the next one. What happened when I wanted to see the late dates of my schedule? All the weekly reports moved to the end, and they were not linked sequentially as I expected. 
     Was this a good use of soft logic? What is the recommendation when deliverables have to be submitted with a certain frequency and they depend on one to another? 

1)      Step 2 – Feasible Alternatives

The literature mentions the following types of logic:
    1. Soft Logic
    2. Hard Logic

2)      Step 3- Develop the outcomes for each alternative
      1. Soft Logic

      Soft Logic or Preferential logic is an expected sequence of activities that might be executed in a different way. It reflects management’s plan but the logic does not reflect what really happens for execution.

     

      2. Hard Logic

      Hard logic is when a sequence of activities must occur regardless of preference. More often involves physical limitations, contractual

4)      Step 4- Selection of the acceptable criteria.
       The following attributes will be considered for the selection criteria
       -       Mandatory
       -       Discretional

5)      Step 5- Compare the outcomes from each alternative analysis done in Step 3 against the minimum acceptable criteria from Step 4.
       -          Mandatory: Are the weekly reports dependent on each other?
       -          Discretional: Can we do weekly reports in a different way that they do not depend on each other?

6)      Step 6- Selection of the “best”.
      For the selection of best logic, we must answer the questions and see what solutions fit our purpose to reflect what happens in a real execution of activities.
      
     -    Mandatory: Are the weekly reports dependent on each other?
          Yes. Most reports and especially weekly reports require analyzing tendencies and performance for each period of reporting. For that reason, it is mandatory to deliver a report each period agreed contractually or requested by management. In real situations, a weekly report cannot start if the previous progress of work has not been approved. Otherwise, the following report cannot fix the previous week progress in order to determine the progress of the period.

      -   Discretional: Can we do weekly reports in a different way that they do not depend on each other? 
          No. In case of delays, you have to put a lot of effort or resources (which might not be available) to complete each period of reporting required. Otherwise, you should agree with your internal or external client if the period of the report can be different from requested. Therefore, this means a change order in your contract if you were requested to deliver a certain frequency. This is also not recommendable because then it is difficult to compare with historical data for a different periods of reporting.
      
    
     Regarding the characteristics of weekly reports in real situations, we can conclude that the best option is to use a mandatory logic for a type of deliverables.

7)      Step 7- How to plan on tracking/reporting on the recommended choice. 

An option to track if mandatory logic has been used is to document in a Basis of Schedule the type of logic used for this type of activities and also to identify what contractual requirements are for this type of deliverables.

8)      REFERENCES.

Guild of Project Controls Compendium and Reference (CaR). (2015, November 01). M07-4_create_the_logical_relationships__sequence_activities_-_rev_1.02.pdf  

GAO (United States Governance Accountability Office), 2015, GAO-16-89G Schedule Assessment Guide. 

Project Schedule Management. (2017). In Project Management Institute (Ed.), A Guide to the PROJECT MANAGEMENT BODY OF KNOWLEDGE: (PMBOK® guide) (6th ed., p. 191). Newtown Square, Pennsylvania: Project Management Institute..

W1 - Piero_Anticona_Pros&Cons of Hiding Contingency

1)      Step 1- Problem or Opportunity Statement-

Public Capital Projects are not excluded from uncertain events which when they occurred, they create overruns. Public companies are restricted by the fact that they can do a risk assessment and register risk or opportunities and implement a risk management process but they cannot include a contingency in the project budget. Therefore, when money is required project managers have to justify a budget increase and start over a process to ask for funds when in other projects that have a contingency, they only have to activate a change management process for use of contingency. What are the advantages or having contingency approved in the budget or ask for funds when required?

The following post will analyze the Pros and Cons of Hiding Contingency.

  

1)      Step 2 – Feasible Alternatives

The following options will be taken into consideration:

1.       Do not include contingency

2.       Include Contingency

                                                               i.      Include it and show it and put it in a contingency project account

                                                             ii.      Include it but Bury it in project accounts

2)      Step 3- Develop the outcomes for each alternative

1.       Do not include contingency

·   Less Probability to Meet Budget

·   No money allocated

·   Needs the approval to ask for funds

·   Strong Monitoring of Risk Management Plan

·   Involve more people in making decisions

·   Not so easy to shift or transfer money into accounts

2.       Include Contingency

                                                               i.      Include it and show it and put it in a contingency project account

·         Less Probability to Meet Budget

·         The tendency to Use Buffers

·         Needs to activate process for request use of contingency

·         Weak Monitoring of Risk Management Plan

·         Fewer people to make a decision

·         Easy to Shift to Project Account Required

                                                             ii.      Include it but Bury it in project accounts

·         More Probable to Meet Budget

·         Buffer ignored

·         Do not need the approval to use it

·         Weak Monitoring of Risk Management Plan

·         No people needed to make decisions

·         No need to shift

3)      Step 4- Selection of the acceptable criteria.

The following attributes will be considered as the selection criteria

a.       Reliability

b.       Accuracy

c.       People Involved

d.       The effort to Monitor Risk

e.       Allocation

4)      Step 5- Compare the outcomes from each alternative analysis done in Step 3 against the minimum acceptable criteria from Step 4.

We are going to use Multi-Attribute Decision Making methods.

Non Compensatory Models

1.       Dominance

Conclusion

Nothing is eliminated. Buried dominates Buffer. The buffer could be the best choice.

2.       Satisficing

Conclusion

Nothing is already eliminated, Buried could be unacceptable. Therefore Buffer satisfies as the best choice

3.       Lexicography

Conclusion

Buried better than Buffer

Compensatory Models

1.       Non Dimensional Scaling

2.       The additive weighting technique

       

5)      Step 6- Selection of the “best”.
       Buried Contingency is 4 out of 6 models a better choice.

6)      Step 7- How to plan on tracking/reporting on the recommended choice. 

This approach needs to be documented to avoid that a new member of a team or for some reason persons who knew about this who left the project, know about this approach.

A Plan on tracking this is the best choice is to establish an adequate frequency in assessing a contingency in order to do not drawdown contingency and then reallocate it again.                                                            

7)      REFERENCES.

Guild of Project Controls. (2016, January 05). 08.0 Managing Cost Estimating & Budgeting. Retrieved September 15, 2018, from http://www.planningplanet.com/guild/gpccar/conducting-a-cost-risk-analysis

Sullivan, W. G., Wicks, E. M., & Koelling, C. P. (2012). Decision making Considering Multiattribute. In Engineering Economy (15th ed.). Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited.

GAO Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide- Best Practices for Developing and Managing Capital Program Costs. Page 6-7.