Scheduling

Earned Value and Negative Float

Earned Value and Negative FloatQuick.  What do Bankers, Ship Captains and Program Managers have in common?  Answer: They all want to address negative float issues in a timely manner.

While those of us working in program management are not concerned so much with a ship’s ability to stay afloat or financial maneuvers, we should be concerned with earned value and negative float in the schedules.  It is an important warning sign that one or more of the Program’s schedule goals cannot be met with the current plan.

As described above, the term ‘negative float’ has different meaning to different people even within the project management community.  To be precise, the term refers to a property assigned to each task or milestone in the schedule called Total Float, or Total Slack in Microsoft Project.  The values in the property usually represent days and are assigned as a result of a scheduling analysis run.  These numbers can be positive, zero or a negative number of days:

  1. For tasks with positive numbers assigned to the Total Float property, the tasks can be slipped by that number of days before impacting a milestone or the end of the project.
  2. When the task Total Float value is zero, the task cannot slip at all.  Conditions 1 and 2 should be the norm, with all tasks having zero or higher total float values.  If the schedule were well constructed, has realistic task durations and includes all discrete scope, the schedule indicates the project has a good plan in place to achieve its goals, albeit contractual or internal.
  3. When tasks have negative float values, the schedule is sounding an alarm.    Tasks with negative float values indicate probable failure to meet one or more completion goals.  These goals are represented in the schedule as date constraints assigned to tasks or more preferably, milestones. These date constraints represent necessary delivery deadlines in the schedule and if the current schedule construct is unable to meet those delivery deadlines, negative float is generated on every task that is linked in that potential failure.  The more tasks with negative float, and the larger the negative float values on those tasks, the more unrealistic the schedule has become.

If the schedule contains tasks with negative float, the first step is to quantify it. This can be performed in the tool using filters or grouping by float values.  Analysis tools, such as Deltek’s FUSE, Steelray or the DCMA’s new Compliance Interpretive Guide (CIG), are used to evaluate contractor delivered data and provide metrical analysis to Auditors prior to a review.  The tolerance threshold in the CIG (current nickname ‘Turbo’), as in all schedule analysis tools, is 0 (zero) percent of tasks with negative float.

Once identified, the next step is to determine the cause of the issue(s).  Because negative float is generated by a date constraint in the schedule, if the end point can be determined, then the predecessors can be identified that are forcing the slip to the end point.  One of the easiest ways to do this is to group the schedule by float and sort by finish date.  This is because most of the string of tasks that push a task/milestone with a delivery date constraint share the same float values; look for those groups of tasks with the same negative float values.

The final step is to take action.  Planners, CAMs and their managers should meet and collaborate to determine the cause and options available to solve the issues.  These meetings should result in a corrective action plan to solve the problem. In general, there are five options available to the program team:

  1. Change durations – if the negative float leading up to a delivery point were low, perhaps additional resources assigned to those tasks may help reduce the durations of the activities and relieve the negative float issues.  It is important to understand that reducing durations just to avoid a bad metric reading for negative float is just putting off the issue until the ultimate surprise is delivered; a delay in delivery, and all the pain associated with that delay (penalties, lost award fees, lost business if consistently late, etc).
  2. Change relationships – perhaps some tasks may be run in parallel instead of in series. A review of all the logic contributing to the negative float condition should be performed and adjustments should be made only if they make sense.
  3. Review date constraints in the Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) – for example, if subcontractors could deliver product earlier, that could also help solve the issue. If waiting for customer-provided equipment or information, perhaps the effort can be accelerated to relieve the stress on the schedule.
  4. Consume Schedule Margin – If there is still negative float leading up to a major contract event or contract completion, and if all of the above options have been exhausted, the PM has the option to use a portion of the Schedule Margin to relieve the negative float pressure leading up to the milestone.  If the Schedule Margin were represented by a bar, it means decrementing the forecast duration of the bar.  If the Schedule Margin were represented as a milestone, the date constraint on that milestone can be changed to a later point in time, but not later that the contractual delivery date assigned to it.
  5. Ask for relief – if, after all processes above have been completed and the schedule still has negative float indicating an inability to meet schedule deadlines, it is time to have a discussion with the customer.  It is usually better to have these bad news discussions earlier rather than later when there is still time to implement work-around or corrective action plans.  The customer has been reading the same schedule and may have helpful suggestions to solve the problems or could potentially provide contractual relief for the delivery dates.   As a last resort, the contractor can inform the customer and seek concurrence that an Over Target Schedule (OTS)* should be instituted to relieve the schedule condition and a more realistic schedule developed.  This is an option of last resort and should not be taken lightly unless all of the other options have been thoroughly explored. *See our blog: Is it OTB/OTS Time or Just Address the Variances?
    .

Summary

The definition of a schedule is a time phased plan that defines what work must be done, and when, in order to accomplish the project objectives on time. Earned value and negative float is a condition in the schedule that indicates the project will be unable to meet one or more of its objectives. It should not be ignored, or worse, marginalized with slap-dash tricks to get rid of it such as deleting relationships or reducing durations to zero.

Instead, negative float should be quantified, analyzed and addressed with a corrective action plan which includes steps and follow-up reviews to ensure adequate remediation of the problem.  It is a zero tolerance metric with most customers and, if not addressed internally, will most likely be identified by the customer for action.

Contact Humphrey’s & Associates, Inc. with questions or information on how to set up a corrective action plan for earned value and negative float. 

Earned Value and Negative Float Read Post »

Executive Level Schedules: Humphreys & Associates Methodology for Top Level Program Schedule Road-Mapping

Humphreys & Associates IPMRMethodology for Top Level Program Schedule Road-Mapping

The lack of a useful, concise, easily understood top level plan for a project is an issue that our consultants have repeatedly noted. It is way past time for the adoption of more useful and understandable executive level schedules. Having a distinctive top level plan linked to the lower level Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) planning can help differentiate one approach or one project from another.

With the advent of modern scheduling software such as Microsoft Project or Primavera, we have been assisting clients in developing more and more complex Integrated Master Schedules. However, a bigger and more complex IMS does not make the project plan any more accessible or understandable. In fact, it makes having an attractive and useful top level schedule more important.

The Data Item Description (DID) that governs the IMS, the Integrated Program Management Report (IPMR) DI-MGMT-81861, requires a Summary Master Schedule and describes it as:

3.7.1.3.2 Summary Master Schedule. A top-level schedule of key tasks/activities and milestones at the summary level which can be sorted by either the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) or IMP structure (if applicable). It shall be a vertically integrated roll up of the intermediate and detailed levels within the IMS.

The Planning & Scheduling Excellence Guide (PASEG) developed by the NDIA Program Management Systems Committee is a wonderful resource for schedulers. The guide discusses the Summary Master Schedule in a way that avoids specifying it is to be sorted either by WBS or by Integrated Master Plan (IMP) the way the data item description does. It also does not describe the top level as a roll up.  The PASEG describes the Summary Master Schedule as:

Summary Master Schedule – The Summary Master Schedule is ideally a one (1)-page schedule and may also be called a Master Phasing Schedule (MPS), Master Plan or Summary Schedule. As the highest, least detailed schedule, the program’s summary master schedule highlights the contract period of performance, program milestones, and other significant, measurable program events and phases.

The Program Team initially develops the program summary master schedule from the analysis of requirements data during the pre-proposal phase and similar past program efforts. The program team review and approve the program’s top-level schedule, which serves as a starting point in the Top Down planning approach (See Top Down vs. Bottom up Planning). This process continues until contract award to include any changes caused by contract negotiations.

Key components of summary master schedules could include significant items from the following list:

    • Key elements of contract work
    • Test articles
    • Deliverable hardware, software, and documentation
    • GFE/customer-furnished equipment deliveries
    • Key program and customer milestones/events over the life of the contract
    • Subcontract elements

The PASEG further describes the process for developing the Summary Schedule. H&A agrees that this process is the effective one for creating an executable plan. The process makes the top level summary schedule even more important. The process outlined by the PASEG is:

    1. Read and understand the RFP.
    2. Make a high level plan to meet the requirements of the RFP.
    3. Use the high level plan to guide the top-down development of the IMS. This includes building the milestones that represent the Integrated Master Plan (IMP) events, accomplishments, and criteria.
    4. Validate lower level planning back against the top down plan.

In addition to the Data Item Description and the PASEG, H&A suggests that the Summary Schedule have some specific attributes that make it useful. It should be:

    1. Complete – show the key milestones and the entire project top to bottom and across time at a level of condensation that makes sense and is natural to the project.
    2. Easy to read – graphically it should portray the plan in a visually pleasing way that is easy to read.
    3. Easy to follow – flowing from left to right and top to bottom in a sequence that follows the progression of the work of the project.
    4. Self-explanatory – it should tell the story of the project even if adding notes are needed to make the story stand out.

Because the graphics in the IMS tools do not provide those attributes, H&A most often sees clients building some sort of “cartoon” plan, manually drawn in Excel or PowerPoint, and used during the proposal phase until the IMS can be considered solid enough to start using the roll up in the IMS as a Summary Schedule. The problem with this approach is that it is not linked electronically to the IMS; it is not part of the IMS and the data in the two can easily become different.

 The maintenance of the cartoon version is continued in some cases or abandoned. When it is continued it involves labor effort to draw and redraw the plan based on changes and updates. Often the cartoon is abandoned and the roll up approach from the IMS tool takes over. At this point the top level executive type schedule no longer exists and the project plan is no longer readily accessible.

One of the main benefits of having an executive level summary schedule is that the program manager and team can easily tell the story of the project in a one page, coherent, easily understandable plan; and with the proposed methodology this summary schedule is linked to the IMS so the two do not become separated.

Looking at the two examples of a master schedule for the same project shown below, it is apparent that the first one is from Microsoft Project; it has the roll up look and feel to it. The summary bars do not really provide much information other than to indicate there is more information below.

The other example from the H&A methodology is a top level schedule that tells the story of the project in a form that flows the way the project does. It may be in WBS or OBS order but those may not be natural to the flow of the project.  This example is grouped in the order that displays the evolution of the project the way the team thinks of the project. The tie to the underlying IMS is built into the plan. Each milestone or bar on the top level represents one or more tasks within the IMS so a user can find the identification of the corresponding work in the depths of the IMS when needed.

Gantt Chart with Project Tasks
Click image to enlarge
Humphreys & Associates Road Map Chart
Humphreys & Associates Road Map Chart – click image to enlarge

H&A now has developed a methodology supported by commercially available software that follows the guidance of the NDIA Planning & Scheduling Excellence Guide (PASEG) and provides the ease of use and executive level visibility needed in a top level schedule. Now a project can have a useful and demonstrative top level schedule that drives the top down planning effort as recommended in the PASEG.

This methodology was recently used successfully in the aerospace industry to develop the top level executive schedule view that drove the planning of a proposed multi-billion dollar project and to tell the story of the proposed project convincingly. The benefits perceived in that instance were:

  • Enhanced communication with the customer – the story could readily be told on one page.
  • Enhanced communication with company executives – they could easily see what was being planned by the proposal team.
  • Top down planning from the proposal leadership into the Integrated Product Teams (IPTs) early in the proposal process when it counted most and kept all the teams focused on the same plan – everyone knew the plan.
  • Establishment of the System Engineering approach and the Technical/Program reviews as the key points in the plan.
  • Top down electronically linked planning into the Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) so that the development of the 5000 line proposed project schedule could be compared upward to constantly verify that the developing plan would support the top level plan.
  • Establishment of time-fences that alert proposal leadership when lower level plans were moving away from established time goals.
  • Rapid effective translation of the developing IMS into the understandable project plan – especially useful in planning meetings within the proposal teams.
  • Because the top level is linked to the lower level, it can be used in meetings to rapidly isolate and find sections of the lower level IMS relating to a particular topic – no more paging, filtering, and searching for a particular area of the project’s  IMS.
  • Proposal quality graphics that did not require artists or artwork to tell the story.

To learn more about the H&A top level project road-map methodology and other EVMS topics, visit our website or call us to discuss your project.  

Humphreys & Associates 35+ years in the EVM community

Executive Level Schedules: Humphreys & Associates Methodology for Top Level Program Schedule Road-Mapping Read Post »

Scroll to Top