critical path method

Understanding the As Late As Possible (ALAP) Scheduling Option in Practical Terms

, , , , , , , , , ,
Understanding the As Late As Possible Scheduling Option in Practical Terms

Many project professionals have spent entire careers without ever using the As Late As Possible (ALAP) scheduling option, although the underlying idea feels familiar. Why? Because it’s very similar to the “just-in-time” concept widely used in manufacturing and logistics.

In materials management, just-in-time means having what you need arrive exactly when you need it, minimizing storage costs and reducing inventory. The same principle can apply to project labor, but with some important cautions.

The “Right Time” for Project Work

On development or design projects, doing work too early can be counterproductive. If designs change, early work may become obsolete, forcing costly rework. The “right time” to perform a task is often determined by schedule logic. In some cases, however, it can also be guided by the ALAP constraint.

Before we explore when ALAP makes sense, let’s quickly review the two primary constraint options in Microsoft Project (and most other scheduling tools).

ASAP – As Soon As Possible

As soon as possible:

  • Is the default setting for forward-scheduled projects (when you set a project start date).
  • Means tasks are pushed as early as possible, immediately after their predecessors finish.
  • Is ideal when you want the earliest possible completion and clear visibility into float/slack.

In an ASAP chain, every task begins at the earliest opportunity, pushing resources as far to the left as possible on the Gantt chart as illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1: As Soon As Possible Scheduling Option
Figure 1: As Soon As Possible Scheduling Option

ALAP – As Late As Possible

As late as possible:

  • Means tasks are scheduled as late as possible without delaying the successor or project finish date.
  • Is used in backward-scheduled projects (those planned from a fixed finish date) or when you want to defer work until the last responsible moment.
  • Microsoft Project automatically places each task at the latest feasible start date that still satisfies all constraints.

Switching a chain of tasks to 100% ALAP dramatically shifts all work to the right on the timeline as illustrated in Figure 2. The impact on management is significant: Every task now has zero total slack, which means any delay, even one day, directly delays the project finish. Multiple paths can appear “critical,” making control and reporting more complex.

Figure 2: As Late As Possible Scheduling Option
Figure 2: As Late As Possible Scheduling Option

When ALAP Makes Sense

There are legitimate reasons to use ALAP selectively. For example:

  • When a task consumes resources you don’t want engaged early (e.g., expensive equipment rental or specialized consultants).
  • For just-in-time deliveries or procurements where early completion has no benefit.
  • When modeling backward scheduling. For instance, working from a fixed delivery date toward today.
  • A mixed schedule. Mostly ASAP but with a few ALAP tasks can balance flexibility, cost control, and realism as illustrated in Figure 3.
Figure 3: A Schedule Using ALAP and ASAP
Figure 3: A Schedule Using ALAP and ASAP

A Real-World Example

One of H&A’s senior scheduling consultants once faced this exact dilemma while helping to prepare a multi-year, multi-billion-dollar defense proposal for a project with strict annual funding limits. 

With less than two weeks before the submission deadline, the Proposal Director was exasperated: “I keep asking the engineers what can be delayed! Why does everything have to happen up front? The front-loaded schedule is blowing our funding cap!”

A quick inspection revealed the problem: every task was set to ASAP. The entire effort was jammed toward the beginning of the timeline, creating a massive early demand for resources. After several failed attempts to persuade the engineers to move work later, the consultant proposed something unconventional: “Let’s flip the question. Instead of asking what can we delay, let’s ask what must be done now.”

The H&A scheduling consultant converted the entire schedule to ALAP, instantly shifting all work to the far right of the timeline. The resulting view inverted the problem, from overspending early to under-spending, and gave the team a new way to discuss priorities.

In meetings, engineers were asked to move tasks from ALAP to ASAP one at a time, stopping when the annual funding limit was reached. The discussion changed from “Why can’t we do this now?” to “What can we afford to do this year?”

The result wasn’t elegant, but it solved the immediate problem: the funding limits were clearly observed, the resource profile became manageable, and the trade-offs were visible to everyone.

How ALAP Affects Critical Path and Risk

Because ALAP tasks consume all available float, they appear critical even when they may not truly drive the project finish. This can obscure the actual critical path, making it difficult for project managers to distinguish between genuine schedule risks and artificial ones. In Earned Value Management (EVM) environments, this matters. Earned value metrics depend on knowing which tasks drive completion. Excessive use of ALAP can lead to misleading forecasts and distort DCMA data quality metrics such as the Total Float test and the Critical Path test. For this reason, auditors often recommend using ALAP sparingly and documenting the rationale wherever it’s applied. 

Note: in a sophisticated scheduling environment, it is possible to make a copy of the integrated master schedule (IMS) and revert to ASAP to look for critical paths in the normal sense.  

Combining ALAP with Other Constraints

In practice, project managers often use a blend of constraint types. For example, you can combine ALAP with “Must Finish On” or “Start No Earlier Than” dates to simulate external dependencies such as contract milestones, funding release dates, or material delivery windows. This hybrid approach allows the schedule to model reality while maintaining logical control. However, it’s important to track these constraints carefully. Too many “hard” constraints of any type can reduce the schedule’s dynamic nature and make automated forecasting less accurate.

Guidance from Industry and Agencies

Industry and government scheduling guides consistently advise restraint when using ALAP. The DCMA data quality tests consider the presence of ALAP tasks as a potential red flag because they can mask schedule float and obscure the true drivers of program completion. Similarly, the GAO’s Schedule Assessment Guide recommends minimizing artificial constraints and using logic-driven sequencing whenever possible. ALAP may be appropriate for modeling constrained resources or fixed delivery milestones, but it should always be justified and documented. Within DoD and NASA programs, reviewers often require clear evidence that ALAP usage is intentional, controlled, and limited to well-understood modeling cases. It should never be used as a workaround for poor sequencing.

Key Takeaways

  • ASAP emphasizes early starts, clear float visibility, and traditional forward scheduling.
  • ALAP emphasizes delayed starts, tighter resource control, and is useful in backward or funding-constrained planning.
  • Use ALAP sparingly and intentionally as it can obscure float and create multiple critical paths.
  • In creative problem-solving, toggling between ASAP and ALAP can reveal insights about timing, funding, and necessity that might otherwise remain hidden.

Final Thoughts

The ALAP constraint is a powerful but double-edged tool. It can simplify discussions about funding limits, resource phasing, and timing priorities, but it also carries risk if used indiscriminately. Like most features in commercial off the shelf (COTS) scheduling tools, its value depends on the user’s intent and discipline. The best project schedules blend logic, transparency, and flexibility. Understanding when to use ALAP (and when not to) can make the difference between a reactive plan and a truly managed one.

Interested in Learning How to Use More Advanced Scheduling Techniques?

Master schedulers skilled at asking the right questions to solve project management challenges hone their craft based on years of experience and working with other scheduling experts. There are always opportunities to learn more. H&A routinely offers basic, advanced, and tailored scheduling workshops taught by senior master schedulers with decades of experience in all types of project environments using common scheduling tools such as Microsoft Project and Oracle Primavera P6. Give us a call today to get started. 

Humphreys and Associates also offers basic and advanced EVMS training as well as tailored EVMS training that aligns with a client’s EVM System Description. 

Understanding the As Late As Possible (ALAP) Scheduling Option in Practical Terms Read Post »

Video Release – Assessing Schedule Risk Using Deltek’s Acumen Risk 6.1 | Part 2 of 2

, , , , , , , , , , ,

The conclusion of our review of the foundational elements of performing a schedule risk assessment (SRA) using Acumen Risk 6.1

0:17 – Risk Exposure Chart
1:03 – Tornado Chart
2:14 – Parting Thoughts

Read the blog post at:

Assessing Schedule Risk Using Deltek’s Acumen Risk 6.1 | Part 2 of 2

Video Release – Assessing Schedule Risk Using Deltek’s Acumen Risk 6.1 | Part 2 of 2 Read Post »

Video Release – Assessing Schedule Risk Using Deltek’s Acumen Risk 6.1 | Part 1 of 2

, , , , , , , , , , ,

 

How confident are you that your project will finish on time? Review the foundational elements of performing a schedule risk assessment (SRA) using Acumen Risk 6.1

2:22 – Schedule Health Diagnostics
4:55 – Duration Uncertainty
6:35 – Risk Events
8:20 – Simulation Process
 
Read the blog post at:

Assessing Schedule Risk Using Deltek’s Acumen Risk 6.1 | Part 1 of 2

Video Release – Assessing Schedule Risk Using Deltek’s Acumen Risk 6.1 | Part 1 of 2 Read Post »

Assessing Schedule Risk Using Deltek’s Acumen Risk 6.1 | Part 1 of 2

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Why Perform Schedule Risk Assessments? EVMS and Agile implementations within the same company or on the same project.

Before a project is ready to be baselined, a typical question the customer asks the project manager is, “How confident are you that the project will finish on time?”

This is a more difficult question than you might think.  In competitive environments, guessing is not an option.  The probability of success on a project must be quantified.  The risks that impact the odds for success must also be quantified.  If the risk is managed, the probability of completing the project on time and under budget is improved.

Customers are not blind to the importance of risk management.  This is evidenced by recent changes in government contracting requirements that call for formal risk assessments of project schedules.  Even if risk management were not a contractual requirement, it would be irresponsible for any project manager to ignore the need for risk management and proceed without identifying and assessing the project’s risks.

Schedule risk exists in every project.  This risk can be quantified, analyzed, and mitigated, or it can be ignored.  However, ignoring schedule risk does not make it go away.  Fortunately, there are advanced software tools, such as Deltek’s Acumen Risk, that can help model the expected impacts of risk in the schedule. Then, the answer to “how confident are you that the project will finish on time?” can be answered with quantifiable information.

In the following sections, a few of the foundational elements of performing a schedule risk assessment (SRA) using Acumen Risk 6.1 will be discussed.  The software was designed with the understanding that not everyone is an expert in schedule risk analysis.  The software provides beginners with an easy to follow path to perform in-depth schedule risk analysis as well as advanced features for experienced risk experts.

Along with quick start guides and help documentation, the menu structure is laid out like a schedule maturity timeline.  From left to right, the menu selections take one from the start-up steps of importing the schedule, to analyzing the schedule, assessing schedule risk, accelerating the schedule, and advanced customization features.

Deltek_Acumen-Top-Level_MenusDeltek Acumen – Top-Level Menus

 

Schedule Health Diagnostics

Before delving into schedule risk assessments, let’s take one minor detour from risk into schedule diagnostics.

Would you trust a broken watch to tell you the correct time?  The same goes for a schedule risk assessment.  A broken schedule network cannot be trusted to yield reliable, and therefore actionable, SRA results.

The National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) Integrated Program Management Division (IPMD) Planning & Scheduling Excellence Guide (PASEG), is widely regarded as one of the premier references on scheduling best practices.  The PASEG was created by a joint team of both government and industry scheduling experts, thus it has no particular point of view to promote or defend.  One of the scheduling best practices the PASEG discusses is that the integrated master schedule (IMS) should be validated before any SRA is performed.  “Validated” means that the tasks, logic, durations, constraints, and lags in the IMS should be analyzed and corrected as necessary.

Acumen Fuse provides a complete set of schedule diagnostics.  When I first clicked on the “Diagnostics” tab, I saw an initial set of metrics.

EVMS: Acumen Fuse Schedule diagnostics

Each one of these metrics was applied to the project’s timeline that which makes it easy to see both where and when the issues occur.  What I did not notice at first was that these metrics were just one subset; I was only looking at the “Schedule Quality” subset of the diagnostics.  There were similar subsets in the areas of Logic, Duration, Constraints, Float, and the DCMA 14-point Schedule Assessment, just to name a few.  All of these diagnostic tests can be modified to reflect your company or customer’s standards.

Before leaving the topic of schedule health, there are a few words of caution.  No matter how useful a schedule analysis tool may be, there is no substitute for the task managers taking ownership of the IMS and ensuring that it is in good working order.  For example, analysis software can be used to check to determine if a task has a predecessor and a successor, but only someone familiar with the effort can determine if a task has the “correct” predecessor and successor.  Analysis software is becoming more and more sophisticated, but people still control the success or failure of the project.

Duration Uncertainty

Once a sound schedule has been developed, the next foundational elements of an SRA are the duration uncertainty estimates.  There are two widely accepted methods of assigning duration uncertainty.

The preferred and more precise method is to obtain three-point duration estimates (best case, worst case, and most likely) from the task owners.  At a minimum, this should be performed on all critical and near-critical tasks (and driving and near-driving tasks supporting significant events).  For larger schedule networks, it may not be reasonable to gather this type of information for every task.  If custom three-point estimates are not available, templated duration uncertainty could be applied based on the type of work, the task owner, historical performance, or any other applicable task characteristic.

Acumen Risk handles both methods very easily.  Custom three-point estimates can be entered for each task in days (or hours), or as a percentage of the current remaining duration of the task.  Standard duration uncertainty templates are easily applied to a task by selecting the appropriate risk level on the calibration bar.  To streamline the process, by setting the calibration at any summary level, the uncertainty template is cascaded down to all the “children” tasks.

Description. Calibration.

Risk Events

One thing traditional Critical Path Method (CPM) networks do poorly is model unexpected results.  For example, if there is a 90% success rate on fatigue testing, the IMS will generally be constructed to assume the test will be successful, with no disruption to downstream tasks.

EVMS: Critical Path Method

But what happens if the test fails?  While unlikely, there is still a very real possibility that the results will be unfavorable.  If the test does return unfavorable results, there will likely be a significant delay while re-work is performed in the areas of design, build and test.  A traditional CPM network can model a successful test or an unsuccessful test, but not both.  This is not a problem with a schedule risk assessment.  Information from the project’s risk register can be used to model the likelihood of a test failure, as well as the consequence, or delay to downstream tasks resulting from that failure.

EVMS: CPM Risk Events Consequence

Is this an acceptable risk?  An SRA can quantify the risk and provide information on the likelihood of successful deliveries.  Acumen does not stop there though.  One of its newest features is to organize and track all risk events within its built-in risk register, as well as to track the steps being taken to help mitigate that risk.  Or, if your organization already maintains an external risk register in Excel, it can be imported into Acumen to eliminate the duplicate tracking of risk events.  Whether the risk register is imported from Excel or built from scratch within Acumen, a single risk event can then be mapped to one or more activities, or a single activity can be associated with one or more risk events.

EVMS: risk registers 

 

Simulation ProcessEVMS: Simulation Process

A typical SRA uses Monte Carlo techniques to simulate hundreds or thousands of potential project outcomes using the risks and uncertainties that have been supplied.

For most users, simply accepting the default settings and pushing the “Run Risk Analysis” button would be sufficient.  But if terms like “Convergence”, “Correlation Coefficient”, “Central Limits Theorem” and “Seed Value” are part of your normal working environment, Acumen provides a variety of settings that can be customized to tune the SRA to best model your project.

No matter which approach you take, the Acumen toolset provides a quick and easy simulation process.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What to Expect in Part 2

Part 2 of this blog will delve into the interpretation of SRA results.

 

Yancy Qualls, PSP

Engagement Director, Schedule Subject Matter Expert (SME)

Humphreys & Associates, Inc.

Assessing Schedule Risk Using Deltek’s Acumen Risk 6.1 | Part 1 of 2 Read Post »

Scroll to Top