Large project schedules can be complex and hard to follow. Projects lose value when project managers, leadership, or other stakeholders cannot understand the stories that these schedules are telling. Join Alexander Neary, Product Manager at PMA Consultants, for a demonstration of how PMA Technologies’ latest innovations can save contractors and owners significant time and make the critical insights on complex projects more understandable. We will demonstrate how schedulers — together with their stakeholders — can make real-time visual adjustments to a multi-thousand-activity schedule in just seconds, enabling better decision-making, communication, and a shared understanding within project teams. This presentation includes a live demo of the latest scheduling software developments and updates on the product roadmaps. 

Seve Ponce de Leon  

Mr. Seve Ponce de Leon leads product management for innovation and software at PMA Consultants. He has over 10 years of experience, including UI/UX, user research, QA testing, Agile methodologies, product strategy, product marketing, planning, scheduling, and risk management. Mr. Ponce de Leon earned a bachelor of science degree from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. 

Alexander Neary  

Mr. Alexander Neary is an experienced project manager with a background in team coordination and management of project tracking processes. He has supported a portfolio of projects in the electric utilities and software industries. Serving as Senior Project Manager, Mr. Neary provided budget and resource management oversight for five-year capital upgrade plans and led directors and managers to overhaul and standardize internal project tracking processes. He has performed in a mentorship role for newly hired project managers and applied Agile project management techniques to lead and manage team members. His software skills include Atlassian Software Suite (JIRA), Microsoft Suite, Infusionsoft CRM, and Primavera P6. 

Gerald Rosario  

Mr. Gerald Rosario is a licensed professional Civil Engineer with 25 years of experience in program and construction management for major international design and construction projects. He is currently the Deputy Resident Engineer for the P-381 Multi-Mission Dry Dock #1 project at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard. Mr. Rosario is experienced in critical path method (CPM), graphical path method (GPM) scheduling and analysis, project controls applications, and risk analysis. He has advised on FIDIC conditions of contract; identified root causes for delays and disputes; and implemented mitigation measures for procedural contract administration and execution issues.  

Q&A

This presentation dispels the notion of the elusive as-built critical path and introduce the concept of the algorithmic as-built schedule. As demonstrated at the PMI Global Congress 2010, the as-built critical path is alive and well, left of the data date. With the primacy accorded to the as-built schedule, analysts may welcome the addition of the algorithmic as-built alternative, sourced from the fully progressed update, in revisions of RP 29R-03, the SCL Protocol, and ASCE 67-17. 

Dr. Gui Ponce de Leon 

Dr. Ponce de Leon is recognized as one of our nation’s foremost planning and scheduling subject matter experts. His broad professional experience includes executive and senior roles as investor’s developer, program manager, construction manager, and EPC contractor planner/scheduler. He continually pioneers innovations in project management and has written widely on the use of CPM in construction contracts as well as on schedule, delay, and acceleration analysis.

Dr. Vivek Puri 

Dr. Vivek Puri has significant experience planning and executing projects in both construction and information technology. Dr. Puri’s recent work involves research and development relating to NetPoint, NetRisk, and Schedule MD. Three innovative tools were developed in-house by PMA. His doctoral work addressed simulation applications for construction planning. 

Discover how PMA uses NetPoint and Project Summit to communicate schedules and navigate critical paths and near-critical details, providing a comprehensive view of the entire project for our pharmaceutical clients, Abbott, Johnson & Johnson, and Merck. See how Project Summit integrates NetPoint and P6 schedules, conducts weekly reviews, and delivers detailed schedules to key stakeholders, fostering collaboration and ensuring effective progress monitoring.  The presentation will showcase the critical path visual as a reference guide, setting the stage for broader adoption across various workstreams. Join us on this journey of project management innovation and efficiency! 

Eduardo Nazario 

Mr. Eduardo Nazario has extensive experience in capital planning, project management, and project controls for the pharmaceutical industry. He is a proven expert in preparing and updating construction schedules, planning, coordinating, and executing construction activities, supervising subcontractor work, and evaluating vendors and subcontractors. Mr. Nazario’s software knowledge includes NetPoint®, Primavera P6, Primavera Enterprise (P3e), Primavera Project Planner (P3), PrimeContract, and Microsoft Project.  

Rey Diaz  

Mr. Rey Diaz brings extensive expertise in program and project management, project scheduling, and project controls, having overseen projects with budgets ranging from $1.7 million to $500 million. His proficiency extends across the conceptual, planning, execution, and close-out phases of projects in heavy civil infrastructure, commercial, and hospitality industries. He also presents at AACE International meetings, revises AACE International Recommended Practice documents, and is a university instructor in project and construction management and project controls.  

Q&A

Early project planning and scheduling are essential when it comes to laying a strong foundation for the successful execution of a project. In this session, Amanda DavyRomano and Matthew Helner demonstrate the crucial role of NetPoint in the early validation and development of the master schedule for an active airport expansion project. This schedule has a tight construction timeframe and several risks that could be detrimental to the project, and it continues to be leveraged for interactive planning sessions and scenario planning. Learn how the use of NetPoint on this project has helped drive discussions, coordination, and decision-making efforts amongst stakeholders. 

Amanda DavyRomano  

Ms. Amanda DavyRomano is a seasoned project management and scheduling expert. She has been engaged in a variety of projects throughout her career with PMA, from schedule analysis in support of claims analysis, to project management and controls on multi-million-dollar construction projects. Ms. DavyRomano is currently serving as the schedule lead on the multi-year, multi-billion-dollar Peoples Gas System Modernization Program, where she is responsible for the development, management, and communication of the overall capital program schedule and has had a key role in the development of the project management and controls processes.  

Matt Helner  

Mr. Matt Helner has substantial experience as a project manager and civil engineer. He has a successful track record of delivering a diverse portfolio of construction projects in multiple industries, including transmission and distribution, refineries, and aviation facilities. Mr. Helner is a proven troubleshooter and effective problem solver of complicated issues with a strong ability to adapt and lead cross-functional project teams. He is skilled in project planning, report development, contract administration, procurement, scope development, and project schedule and budget.  

Q&A

In this NetPoint planning software training, Tim Mather covers essential aspects of project scheduling, conveying best practices for schedule setup, updates, and comparisons, as well as interactive resource loading and leveling features. Tim explores Layout Manager and Automated Layouts, offering insights into schedule layout creation, modification, and link analysis. The session wraps up with a focus on printing and reporting, showcasing how NetPoint generates insightful reports and timelines for effective communication with key stakeholders. Take advantage of this concise and informative session to enhance your NetPoint proficiency. 

Tim Mather 

As COO of PMA Technologies, Mr. Mather is responsible for the growth of PMA Technologies. Mr. Mather is a PMP with extensive project management, software development, and marketing experience. Mr. Mather earned his bachelor’s degree from Michigan State University and pursued postgraduate studies in project management at the University of Chicago.  

Q&A

Are you starting a new project and need to get your team on the same page? We created a quick start guide from a recent New Facility Design Kickoff Workshop. An interactive planning session coordinates and establishes the needs, milestones, and plans for design, permitting, and procurement. To ensure a productive workshop, follow these steps:

Step 1: Review Workshop Topics 

Familiarize yourself with these key topics:

• Design strategy
• Permitting
• Long lead & procurement strategy
• Site logistics & utilities
• Risks

Step 2: Prepare Your Inputs

Prior to the workshop, prepare a list of high-level activities (approximately 10-20 working days) related to the workshop topics. These activities should be essential for discussion and planning during the sessions. Use the provided high-level master schedule as a starting point and identify activities that align with the workshop topics.

Step 3: Identify Risks

Utilize the additional tab in the provided spreadsheet to identify any risks that should be discussed during the workshop. Consider potential obstacles or challenges related to design, permitting, procurement, site logistics, or other relevant factors.

Step 4: Submission Deadline

Ensure timely submission of your completed file. The deadline for submission is the close of business on the specified date. This allows us to preload the activities into the scheduling tool for the workshop.

Step 5: Engage and Collaborate

Come prepared to engage in collaborative discussions and contribute your expertise to the planning process. Be ready to share insights, ask questions, and work together towards establishing a comprehensive plan for the new facility design project.

As the facilitator, focus on getting active participation in the workshop and collaborating with stakeholders to achieve your project goals!

This presentation provides a comprehensive overview of NetPoint, including basic concepts, new features, and essential tips for understanding the application’s unique aspects. This training session ensures you derive maximum benefit from our conference content. To best support your education, the class includes a free 90-day license of NetPoint.

NetPoint is a unique tool that combines the simplicity of the Gantt chart with the power of critical path method (CPM) scheduling. In this session, NetPoint offers a visual and interactive approach to scheduling, allowing users to build and analyze project schedules quickly. It highlights the software’s drag-and-drop functionality, which enables users to quickly create and modify schedules by manipulating activities directly on the screen.

See how NetPoint performs dynamic scheduling, meaning that changes made to the schedule automatically update all affected activities and relationships. This feature is particularly useful for managing complex projects with evolving timelines.

The session concludes by showcasing some of NetPoint’s unique features, such as its ability to visualize project durations, critical paths, and potential delays. It emphasizes the software’s user-friendly interface and suitability for various industries and project types.

Tim Mather CCMP, LPEC, PMI-ACP

As COO of PMA Technologies, Tim is responsible for the growth of PMA Technologies. Tim is a PMP with extensive project management, software development, and marketing. Tim earned his bachelor’s degree from Michigan State University and pursued the postgraduate study of project management at the University of Chicago.

For over 155 years, Cargill has connected farmers with markets, customers with ingredients, and families with daily essentials. Cargill is currently the largest privately owned company in the US, with a robust capital expansion portfolio comprising small, medium, and large-sized projects worldwide. Through all phases of project execution at Cargill, NetPoint paints a clear picture for stakeholders to understand expectations, opportunities, and risks in a project schedule. NetPoint is also the preferred tool in the organization to conduct interactive planning sessions and communicate schedule related issues to sponsors and steering team. This session will demonstrate how NetPoint is utilized in various scenarios during project execution across a multi-billion-dollar portfolio.

Reniz Moosa, PMP

Mr. Reniz Moosa is a project management professional with extensive experience in providing schedule, cost, and change control services. Currently, Mr. Moosa actively manages Cargill’s overall portfolio and ensures his team provides the client appropriate support to complete projects on time and on budget. He orchestrates the effort to implement industry best practices and best-in-class standards as the client expands their business reach in the US, Canada, and Latin America. Mr. Moosa also manages the proposal process, purchase orders, and invoices for PMA’s engagement with the client’s North America Capability Center.

J. Alberto Martinez

Mr. Alberto Martinez is a meticulous project controls specialist with experience in a variety of construction types that require efficient schedule and cost coordination. He has proven experience as a project planner and scheduler, and he is well versed in the fundamentals of the critical path method. Mr. Martinez is additionally capable of developing, integrating, and maintaining cost- and resource-loaded schedules utilizing many of the industry leading tools including Primavera P6, Microsoft Project, and NetPoint.

Ewere Holloway

Ms. Ewere Mgbeke is an experienced project scheduling and controls consultant with multiple years of managing oil and gas, IT, engineering, transportation, civil, construction, and utilities projects. She is highly skilled in Primavera P6, versions 8.0 through18.8, and Microsoft Project Professional, both in the standalone and PPM environment. She has led the resource planning process for both horizontal and vertical projects to optimize organization-wide resource plans. Ms. Mgbeke successfully anticipates, communicates, and manages technical, business, and project schedule challenges.

Archana Harikrishnan

Ms. Archana Harikrishnan has significant experience in project management and claims management. She is technically skilled in construction management software, including Procore, Bluebeam Revu, Microsoft Project, Primavera P6, and Kahua. Ms. Harikrishnan is also trained in virtual design software, including REVIT, Sketchup, AUTOCAD, and Navisworks. She is a certified associate within the Project Management Institute and is fluent in English and Malayalam.

Vaisakh Kizhakkedathu

Benjamin Solano

Mr. Benjamin Solano brings substantial experience in project management, project controls, financial reporting, marketing, consulting, IT support, and product management in nuclear power projects as well as business process environments. He is adept in leading and integrating teams, clients, and key stakeholders to deliver projects on schedule and within budget. He has successfully used analytics, software, and technology and other business data tools and methods to drive change and progress toward the desired goal.

Besher Alsbiei

Mr. Besher Alsbiei has significant experience in planning and scheduling for construction projects during all phases, including design, engineering, procurement, construction, closeout, and turnover. He is skilled in working with project constraints (e.g., economic, environmental, social, ethical); has been involved on numerous multidisciplinary teams; and is an effective communicator. Mr. Alsbiei is a hands-on user of Primavera P6, Autodesk Revit, Microsoft Office (Word, PowerPoint, Excel); AutoCAD (2-D); and MS Project.

Early design-phase planning for long-term construction projects can be challenging in light of the ongoing design work and the uncertainty of the schedule in the distant future. Weeraya Orwatthana illustrates the benefits of using NetPoint on a multi-year public construction project to enhance team collaboration and support decision-making in the design and construction packaging scenarios. NetPoint clarifies key scheduling concepts and develops multiple scenarios for first, second, and third-level schedules to facilitate scope and schedule discussions among project team members. We will present the planning/schedule development process and different schedule formats and layouts that support discussions and assist the team’s decision.

Weeraya Orwatthana

Ms. Weeraya Orwatthana is a project control specialist with a diverse background in public and private construction projects. She is skilled in construction management, project management, budget and cost control and analysis, planning and scheduling, quality assurance and control, and risk management. Her scheduling software knowledge includes Primavera P6, MS Project, and NetPoint.

In this age of globalization, virtual meetings are the primary forum to discuss, plan and gather information. One crucial client requirement is to ensure the team can readily communicate on the project schedules. Learn how NetPoint functioned as the primary collaborative tool to schedule new sites, building expansions, and renovations for a cell and gene therapy contract development and manufacturing organization. For this program, PMA was tasked with developing fully integrated schedules from the shell schedules and presenting planning sessions to multiple clients. PMA schedulers integrated schedules from P6, Microsoft Project, and sometimes Excel into NetPoint to provide interactive schedules for the client and project team. NetPoint clearly identified the critical path and all near-critical activities to reveal the current status and health of the project schedule. NetPoint also validated the strategy implemented during the process validation phase and the other back-end activities.

Eduardo Nazario

Mr. Eduardo Nazario has extensive experience in capital planning, project management, and project controls for the pharmaceutical industry. He is a proven expert in preparing and updating construction schedules; planning, coordinating, and executing construction activities; supervising subcontractor work; and evaluating vendors and subcontractors. Mr. Nazario’s software knowledge includes NetPoint®, Primavera P6, Primavera Enterprise (P3e), Primavera Project Planner (P3), PrimeContract, and Microsoft Project.

Construction planning and scheduling are essential for all engineering and construction professionals, and their training starts at our universities. Educators from Northwestern University, the University of Dayton, and Columbia University lead a panel discussion on instructing undergraduate students in the art and science of construction project planning and scheduling. Panelists will discuss the learning objectives, present key concepts, and share how they use NetPoint and GPM.

Jerry Klanac

Mr. Klanac is a consultant emeritus within PMA Consultants who has been practicing quantitative risk analysis for more than two decades. He brings unique knowledge and experience to the classroom as faculty member in practice and Director of the Construction Engineering and Management program. Mr. Klanac has significant project management experience on US and international construction projects. He has expertise in analyzing and managing cost and schedule risk, providing project cost and schedule controls, developing and analyzing contractor CPM schedule submittals, and providing probabilistic analysis of cost estimates and schedules.

Dr. Ahmad Hadavi

Dr. Ahmad Hadavi is a Clinical Professor at the McCormick School of Engineering and Applied Science and Deputy Director of the Master of Project Management program. For his project scheduling and cost engineering & control courses, Dr. Hadavi developed his own Professional Project Management Fundamentals curriculum using Oracle Primavera P6 and NetPoint. In addition to mentoring his students to succeed in these traditional areas, Dr. Hadavi has initiated new courses in lean construction, VR/AR for design and construction, and disruptive technologies in the Architecture, Engineering, and Construction (AEC) industry.

Tim McManus

Mr. McManus is an Adjunct Associate Professor in the Department of Civil Engineering and is the Industry Advisor for the Global Leaders in Construction Management Program at Columbia University. He is a global expert and advisor to companies and governments on the planning, development, and delivery of major infrastructure, transportation, urban development, sports facilities, and capital projects and programs. He has been a Vice President at McKinsey & Company and also lectures at Northeastern University’s Graduate School of Engineering, Harvard University’s Graduate School of Business and the Graduate School of Design, and Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Total float is a pivotal concept in scheduling invariably relied upon by schedulers even though total float is based solely on a deterministic schedule without any consideration of risk. To do away with this limitation, PMA professionals are developing a body of knowledge that we call float risk assessment (FRA). In FRA, schedule leeway is calculated with respect to a realistically likely completion date as float use is modeled in the schedule simulation. Safe float values are further calculated to consider all duration uncertainty and risk remaining in the schedule. In summary, safe float is total float adjusted for uncertainty.

Throughout the presentation, Dr. Gui and Dr. Puri cover four main concepts surrounding project completion predictability:

• Improving odds of timely completion requires ample contingency because total float is derived from a forward-pass-calculated, overly optimistic finish date.
• By simulating a schedule and choosing not to assess float-use risk, schedulers are leaving out important information.
• The combination of total floats and safe floats in scheduling should greatly improve offs of timely completion.
• While there is much to learn about how to capitalize on safe float principles in deterministic schedules, the potential project control payoff appears promising.

For additional information about this invaluable scheduling innovation, you can read PMA’s article titled Safe Start Date & Safe Float.

Dr. Gui Ponce de Leon PE

Dr. Ponce de Leon is recognized as one of our nation’s foremost planning and scheduling subject matter experts. His broad professional experience includes executive and senior roles as investor’s developer, program manager, construction manager, and EPC contractor planner/scheduler. He continually pioneers innovations in project management and has written widely on the use of CPM in construction contracts as well as on schedule, delay, and acceleration analysis.

Dr. Vivek Puri PMP

Dr. Vivek Puri has significant experience planning and executing projects in both construction and information technology. Dr. Puri’s recent work involves research and development relating to NetPoint, NetRisk, and Schedule MD. Three innovative tools were developed in-house by PMA. His doctoral work was in the area of simulation applications for construction planning.

Part 1: Build & Update the Schedule

Tim Mather covers building and updating a schedule, including working with data dates, creating targets, statusing the schedule, actualizing objects and displays, resource loading and leveling, and comparing updates. Attendees learn how to use NetPoint’s unique features to update, modify, and compare schedules.

Part 2: Layout Manager & Automated Layouts

Dr. Vivek Puri covers schedule layout, including creating and modifying layouts, analyzing links, and viewing statistics. Attendees learn how to use NetPoint’s unique features, including Layout Manager and Automated Layouts for running the engine, locking relative positions, and setting up swimlanes.

If you are new to NetPoint, we suggest watching our Intro to NetPoint session first, where Tim gives a comprehensive overview of the technology and its features.

Tim Mather, CCMP, LPEC, PMI-ACP

As COO of PMA Technologies, Tim is responsible for the growth of PMA Technologies. Tim is a PMP with extensive project management, software development, and marketing. Tim earned his bachelor’s degree from Michigan State University and pursued the postgraduate study of project management at the University of Chicago.

Dr. Vivek Puri, PMP

Dr. Vivek Puri has significant experience planning and executing projects in both construction and information technology. Dr. Puri’s recent work involves research and development relating to NetPoint, NetRisk, and Schedule MD. Three innovative tools were developed in-house by PMA. His doctoral work was in the area of simulation applications for construction planning.

When construction delays occur, a project’s success can depend on a contractor’s ability to accelerate and recover from these changes and to communicate with stakeholders and project executives. In this session, join Zach Wotherspoon, planner and scheduler at Gilbane, and Seve Ponce de Leon, Senior Director of Product at PMA Consultants, as they share how acceleration and recovery are vital to Gilbane’s success and how PMA is working to bring them game-changing software solutions. This session includes a live demo of the latest software developments and updates on the product roadmap.

Gilbane primarily uses NetPoint to develop their baseline schedule, starting at a high level with extended-duration activities to put together a Level 1 schedule. Through scheduling workshops with necessary stakeholders, they then utilize NetPoint to build the client’s portion of the project or a specific phase with the subcontractor. Additionally, the software allows them to perform push and pull plans.

Another way that Gilbane uses NetPoint is to perform schedule scenarios. This enables clients or other project stakeholders to visualize the delay that a decision or impact may be having on the project schedule. Especially with the use of GPM, the display is oftentimes more understandable than other scheduling software. For example, while using NetPoint, you can overlay the original plan with a scenario that may impact or delay the project, creating a simple and effective way to show how a permit delay or extension can impact the critical path. This also allows you to print on one page while still effectively showing all necessary details and ensures that there is connectivity to your master/contract schedule, which is a common challenge with other scheduling software.

Seve Ponce de Leon

Seve Ponce de Leon leads product management for innovation and software at PMA Consultants. He has more than 10 years of experience, including user research, design, testing agile methodologies, product strategy, planning, scheduling, and risk management. Seve earned a bachelor of science degree from the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Zach Wotherspoon, Gilbane

At Gilbane, Zach leads the Midwest Scheduling Department.  He has 19 years of experience in the Engineering and Construction market, 17 of them spent with Gilbane.  Zach also leads the company’s Scheduling Peer Group.  He is a LEED-accredited professional.   Zach earned a Bachelor of Science from the Wentworth Institute of Technology in Boston.  Zach’s passion is focused on building high-quality schedules during the Preconstruction phase of the project and managing schedule risk during the Construction phase.

Vivek Puri, PhD, PMP

Dr. Vivek Puri has significant experience with planning and executing projects in both construction and information technology areas. Dr. Puri’s recent work involves research and development relating to NetPoint, NetRisk, and Schedule MD, three innovative tools developed in-house by PMA. His doctoral work was in the area of simulation applications for construction planning.

What is the Graphical Path Method?

Graphical Path Method or GPM is a mathematical algorithm used to schedule tasks in a project. The algorithm provides an efficient update mechanism by which a change to the plan triggers an update that is limited to affected objects and unlike CPM does not require a complete forward and backward pass on the entire network. This enables real-time feedback from the GPM scheduling engine which allows the user to interactively cause a change to the schedule and see its impact on other activities or milestones.

How is the Graphical Path Method different from CPM?

There are a number of differences between CPM and GPM. The most notable being that unlike CPM, GPM algorithm does not need to recalculate the entire schedule when a change is made to one of the activities or relationships.

CPM algorithm uses the relationships between activities and their durations to calculate the early and late start and end dates for each task along with calculating the available float for each activity.

GPM on the other hand provides added control to the scheduler wherein the schedule is built by specifying planned dates for all activities and their relationships. This provides added flexibility in developing the schedule network without adding needless constraints to satisfy the required dates. The algorithm then uses the gaps between tasks to calculate backward and forward floats for all activities.

What are Planned Dates, and how do they improve planning and scheduling?

Planned Dates in GPM provide the scheduler with the ability to specify the dates of when a particular activity in the network is meant to be worked on. In real-world projects, activities do not necessarily start on the earliest possible date when its predecessors are complete. However, often the activity start gets delayed for example due to lack of available resources, or in the case of parallel tasks to avoid excessive need of starting and then stopping of the activity so that the other task can catch up.

Use of planned dates thus provides that added flexibility and the schedule accurately models a real-world plan for the project. In CPM, the typical approach to hold the dates is to add constraints to these activities, which in turn affects the continuity of the float in the network. Planned dates in GPM however do not affect the total float for any activity in the network, but instead adds to the flexibility by representing the total float as a sum of backward float (Drift) and forward float (CPM Float).

What are forensic critical paths and how are they important?

An important aspect of any project is identifying and documenting the as-built schedule. This is done simply for documentation and to aid in future planning of similar projects, but also documenting how the project evolved over time is very important in the unfortunate scenario of evaluating claims. Since the critical path may change as the project progresses so it is necessary to know how the project evolved over time and assess how specific delays affected progress on the project.

In CPM based tools, the float of all completed activities is not calculated or is set to 0 because there are no early and late start dates left of the data date. However, in GPM since the algorithm relies on the gaps to calculate floats, which also exist left of the data date, thus a continuous critical path is available from project start to project end.

How is the forensic critical path calculated?

GPM algorithm relies on gaps between activities to calculate their available float. These gaps exist both on the left and right of the data date. This allows GPM algorithm to calculate floats for completed activities similar to that for future activities.

How does GPM account for real-time logic? How is this different from CPM?

CPM algorithm runs in a batch approach wherein a forward pass is first run on the entire network to establish a project end date. The project end date is then used while running a backward pass thereby calculating the floats on all activities and identifying the critical path. When a change is made to the network, the whole network needs to be recalculated using the forward and backward pass approach to determine the new dates, floats, and critical path.

With larger schedules, recalculating the entire network can be very inefficient. GPM however uses a more efficient approach by just recalculating the portion of the schedule which is actually affected by any change. So even on larger schedules, the network can be updated quickly and accurately.

What is probabilistic total float? How does it improve project risk analysis/simulation?

Probabilistic total float of an activity is the amount of time available for any task by which its start can be delayed without affecting a given project finish date, considering the risks and duration uncertainties in the network. So it is similar to float in deterministic schedules, but takes into consideration the stochastic nature of the dates and durations in the network.

Since the probabilistic total float is calculated with uncertainty in the schedule, it provides a more accurate narrative of how much flexibility the schedule really has and helps in decision making when certain tasks need to be delayed or floated.

Part 1: Build & Update the Schedule — focuses on building and updating a schedule, including working with data dates, creating targets, statusing the schedule, actualizing objects and displays, resource loading and leveling, and comparing updates. Attendees learn how to use NetPoint’s unique features to update, modify, and compare schedules.  

Part 2: Layout Manager & Automated Layouts — focuses on schedule layout, including creating and modifying layouts, analyzing links, and viewing statistics. Attendees learn how to use NetPoint’s unique features, including Layout Manager and Automated Layouts for running the engine, locking relative positions, and setting up swimlanes. 

Tim Mather 

As COO of PMA Technologies, Tim provides leadership for the design and development team and the intellectual property efforts surrounding NetPoint. Tim is a PMP with extensive project management, software development, and marketing. Tim earned his bachelor’s degree from Michigan State University and pursued the postgraduate study of project management at the University of Chicago.

Dr. Vivek Puri

Dr. Vivek Puri has significant experience planning and executing projects in both construction and information technology areas. Dr. Puri’s recent work involves research and development relating to NetPoint, NetRisk, and Schedule MD. Three innovative tools were developed in-house by PMA. His doctoral work was in the area of simulation applications for construction planning. 

Performing schedule risk analysis has never been more rewarding. Monte Carlo simulations have become even more faithful representations of the modeled projects from systemic risks to risk calibration, benchmarking, and reference class forecasting. But one central element continues to be overlooked. As a project gets underway, activities off the critical path (most of the schedule) are often deferred to standby status in favor of other work or to balance out resource utilization. When combined with uncertainty or discrete risks, this further pushes out project completion. In this session, you’ll learn why float-use risk matters and discover the only known solution for modeling it. PMA’s approach to risk analysis is based on over 20 years of experience on more than 350 projects with combined values exceeding $50 billion. 

Tim Mather

As COO of PMA Technologies, Tim provides leadership for the design and development team and the intellectual property efforts surrounding NetPoint. Tim is a PMP with extensive project management, software development, and marketing. Tim earned his bachelor’s degree from Michigan State University and pursued the postgraduate study of project management at the University of Chicago. 

Dr. Vivek Puri

Dr. Vivek Puri has significant experience planning and executing projects in both construction and information technology areas. Dr. Puri’s recent work involves research and development relating to NetPoint, NetRisk, and Schedule MD. Three innovative tools were developed in-house by PMA. His doctoral work was in the area of simulation applications for construction planning. 

Risk management is becoming an essential skill set for all engineering and construction professionals, and training should start at our universities. Jerry Klanac has developed and delivered a novel course at the University of Dayton called Risk Management for Construction Projects. This presentation will explain the learning objectives, present key concepts, and share students’ reactions to the course. One of the course’s unique features is using PMA’s NetPoint and NetRisk simulation tools to provide students with hands-on experience in conducting a schedule risk analysis and expose them to the innovative approach to handling project risks caused by the use of float.  

Jerry Klanac 

Mr. Klanac is a consultant emeritus within PMA Consultants who has been practicing quantitative risk analysis for more than two decades and brings a unique set of knowledge and experience to the classroom as director of construction engineering and management at the University of Dayton.  Jerry has had significant project management experience on US and international construction projects.  He has expertise in analyzing and managing cost and schedule risk, providing project cost and schedule controls, developing and analyzing contractor CPM schedule submittals, and providing probabilistic analysis of cost estimates and schedules. 

Do your projects require maintaining multiple schedules for different levels of detail? Summarizing large and detailed schedules and keeping multiple schedules synchronized can be very time-consuming. In this session, we’ll demonstrate our upcoming solutions for overcoming these challenges. 

Seve Ponce de Leon 

Seve Ponce de Leon leads product management for NetRisk. He has 10 years of experience, including design, UX, QA/QC, Scrum, customer support, and product strategy. Seve earned a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. 

In this keynote, Dr. Gui unveils his vision for highly predictable schedule forecasts by using reference class forecasting to target project duration while preserving probable P-value as the project is executed. This is attained, in part, with Level 3/4 forecasting schedules that algorithmically extrapolate future schedule performance (right of the data date) from patterns discernible from as-built schedule data.

I believe that the time has come for schedulers to mine the wealth of actual durations—specific to this project—accumulating left of the data date and to convert the heretofore hyper-detailed deterministic schedule into a true forecasting model that relies on actual performance, not just on estimates, to predict completion likelihood. The value of a progressed detailed schedule incorporating actual, statistical duration data as a reliable project completion forecasting tool far exceeds using the schedule for predicting when, say a 10-day activity two years in the future, may be started.

The mission is nothing short of reforming project-wide scheduling into project completion forecasting and, to once and for all, solve the conundrum of most projects completing late despite the billions spent year after year on scheduling projects. The outcome of a schedule should be algorithmic likelihood of completion, and conversely, to compel replanning to restore the targeted likelihood when periled by progress—or by the lack thereof.

Gui Ponce de Leon PhD, PE, PMP, LEED AP

Dr. Ponce de Leon is recognized as one of our nation’s foremost planning and scheduling subject matter experts. His broad professional experience includes executive and senior roles as investor’s developer, program manager, construction manager, and EPC contractor planner/scheduler. He has continually pioneered innovations in project management and written widely on the use of CPM in construction contracts as well as on schedule, delay, and acceleration analysis. 

NetPoint® and Primavera P6 are both tools used to plan and schedule projects. There are similarities and differences between the two platforms, but they can both have a place in providing premium project control techniques on construction projects. For example, a planner may choose to develop Level 0, 1, and 2 schedules in NetPoint, but they may feel P6 is the more appropriate choice for Level 3 and 4 schedules. In scenarios like this, there are frequently situations where an export from one tool to the other is a valuable time-saver. In this session we will discuss the most common reasons where an export between NetPoint and P6 make sense; steps required to export from NetPoint to P6 and vice versa; what to look for after the data is exported; and tips and tricks to optimize the results of the export. Finally, we will demonstrate a round-trip export between NetPoint and P6 and provide an overview of how exporting with P6 may look in the forthcoming Project Summit. 

John Zann 

Mr. John Zann has extensive experience in the construction consulting industry. He has significant knowledge of construction cost engineering, consultant and contractor procurement, project management, project planning, critical path method scheduling, and construction engineering. He has developed, implemented, and updated schedules for numerous projects during his years at PMA, and he has worked for both owners and contractors in developing and implementing extensive cost and schedule control systems—including overall program and project budgeting, forecasting, and analysis—on multiple projects, spanning multiple industries. He has proficiency in and significant experience using Primavera, MS Project, SAP, and NetPoint. 

NetPoint managed construction on a technology campus using Last Planner short interval scheduling. PMA’s Nick Gendron developed a Last Planner process to improve schedule and field communication with the construction manager and with contractors. NetPoint turned Post-it Notes into clear, valuable schedule data that was visually communicated, integrated with weekly work plans to view progress, and fed data into the Primavera P6 master schedule. Pull planning sessions with the project team utilized NetPoint to improve the planning and scheduling process. 

Nick Gendron 

Mr. Nick Gendron is a skilled project and construction manager and a project controls scheduler with experience in power, aviation, pharmaceutical, data, transportation, healthcare, and hospitality industries. He has comprehensive knowledge of and experience in major project management software programs and in budget and schedule reporting, and he effectively leads multi-subconsultant teams and serves as the primary point of contact in managing tasks, subconsultant budgets, and contracts; providing timely change management; and communicating and coordinating project activities. 

In considering the delivery of major infrastructure projects, two of the vital issues to be addressed are meeting schedule requirements and the consequences of transferring risks from the public sector to the private sector. On major public infrastructure projects, the public sector’s scheduling requirements may be challenging to many private contractors who struggle to respond to the scheduling specification. The second major issue is the underpricing of risks and ineffective planning for the consequences of adverse risks that materialize. NetPoint has proven to be an effective tool to address the private partner’s scheduling requirements, manage high-level schedules, identify issues promptly, and contribute to reducing claims. NetPoint can also assist in the risk planning process and in evaluating the impacts, in real-time, of various risk scenarios. Jeffrey Plant draws from his experience on over fifteen major infrastructure projects and suggests a new paradigm for schedule and risk management on major infrastructure projects. 

Jeffrey Plant 

Mr. Jeffrey Plant is an accomplished infrastructure delivery professional with extensive transportation, environmental, and building project experience for clients that include railway and transit authorities; design-build contractors and private developers; building owners and facility managers; consulting engineers; government ministries, departments, and agencies; international financial institutions; concessionaires; municipalities; First Nations; and industries. Mr. Plant has honed his scheduling, negotiating, and dispute resolution skills on hundreds of projects reviewing claims, analyzing positions, preparing expert reports, and participating in settlement meetings on multiple change order and claims issues. He has also prepared evidence and provided support to attorneys during litigation. 

This presentation provides a comprehensive overview of NetPoint including basic concepts, new features, and essential tips necessary to understand the application’s unique aspects. This training session ensures you derive maximum benefit from our conference content. 

Tim Mather 

As COO of PMA Technologies, Tim provides leadership for the design and development team and the intellectual property efforts surrounding NetPoint. Tim is a PMP with extensive project management, software development, and marketing. Tim earned his bachelor’s degree from Michigan State University and pursued the postgraduate study of project management at the University of Chicago.

Dr. Vivek Puri

Dr. Vivek Puri has significant experience planning and executing projects in both construction and information technology areas. Dr. Puri’s recent work involves research and development relating to NetPoint, NetRisk, and Schedule MD. Three innovative tools were developed in-house by PMA. His doctoral work was in the area of simulation applications for construction planning. 

Is your team keen to utilize the most important project management tools when planning their projects? Statistics indicate that organizations that adopt robust project practices are more likely to achieve their project goals (77% vs. 56%), stay within budget (67% vs. 46%), and meet deadlines (63% vs. 39%), and much less likely to experience total project failure (11% vs. 21%).

If your answer is a resounding yes, then a work breakdown structure (WBS) template is what you need to help your team keep projects on the right course. A suitable template greatly facilitates the goal of specifying the organization and definition of your project.

The WBS is a valuable project management tool for defining and organizing the work required. It facilitates the development of a project schedule by clarifying the total estimated time for the realization of an activity for specific sections of the work areas. The WBS provides a visual of the entire scope and can identify potential scope risks if work areas are not well defined.

This guide will walk you through the essential characteristics of a Work Breakdown Structure and why you need one.  

What is a Work Breakdown Structure?  

The Project Management Institute’s PMBOK® Guide describes the WBS as follows:

“Its purpose is to give teams a visual deconstruction of their project. It is designed to look hierarchical and allows you to break down all the project’s deliverable actions.” 

Think of it as a diagram that gives you an at-a-glance view or breakdown of all the steps required for your project-related tasks. It’s an essential tool for project planning and is often used by project managers when creating a Gantt chart or project schedule.

Using Gantt charts and the WBS together greatly improves the successful planning, organizing, and executing of projects.

The primary purpose of a WBS is to make your project more manageable. It breaks your project down into more bite-sized pieces of work that can be carried out by more than one person.

Using a WBS inspires confidence in project managers and team members alike; namely, because they can confidently pinpoint pending and completed deliverables alongside their budget. 

Why Use a WBS in Project Management?  

The best question is, why not?

A WBS should be your first step when creating your project’s structure. It clarifies all the work that needs doing and in which order. This is imperative for ensuring all your team members are on the same page for meeting the project’s objectives and goals within budget.

As a result, a well-planned WBS helps you avoid common project management difficulties such as missed deadlines, going over costs, poor communication, etc.  

Key Characteristics of a Work Breakdown Structure 

The result can vary when you start with a downloadable WBS template. However, the ultimate goal remains the same:

• To see a hierarchical illustration of your project 
• Clarify pending tasks and milestones  
• Communicate each task’s progress to all relevant team members

First, remember the 100% rule. This means your WBS fences in every project strand, including who’s working on each strand.

A WBS has a leveled structure. So, if we apply the 100% rule, level 1 describes the project’s entirety. It’s your top line; for example, “New Staff Intranet.”

After level 1, several levels will then break down the project into more detail and specify the deliverables, ensuring 100% rule is applied at each tier.

Examples of this, when applied to our “New Staff Intranet,” might be design layout, build content, and so on.  

How to Create Your Work Breakdown Structure 

Project planners break the scope of work down into work packets organized into groups. Common group breakdowns are phases of the project lifecycle, or the different processes required to run the project.

Below is a quick work breakdown structure guide. Here are our six steps for you to follow so that your WBS is effective.

Step 1: Define the extent of the project. This means setting your objectives and goals. It’s how you establish your project for all involved.  

Step 2: Identify each phase of the project. This is when you start to break things down, especially if it’s a large project.   

Step 3: List your deliverables. Itemize each deliverable and break it down into smaller categories, including tasks needing to be done, participants, etc.  

Step 4: Outline all your project levels. Here’s your 100% rule in play. Starting with level 1, you deconstruct your project. 

Step 5: Define work packages. Using your deliverables as a reference, break them down into all the tasks that need completing. Then group them into work packages.  

Step 6: Choose team members. In other words, choose who owns each task. This is when you give all your team members the work management tools to do their job.  

Voila, that’s it!

Some Examples of a Work Breakdown Structure 

We’ve established that not all work breakdown structures are the same. Here are some examples of tools you can use to help you create your WBS:

• WBS flowchart: A diagrammatic workflow to structure your WBS 
• WBS spreadsheet: To note down project phases, deliverables, and tasks, using the spreadsheet rows and columns 
• WBS list: Structures your WBS as a straightforward list of deliverables and tasks 

• WBS Gantt chart: You can use this to show project milestones, link task dependencies, and arrange your WBS, so it acts both as a timeline and asa spreadsheet 
• WBS Swimlanes: organize project phases, deliverables, and tasks in colored rows spanning the width of the page, each lane containing activities within a work packet or group

Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and Codes 

Both the WBS as well as codes can be used as a basis for swimlanes to lay out the network, and they can be exported or imported from Xer file or with Excel.

In project scheduling software, codes are also used for organizing or sorting but have limitations that the WBS does not. For example, codes can only have 1 level of sub-categories, or “values”. Also, values can be assigned to activities, but not codes themselves. Take a project with a code called “Area” with the values “North,” “South,” “East,” and “West”. An activity could then be assigned to “North” but not to “Area” itself. (If desired, an activity could be assigned to “North” AND “South” by choosing the assignment behavior Multiple). In general, codes are not necessarily related to one another and are optional; the WBS is a single cohesive hierarchy that effectively summarizes the project.

Are You Ready to Adopt a WBS Work Breakdown Structure? 

Having read this blog post, we hope you now have a better idea of a WBS work breakdown structure and how you could implement it to aid your project planning and execution.  

If you want help implementing your own, please feel free to register and download our WBS template. Try our project planning software and use an effective work breakdown structure. 

When aligning information to the actual work, project planners must consider many different trades, user groups, and project management teams represented in the schedule. Here we discuss the use of schedule fragnets to substantiate the master plan of the project without having to view the entire schedule.

Focussing on critical schedule areas can make the planning process more efficient and effective. Since there are so many different moving parts in our schedules and some areas may be more critical than others, being able to view at the forefront, for example, a troubled floor of a skyscraper can focus the planning effort on the task at hand. The upcoming work can then be planned at a more detailed level. Using a fragnet of near-future activities, the work is planned to ensure all activities are optimized and coordinated.

Schedule Fragnets on a Healthcare Project

The following example accomplished just this objective. The contractor was required to elaborate on a particular portion of the schedule for a $120 million new walk-in healthcare center, roughly a two-year project. The schedule elaboration resulted in adding about 1,300 activities.

The contractor wanted to do this as efficiently as possible and reached out for assistance from PMA. They were able to provide work sequences in Excel. PMA imported the Excel files into NetPoint to review with the client, and then once the plans were finalized, the NetPoint file was imported into the master schedule in P6.

Here’s how the contractor-provided Excel file looked:

The contractor provided activity descriptions, durations, and even predecessors in the Excel file. This information was sufficient to import directly into NetPoint. On review, however, it was not easy to validate that the work laid out in the Excel file matched the contractor’s intended execution of the work.

This Excel file is just one of seven Excel files that we received. This file is applied to four different areas and sometimes applied to three different floors in each area, arriving at 1,300 activities very quickly.

It was important to ascertain this fragment of the work before adding all of this to the P6 schedule. The sharp contrast between both files was evident.

We needed to verify that the logic, the dates, durations, etc., were going to pencil out at the end and meet the contractor’s goal. We began with basic data cleanup and validation. For example, predecessor IDs and relationship type were in two separate columns. So, we did a simple calculation to merge those into one column, get them into the format that NetPoint could recognize, and then we were ready to go ahead and do the import.

NetPoint made an initial attempt at mapping the columns in the Excel file to the appropriate attributes within NetPoint, resulting in valid identification in most cases.

It is good practice to review this output and copy to the clipboard to save for later. The Excel file provided no dates but was based on logic. Warnings appear to the effect that activities were reported without the appropriate assigned dates. All these will be set to the early date. By flipping to CPM scheduling mode and then back to GPM mode from the toolbar, NetPoint takes the entire logic diagram and snaps everything out according to the logic.

Optimizing the Layout with Autograph

While scanning the file, we see it appears to end around October of 2015. The calendar will be changed, and the page layout modified to tabloid to provide more space. NetPoint’s schedule optimizing feature, Autograph, is endlessly configurable, and with the click of a button, it takes an educated guess at optimizing the layout for the sake of visual display. In this case, it is relatively close to the ultimate deliverable that we put together.

Autograph will not always provide the final end state, but in most cases, will give a good starting point to fine-tune. In this case, colors and colored headings were used to delineate some of the significant sequences of work. All this work could fit onto one page, whereas it might have taken up quite a bit more space with swim lanes.

The data is now in NetPoint. It’s relatively cleaned up and presentable, but there are basic steps for additional network validation that can be performed. Activities without successors or predecessors can be identified one by one by going into the edit menu and searching and filtering objects. Double-clicking on the activity highlights on the bottom, and that activity can be reviewed to ascertain where the most appropriate place to tie it off might be.

Filtering Redundant Lengths

The following process is to filter for redundant lengths. Redundant lengths per se are not necessarily logic violations. But if there are an abundance of them in a NetPoint network, they can substantially impair visual comprehension. A P6 network can add a significant schedule burden in terms of overall maintenance management because of superfluous logic ties to review and maintain periodically when trying to track sequences.

We recommend reviewing and understanding them very clearly in NetPoint before bringing them into P6 because this sequence will be replicated over multiple areas, and redundant lengths and open ends would start to compound.

We were able to break down the schedule into a smaller section and demonstrate a couple of those NetPoint functions that help with reviewing schedules. We were able to do this efficiently because we could communicate with Microsoft Excel. We could also communicate with Microsoft Project and P6, and we took the Excel file, imported it into NetPoint, took the finished product in NetPoint, and then we were able to import it into P6. And once in P6, it was just a matter of copying the WBS fifteen times and putting it into the areas needed.

We were able to get real-time feedback to facilitate this interactive planning process. Overall, we felt we could better understand the sections of work planned and communicate them to the project team.

We’re excited to announce that our new and redesigned website is live. The updated site includes changes to navigation, improved customer support, enhanced graphics, and a more interactive insights section. We’ve also improved the structure of our content, so you’ll get more from a quick read. There’s a whole host of more minor but impactful changes, all to make your experience of the PMA Technologies site that much better for you.

When we started the project, we had big ideas, from updating company messaging to helping users get from one place to the next without skipping our most important content. Our central message on the homepage, Improve Project Certainty, exemplifies what we hope our products will do for you. We also chose to highlight our methodology, the Graphical Path Method (GPM), in the top-level navigation. The GPM algorithm is the backbone of our products and allows users to develop intuitive schedules and improve schedule optimization and analysis. It allows for flexibility to move activities around freely instead of constantly adding and removing constraints. The schedule also instantly updates as you move the mouse, allowing for user collaboration, and float simulation is more realistic, an often unaccounted for risk. Those are just a few of the highlights you can learn more about while visiting the new website.

As an innovation leader, it is essential to make our thought leadership, services, and experience easily accessible to our customers. We provide visitors with the most accurate, up-to-date information and share our knowledge and expertise in the field of program and project management. We also added Insights to our top-level navigation to highlight sample schedules, articles, case studies, and presentations that demonstrate how we are true knowledge experts and innovators in our field.

We continue to offer free 30-day trials of NetPoint, NetRisk, and Schedule MD. No credit card is required. Our new design has simplified the purchasing process, and we have added an FAQ for licensing options.

We hope you like the changes, and if you have any feedback, please let us know on Facebook or Twitter.

Has your team just come up with the next great product? Are you looking to bring your vision to life but not quite sure how to get started?

A product roadmap is just what you need to bring your product from conception to market. Building a product roadmap can help keep you and your team on track.

But how do you create a practical product roadmap? What are some of the critical components of successful strategic planning? This guide will walk you through everything you need to know.

What Is a Product Roadmap?

Product roadmaps are a project management tool frequently used by product managers and their development teams.

With a product roadmap, teams can visualize the trajectory and potential outcomes of a product strategy. Roadmaps help agile teams streamline their communications.

Using product road mapping, you aim to create a high-level visual map of your product vision and the direction you want your product to take over time. Roadmaps look at the big picture, helping you communicate both the what and the why of your product.

Product roadmaps facilitate the alignment of your business strategy with your product strategy.

A little product roadmap planning can go a long way when it comes to execution. With a streamlined process, your team is more likely to reach its overall business goals.

Goals of a Product Roadmap

Your product roadmap should accomplish several different things. Keep these in mind as you begin your product development process.

Bring Focus to the Vision

First and foremost, product roadmaps should describe and align your product vision and strategy. This is a high-level, birds-eye view of what you hope to accomplish. Defining your vision should be the very first step of any product development process.

Provide Processes for Strategy Execution

Product roadmaps should also serve as a guiding document for executing your strategy. Outline high-level steps, including essential detail, and place them in your intended sequence.

Streamline Communications

Product roadmaps are also vital to effective communications, both internal and external.

Internally, they can help facilitate discussion amongst your team on potential pitfalls and outcomes. These are especially useful for cross-functional teams to stay current on communications.

Externally, product roadmaps can help communicate to stakeholders and customers. This feature will generate excitement and interest in your product offering.

Make sure your planning tool is visual and intuitive and that it easily conveys important project information, notably the critical path, to stakeholders at all levels of expertise.

What Are the Different Types of Product Roadmaps?

Your audience will determine the type of product roadmap you will use. In general, there are four different types of product roadmaps you may have to create. These include:

Internal Development Roadmap

This type of product roadmap is customized to fit your team. Focus on building your map in a way that will be most effective for the way your team works.

Many development teams aim to make their product roadmap agile. To accomplish this, begin by focusing on defining the customer-facing value of the product and the critical target release dates, deadlines, and milestones.

This type of roadmap is often organized using a timeline or network of planning activities like a Gantt Chart. Specific sprints, pieces of work, and problem areas are clearly outlined and highly visualized.

Agile Product Roadmaps

When it comes to agile, roadmaps are all about objectives/outcomes over features (A) and horizons over dates (B).

Objectives and outcomes are invariably displayed as themes going down. In NetPoint^®, these are organized into swimlanes (A). Horizons must be coarse, not date-based. On the x-axis, think of “now,” “next,” and “future.” (B)

The following agile roadmap in NetPoint emphasizes the ability to use quarters. On agile projects, the detail is managed in the backlog, sprint boards, and storymaps.

A product management tool that includes Jira integration, feedback monitoring, prioritization frameworks, is recommended to manage the agile process.

Internal Executive Roadmap

This type of roadmap focuses primarily on the most high-level product goals and metrics. This should be a clear outline of your workflow to help executives stay up to date on your team and the product development.

Often, these are organized by month or quarter. Details about stories and tasks are generally unnecessary.

Internal Sales Roadmap

This type of roadmap will focus exclusively on customer-facing goals. It should be used to outline new features and benefits your product can offer to the public. These are used to build sales strategies and facilitate conversation amongst sales and marketing teams.

This should be a flexible roadmap, so it’s best to avoid set-in-stone dates. Aim for projections instead so as not to set the development team up for failure.

External Roadmap

This type of roadmap is used to engage and excite your customer base. These must be easy to follow and visually appealing to generate public interest in the product. External roadmaps should remain high level and highlight the products and features that will benefit the consumer.

How Do I Create a Product Roadmap?

Updating a product roadmap is difficult. Building one from scratch is even more challenging. Here are a few steps you can take to make it easier on yourself:

1. Know Your Audience

What type of product roadmap are you building? Who will use it, and what will they use it for?

These questions will help you determine how much information you should include in your product roadmap. For development teams, there will most likely be a lot of details for each step. By contrast, for customer-facing external roadmaps, you’ll want to stick to only the most high-level values.

2. Define Your Goals

Take a top-down approach and start by defining your highest-level goals. Work with your team to answer these questions: What is your intended outcome? How does it relate to your business strategy?

Use the answers to those questions as a guide for the rest of your product roadmap. Be sure each step in your process is aligned with your overall goal.

3. Prioritize Your Tasks

Define the most important steps you’ll need to take. Use a planning tool to create an execution timeline. Be careful to include just the right amount of information for your intended audience.

Many product roadmap templates can be found online. By using NetPoint^® software, for example, you could maximize your efficiency. NetPoint’s graphical and logic-driven interface provides you with an organized, well-constructed, and flexible plan.

If this is your first time building a product roadmap with NetPoint, you can easily find additional instruction. Check out the NetPoint Training Guide to help you become a NetPoint planning expert.

4. Manage Your Resources

Develop a roadmap that is resource-leveled based on the projected staffing of the development team. NetPoint^® allows you to quickly load and manage your resources for roadmap tasks and is easy to update during project execution.

Quality Roadmaps Lead to Quality Products

If you want a quality product, you’ll need a quality product roadmap. To get a well-defined, clear-cut product roadmap, you’ll need the right tools.

NetPoint^® presents the resulting schedule in a visual model that can be clearly understood by the entire project team and effectively communicated to other stakeholders.

Check out NetPoint^® Road Mapping Software to simplify the planning process. Careful planning using NetPoint^® can help you transform your vision into a reality.

Learn how to use project benchmarks and milestones with NetPoint.

Get Started with a Sample NetPoint Plan

Take advantage of a second sample NetPoint plan as you explore NetPoint’s features. Note: the .zip file must be extracted before opening the schedule (see steps below). If you are new to NetPoint 4.2.1 or need to access legacy NetPoint files, be sure to view the project folder tutorial for details on NetPoint’s new project folder system.

Steps:

1. Once the downloading finishes, click either Save, or Open, or just the name of the download itself (depending on your browser). A folder window will open.
2. Click the UP arrow icon to go one level up, or click  ALT + UP on your keyboard.
3. Right-click on the .zip file (it should be selected) and choose Extract All…
4. After verifying the destination, click Extract. A new folder window will open.
5. Double-click on the .nzp file or choose File > Unzip and Open Project from within NetPoint.

Get Started with a Sample NetPoint Plan with Resources

Get off to a running start during your NetPoint trial with a sample plan that is resource loaded! Note: the .zip file must be extracted before opening the schedule (see steps below). If you are new to NetPoint 4.2.1 or need to access legacy NetPoint files, be sure to view the project folder tutorial for details on NetPoint’s new project folder system

Steps:

1. Once the downloaded finishes, click either Save, or Open, or just the name of the download itself (depending on your browser). A folder window will open.
2. Click the UP arrow icon to go one level up, or click  ALT + UP on your keyboard.
3. Right-click on the .zip file (it should be selected) and choose Extract All…
4. After verifying the destination, click Extract. A new folder window will open.
5. Double-click on the .nzp file or choose File > Unzip and Open Project from within NetPoint.

Best route scheduling is an intractable problem, in both the intangible world of mathematics and the tangible world of job shop manufacturing. The contention between multiple jobs and limited resources quickly overwhelms even the most powerful computers’ ability to solve the problem. This paper looks at the origins of the problem and suggests approaches to decrease overall production time for a group of jobs.

What is the Job Shop Scheduling Problem?

The real question being asked here is: what is the best way to do the work that needs to be done in order to produce a specified group of jobs in the shortest amount of time. The more formal definition reads more like: Given n jobs j1, j2,…jn , each unique in the path they must or could follow through the shop, but sharing resources within the shop, and minimizing the production time for the job list as a whole, what is the best ordering of jobs and steps within jobs.

CPM v GPM in the Job Shop

Graphical Path Method (GPM), an alternative to CPM, allows a graphical model of the planned production schedule. Non-polynomial evaluation aided by real-time graphical feedback through the logic diagramming method (LDM). GPM uses planned dates selected by the planner, which can reside anywhere on or between CPM’s early and late dates. Planned dates are not calculated. Floats are calculated by working through the network path and adding the activity level floats and gaps between activities. This is not intuitive to experienced CPM schedulers because CPM would calculate early dates. The critical difference between CPM and GPM is the availability of back float, or “drift” as GPM describes it. Drift is the number of days an activity can move to earlier dates without forcing an earlier start day for the project. Drift is a calculated activity attribute that measures the number of days an activity may backslide or extend to an earlier position without forcing an earlier project start or earlier interim release date.

Tim Mather and Vivek Puri provide a comprehensive overview of NetPoint, imparting basic concepts, new features, and important tips necessary to understanding the unique aspects of the application.

Tim Mather PMP, CCMP, LPEC

As COO of PMA Technologies, Tim provides leadership for the design and development team as well as the intellectual property efforts surrounding NetPoint. Tim is a PMP with an extensive background in project management, software development, and marketing. Tim earned his bachelor’s degree from Michigan State University and pursued postgraduate study of project management at the University of Chicago.

Daniel Hamilton, global project controls expert, presents how Worley incorporated NetPoint into their global transformational interactive planning process for enhanced identification of critical activities and improved team building and accountability. The global project controls team positioned Worley to perform virtual collaborative interactive planning prior to the 2020 pandemic.

Daniel Hamilton

Daniel Hamilton is a global project controls leader with Worley with extensive experience in project controls, project management, planning and scheduling. Daniel is the lead in house expert in using NetPoint® for Interactive Planning within Worley and supports end users around the globe.

Tim Mather, Vivek Puri, and Liang Liu retrace the developmental history of NetPoint and the Graphical Path Method (GPM).  Since the development of the underlying Logic Diagramming Method and its initial unveiling at the 2008 PMICOS conference in Chicago, a dedicated team of software engineers, programmers, and practitioners has implemented the mathematical underpinnings of NetPoint to enable planners to produce a logic-driven schedule while collaborating interactively with all stakeholders. Inspired by the need to prioritize visualization and real-time adaptation to change, GPM remains true to its origins.

Tim Mather PMP, CCMP, LPEC

As COO of PMA Technologies, Tim provides leadership for the design and development team as well as the intellectual property efforts surrounding NetPoint. Tim is a PMP with an extensive background in project management, software development, and marketing. Tim earned his bachelor’s degree from Michigan State University and pursued postgraduate study of project management at the University of Chicago.

Vivek Puri, PhD

Dr. Vivek Puri has significant experience with planning and executing projects in both construction and information technology areas. Dr. Puri’s recent work involves research and development relating to NetPoint, NetRisk, and Schedule MD, three innovative tools developed in-house by PMA. His doctoral work was in the area of simulation applications for construction planning.

Liang Liu, PhD

Dr. Liang Liu was a faculty member of the Construction Engineering and Management Program of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign from 1992 to his retirement in 2019.  He was one of the core members of the GPM and NetPoint development team in 2004, contributing to the design and coding (in C++)  of NetPoint software architecture, data structure, network algorithms, and the interactive GUI (graphical user interface).

Dan Molnar presents how Merck uses NetPoint to support project production planning. For more than 125 years, Merck has been inventing for life, bringing forward medicines and vaccines for many of the world’s most challenging diseases in pursuit of their mission to save and improve lives.  A part of this mission is minimizing health care costs by efficiently managing corporate capital in bringing new products to market.  To this end, Merck strives to utilize lean methods to identify and eliminate waste on project timelines and to improve performance through standard work.  Much of this is achieved through the project production planning method.  This presentation reviews how Merck uses NetPoint in development and implementation of project production plans.

Dan Molnar

Dan Molnar, Project Controls Director – US, has over 28 years in capital project and program management in the pharmaceutical industry. He has experience in all phases of pharmaceutical capital management from concept development through licensure. He has also developed and maintained global portfolio management systems. In many of his roles, he has deployed innovative and effective tools to facilitate communication throughout the organization. He also has a six-sigma green belt and is involved in many corporate initiatives to implement lean methodologies (including Project Production Planning).

When COVID-19 was declared a global pandemic in March of 2020, almost every project was immediately affected by this new and unprecedented level of uncertainty. Angel Arvelo and Dennis Lucey present how project teams implemented new practices to safeguard workers and minimize the most immediate effects, and Owners endeavored to understand project impact to make informed decisions on recalibrating their overall strategies. PMA Consultants worked with client organizations to comprehend these new risks, update project schedules to reflect their impacts, and to formulate new execution plans, identify variability, and model uncertainty, all while adjusting to the new working environment. This presentation demonstrates how the team leveraged NetPoint to evaluate impacts to the project schedule and to collaborate with stakeholders to recalibrate the plan and used NetRisk to factor uncertainty into the program and to model different scenarios to assist both project team and the Owner to make informed decisions.

Angel Arvelo

Angel has extensive experience delivering large complex projects for clients in multiple industries. His experience includes work with oil and gas, pharmaceutical/GMP, life science, alternative energy, power generation & utilities, civil infrastructure, as well as commercial development projects. Angel’s areas of expertise include project management, construction management, project controls, risk assessment and management, planning and scheduling, cost control and management, strategic planning and claims support.

Dennis Lucey

For over 20 years, Dennis has implemented, and managed project controls processes and systems that have delivered effective management tools and led to successful project outcomes. He has public and private sector experience in design, project management, and construction management. Dennis’s expertise areas include risk management, project scheduling and planning, contract management, cost controls, and related project management services.

Machine Generating and Navigating Multilevel Schedules

Dr. Gui Ponce de Leon discusses Schedule Density Zooming™ at the 2021 NetPoint + GPM Conference. Learn how schedulers needing to summarize and translate massive P6 schedules face an arduous, time-consuming process―a challenge made only more daunting by the prospect of having to repeat the process when the detailed schedule undergoes substantial revisions. To solve this long-standing challenge, we introduce density zooming, an algorithmic protocol that machine generates, from a detailed network schedule, a hierarchy of concordant network schedules.

Gui Ponce de Leon PhD, PE, PMP, LEED AP

Dr. Gui started his career in 1969 facilitating scheduling sessions on a drawing board with project managers and superintendents at Townsend & Bottum, Inc. He has served as a contractor chief scheduler, scheduling consultant, program and project manager, forensic scheduler, and expert witness, and he has pioneered innovations in project management throughout his 50-year career. He holds five U.S. patents and has numerous patents pending on his Graphical Path Method (GPM) scheduling invention. Dr. Gui pursued his MS studies at Vanderbilt University and obtained his PhD from the University of Michigan in 1972. From 1973-1989, he taught two graduate courses in project scheduling in the College of Engineering, Civil & Environmental Department, at the University of Michigan.

Do your projects require maintaining multiple schedules for different levels of detail? Summarizing large and detailed schedules and keeping multiple schedules synchronized can be very challenging and time-consuming. Seve Ponce de Leon and Sergio Ponce de Leon present how we are leveraging NetPoint’s ability to create interactive and high-level schedules with new solutions we’re working on to solve core problems like these and advance our vision: reliable project schedules that everyone understands. See what’s coming next on our journey to transform planning and scheduling!

Seve Ponce de Leon

Seve manages the design and development of NetPoint. He conducts software testing, produces technical documentation, and manages customer support, focusing on quality assurance and quality control. Seve earned his BS from the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Sergio Ponce de Leon

Sergio manages the design and development of NetPoint, where he focuses on feature road maps and UI/UX design and release coordination. Sergio is pursuing an MS in information with specializations in human computer interaction and information analysis and retrieval from the University of Michigan.

Deborah Palmer and Gino Napuri present practical insight into the added value of NetPoint for planning the construction of multiple data center facilities. One of the biggest challenges for the vast and growing data center facility industry is to provide the necessary overview at the optimal time, especially when executing multiple construction projects. Learn how NetPoint can improve communication and stakeholder buy-in for a more efficient, manageable, and scalable data center.

Are your projects meeting schedule and budget? Have you wondered about three-point estimates, Monte Carlo, sensitivity, qualitative, or quantitative analysis? Learn the best practices and major steps of any risk analysis as championed by PMA risk experts. Attendees will walk away with the foundation for performing risk analysis on their projects using NetRisk, PMA’s approach based on over 20 years of experience on more than 350 projects with combined values exceeding $50 billion.

Part 1

Part 2

Bruce Stephan presents how NetPoint and NetRisk have helped large public transit agencies like FTA, NY MTA and LA Metro identify schedule risks and secure on-time completion of multi-billion-dollar projects. From the 7 Line Extension and $4.5B Second Ave Subway phase 1 in New York, to LA Metro’s $1.2B Crenshaw LAX and BART’s $3.5B Transbay Corridor Core Capacity projects in California, NetPoint has played an important role in project success. This session will describe each project’s challenges and explain how NetPoint was able to help resolve the issue.

The PMA-sponsored team of engineering students at The University of Michigan presented their research project focusing on schedule risk analysis as a quantitative technique to better predict schedule performance. Schedule risk analysis is a tool used in combination with the project schedule to help a project finish on time and on budget. The team studied the effect of float use on project results during Monte Carlo simulation.

For this investigation, a generic schedule at two different levels of detail was used to compare the differences in the probabilistic completion dates. The researchers used PMA’s NetRisk software to carry out the analysis.

Watch the video presentation of findings:

Phase 1

In phase 1 of the project, three types of simulations were run where float consumption was varied. The three types of simulations that were run were optimistic (no float use), realistic (varied float use), and pessimistic (all float used).

Phase 2

In phase 2, the summary activities were correlated to the corresponding detailed schedule activities, resulting in a revised detailed schedule that was reanalyzed by the three simulation scenarios.

Conclusions

The results for all three floating simulations indicated that the detailed schedules for phase 1 and phase 2 have later probabilistic completion dates than the summary schedule. This observation demonstrates that, as a schedule becomes more detailed, the estimated project completion date is later.

Researchers additionally observed that when floating was applied and as the level of certainty in the completion date increased, the difference in completion dates between the summary and detailed schedules also increased. This demonstrates the significant impact float can potentially have on a project’s final completion date.

The other major observation was that the correlated detailed schedule (phase 2) and uncorrelated detailed schedule (phase 1) had no proven difference in the completion date. This tends to indicate that correlation has almost no effect on a project’s completion date.

Research Team

Xinyao Zhang, MS

Xinyao is a MSc student of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of Michigan. She earned her bachelors’ degree in Civil Engineering and Management from Chang’an University.

Dariya Protcheva, MEng

Dariya is a MEng student at the University of Michigan. She has experience in project management, estimation, cost management, and contract management.

Weixi Li, MEng

Weixi is a MEng student of Construction Management at the University of Michigan. He earned his bachelors’ degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Iowa.

Sara Freid, MEng

Sara recently completed her master’s degree in Construction Engineering and Management from the University of Michigan.

Professor SangHyun Lee

SangHyun is leading the Dynamic Project Management (DPM) Group at the University of Michigan that aims to understand and manage construction dynamics and human – infrastructure interface through sensing, data analytics and computer simulation. Particularly, DPM is interested in achieving the maximum benefit from technologies like wearables, automation, and robotics for humans in construction and infrastructure. DPM also applies these technologies to direct smart and connected communities and cities toward social equality.

Ryan Donaldson and Eric Sylvestre explain how FACCA, a heavy civil construction firm based in Ontario, Canada, has adopted NetPoint as the compete planning and scheduling solution. From project inception, through project execution, and resolving delays, they use NetPoint to drive project success. FACCA has discovered that through visualization of the plan and schedule they gain efficiencies and a more thorough common understanding of the tasks at hand. This presentation focuses on the value attained using NetPoint GPM visualization to drive project collaboration.

Modeling Float-Use Risk in Schedule Risk Analysis

Use of float and its influence in the likelihood of completion has been overlooked in Monte Carlo schedule modeling, leading to exceedingly optimistic probabilities of completion. This Keynote illustrates how the Graphical Path Method (GPM), by modeling the risk of float use in schedule risk analysis, assists schedulers in more accurately predicting probable project finish dates.

Modeling the Risk of Speculative Float Use

• (A) Use a uniform distribution: use from 0% to 100% on every activity with a likelihood of 100%
• (B) Pace the likelihood of float use: use free float in the first 20% of project duration, use 50% total float up to 67% of project duration, and use free float in the last 33% of project duration
• (C) 100% total-float use for every activity yields the pessimistic completion risk curve
• (D) Limiting total float use in Monte Carlo modeling to safe float yields the SAFE project finish risk curve and a more reliable forecast of probable project finish dates

This innovative GPM scheduling principle allows schedulers to model the risk of float use in schedule risk assessment, leading to a more reliable forecast of probable project finish dates.

Using NetPoint for resource planning, leveling, and analysis has allowed for thorough optimizations of projects and portfolios in light of resource constraints. NetPoint can help schedulers quickly adjust the plan according to these constraints. Schedulers can assess resource requirements with other resources, equipment, labor hours, supervision and capital needed to perform the task. One of the most important of these is cash. NetPoint can easily be applied to monitor cash flow on a month-to-month or quarter-to-quarter basis. Finally, NetPoint generates performance measurement tools such as productivity analysis using the information provided.

Case Study: Resource Planning for Portfolio Projects

Following are examples representing a $150 million portfolio of projects that include rail developments, warehouse renovations, mediation, utility redesign, and relocation for a seaport city department. The city department needed to plan its resources, particularly the number of engineers or project managers that would be required for each project.

This planning was originally being done in Excel and was a long and difficult process for the project managers. PMA was able to step in to demonstrate the capabilities of NetPoint and the ease of assigning resources to projects to determine if timing needed to change due to existing constraints.

 

The above graphic represents a capital plan for a one-year period for the client with a single activity to represent each individual project. Each project was loaded with a variety of internal resources. The client needed to optimize their use of internal resources across the portfolio. So, in keeping with the dynamic nature of NetPoint, the planner could grab activities, move them around, and see the resource histogram responding in real time. This capability facilitates dynamic planning and allows resource leveling within NetPoint.

Every activity has been resourced according to the FTE ratio. The resource loading within NetPoint is very flexible. Any value is possible because the program is agnostic with respect to units. The planner can also drill down into a resource analysis and look at just a single individual. All other resources can be turned off and then a single worker remains in the histogram. In this case a limit has been applied because there’s only one barrier and its possible to see that for a portion of the year, that individual is going to be working some overtime. There is also a representation of the plan highlighting the projects in which the worker is loaded in as a potential resource showing their use of time over the course of the next year.

Create Reports in Microsoft Excel

We can also export these resources to Microsoft Excel for reporting. NetPoint will also build resource histograms for resources exported to Excel. Once again, the ability to communicate with Excel to create different types of reports including monthly expenditures has helped with the development of resource planning.

 

In terms of capital planning, the ability to plan multiple projects as an owner or contractor and understand the timing and resources required promotes quick decision-making on when to start projects and understanding the effects of current projects on future spending. With NetPoint, planners can optimize a capital plan according to priorities and constraints and identify project interdependencies. They can forecast and monitor cash flow, plan and manage resources, and report on program and portfolio performance.

NetPoint facilitates capital planning by using planned dates which allow for unconstrained planning. Each project does not need to start on the earliest date as in CPM; neither is the application of different constraints or lags necessary because planners actually use the planned dates. NetPoint provides real-time feedback and resource histograms that can facilitate interactive planning and plan optimization. NetPoint also contains a plethora of information within one file that is easily accessible so planners can visualize the entire program or portfolio. Planners can visualize critical resources along with the plan and at the end of the day return to the schedule and be confident that the outcome is easily understood by non-schedulers.

What happens when your construction project is delayed? How do you determine what’s wrong and how to fix it? If you are a project manager or scheduler, you compare the baseline schedule with the current progress to find the variances. In the following project descriptions, learn how PMA schedulers used NetPoint to find the variance in construction schedules, identify delays, and build a schedule that would meet the team’s target completion date. These examples of variance and delay are derived from two similar but distinct projects.

For those not familiar with the term, the baseline schedule is one which has been agreed upon in the construction contract by the stakeholders and against which the progress of the project is measured. Baseline schedules can be used to measure performance as the project progresses through time, compare anticipated future progress, or assess the need to perform what-if scenarios.

Measuring Schedule Variance Against the Schedule Baseline

The project represented is a $40 million hospital addition that provided an ICU and more surgical space to a conjoining hospital. PMA became involved in the middle of the project when the construction company required additional project management help. The best project scheduling practices were followed in order to provide a critical path summary with every update. After updating the schedule progress, the schedulers copied that unchanged critical path and added a few delay activities to show the variance between the two updates.

Schedule Comparison Leads to Schedule Recovery

Using a side-by-side schedule comparison, NetPoint visually isolated the critical path to show difference between two updates that pushed out the project completion dates. The two different schedules were reviewed on the same sheet of paper. The ability to compare two updates within one document helped not only the project team but also other stakeholders to quickly address the problem. The scheduling software and the critical path method allowed the team to see areas that were ahead or behind schedule. They were able to receive dynamic feedback from the visual target mode, identify the problem area and its effects on common stream activities, and perform a what-if analysis towards schedule recovery.

This scheduling method revealed that a 12-day extension, attributed to winter weather, and a 3-day extension due to downtime occurring during the Christmas holiday were required to complete the superstructure. The contractor was able to install the perimeter wall frame at the construction site more quickly than previously planned and the contractor also added more resources after New Year’s Day, which effectively cut down the time frame for that activity by five days. That resulted in a 10-workday extension to their project completion date, so the contractor knew where they stood with regard to their contractual requirements and were then able to begin formulating a recovery plan.

When Schedule Variance Becomes Schedule Delay

The suitability of NetPoint in illustrating project schedule delay arises from its developmental history. NetPoint in its earliest days evolved from a tool that PMA was developing to build schedule demonstratives that could support delay in litigation and arbitration. Here we see NetPoint deployed on another $40 million hospital addition. This scenario focuses on presenting delay versus simply reporting on variance. While delay builds off variance, delay discussion requires evaluation of activity slippage and its impact on project constraints and requirements with a focus on how to substantiate the delay.

The project schedulers view their goal as providing the truth about project progress in many different modalities. These modalities included presenting the original plan, describing how work was supposed to occur, drawing attention to a change, and pinpointing how that change should be remediated. Who or what is accountable? At the end of the day, the schedulers need to present how much time or how much acceleration is to be granted.

In this case, the contractor encountered various issues with steel design, including some missing steel as well as steel that was incorrectly sized. This example compares the baseline schedule to a post-impact critical path in which steel fabrication started approximately 45 days late. Compounding the effect of the delay, the redesign effort required more steel to be fabricated which increased the amount of time needed by the steel vendor.

This simple diagram was able to focus the owner’s representatives’ attention to the impact on the original plan and resulted in an approved extension of the project duration as well as modification of the general conditions.

The schedulers provided a baseline schedule looking at a pre-impact versus post-impact scenario. In this case, approximately two update periods between two files. In the space in between, they put in a section to highlight the 44-day delay to start steel fabrication and the 7-day increase in fabrication duration, as well as some links that were faded in order to highlight where they would be inserted into the network and their corresponding impact. Consequently, it was easy to trace the steel fabrication start date to where it was currently scheduled to begin in a progress schedule.

The project schedulers were looking at a pre-impact versus post-impact scenario and wanted to represent multiple progress submittals, so two different data dates were inserted by using a milestone with a tail colored in blue. The data dates represent where the project was at that point in time, with respect to these two different scenarios.

When it comes to project schedules, some timelines are more optimistic than others – and that can lead to big issues later on. Those who have a hard time estimating durations that are reasonable could be providing more of a “best case” scenario versus what represents a more practical assessment.

It’s a concept called the Planning Fallacy, first proposed by Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky in 1979.

So why does this phenomenon occur and how can project managers develop schedules that are more realistic?

First, let’s discuss the planning fallacy concept: A tendency to underestimate how much time is required to complete a task, which, when accumulating over an amount of time with other improperly planned tasks, can lead to an unrealistic project schedule.

What are the root causes of the planning fallacy?

There are 4 main reasons why people underestimate their task completion times:

Group Optimism Bias
When a group reviews a challenge, does the group learn from that experience? Often, no. It’s more likely that the group maintains optimistic time predictions, unknowingly or unconsciously, that a unique external event occurred with no chance of that failure happening again. These cognitive biases impact task completion predictions with overly optimistic predictions.

Backward Planning
What we mean is that a project estimated backward from the forecasted end date on the schedule could have an adverse effect on durations. Rather than a realistic duration associated with each task, the duration gets shortened in order to accommodate the overall schedule. Many other elements can suffer as a result, including scope, cost and quality.

Overpromising
There is often a sense by project managers and other team members that nobody understands the project’s timeline better than they themselves do. So, for example, when an outsider to the project is skeptical of the proposed schedule, they might allow their egos to take over, seeing this skepticism as a challenge to their credibility. The unintended consequence of this action is a highly aggressive schedule with numerous shortened durations that the team must now accommodate.

Lack Of Full Team Input
At times, the most dominant voice in the room for planning discussions belongs to a high-level person who has little interest in obtaining input on the project schedule from a variety of team members. This individual will rarely consider all elements of the schedule and will be primarily locked on a particular date or goal that must be reached at all costs. Unfortunately, that person’s optimistic view of the schedule, often results in time management issues.

How To Re-Align After The Planning Fallacy

The good news is that corrective procedures can bring the project back into alignment if a few important steps are taken:

1. Gather Insights From External Data, Not Internal Voices Exclusively
The schedule will typically be better served with a more practical and unbiased outlook if external data from similar tasks or projects are included. How do those past projects’ timelines and outcomes compare to the current project’s schedule? Relying solely on the intuitive predictions of the project’s current participants can be too insulating. Remove this variable and use comparable projects as a true source of validation.

2. Plan For The Unplanned From The Very Beginning
We often hear about post-mortem meetings, in which the team reviews a completed project to dissect what went wrong and what could have been improved upon. While there is still a place for that discussion to occur, consider moving that conversation to the beginning. Start by envisioning an outcome where the project has derailed or completed beyond the timeline projected. What went wrong? Were there certain elements the team had been too optimistic about delivering on a particular date? Were there elements that were outside of the team’s direct control that no one accounted for?

The point of this type of meeting is to get the entire team thinking about the hidden risks in the project schedule given their past experiences, and making the proper adjustments in the schedule now to allow for situations where these variables may present themselves.

3. Designate A Third-Party To Lead Planning Sessions
The fact of the matter is that, try as one might, it’s very hard for a team to create a project schedule in a vacuum without the benefit of an outside perspective. So, in addition to the use of external data from similar projects, we also suggest utilizing a third party to facilitate planning sessions. We call this the “Coach’s Challenge,” to borrow a concept from the National Football League. Much like how a coach will throw a challenge flag onto the field when they disagree with a referee’s call, the third party facilitator can throw a challenge toward any decision made by the group that doesn’t make sense or carries an unnecessary level of risk that hasn’t been thoroughly discussed.

Whether the resolution of the challenge is to stay the course or to revise accordingly based on the facilitator’s thinking, the point is that the Coach’s Challenge slows the process down in a constructive manner at a key point in time. It allows the team to focus on how it arrived at its decision and if it has sufficiently factored in areas of risk that could influence the schedule.

Managing Risk and Avoiding the Planning Fallacy with Thorough Analysis of Project Schedules

It’s always the hope that data helps people avoid risk. Generally speaking, with risk analysis, the more data at one’s fingertips, the better the analysis can be. One of the best tools is NetRisk™, a module for NetPoint®, which allows one to perform qualitative and quantitative risk analysis.

The system provides an inherent integration with the planning process, enhanced schedule modeling capabilities, and cost functionality. NetRisk™ provides a strategy for identifying and controlling project or program risk, and allows professionals to bring risk management into the future of project planning.

Discover how NetRisk™ can get and keep your next project aligned with a realistic schedule every step of the way by receiving a demo today. Learn more about mitigating the planning fallacy by reading one of our related publications.

Mitigating the Planning Fallacy (Risked Schedules—The New Normal)

In support of this strategy, Dr. Gui introduces GPM schedule risk analysis and provides a demonstrative using NetRisk, download the presentation to learn more.

The Planning Fallacy and Its Effect on Realistic Project Schedules

As a project manager or planner, it’s important to recognize when these psychological effects are impacting your project schedule. The authors, Jeff Valdahl and Shannon Katt, use examples from various projects to show where this challenging planning issue is likely to occur. Identifying where adjustments need to be made at both the task and overall project level is essential in developing a project schedule that is both achievable and reasonable.

Published by AACE® International in Cost Engineering.

“Human history teaches us, however, that economic growth springs from better recipes, not just from more cooking.”

–Romer, Paul M. “Economic Growth.” In the Concise Encyclopedia of Economics, 2008

Back in 1965, the Gantt Chart was viewed with some skepticism.

In the 1965 published book, “CPM in Construction Management”, the author, J. O’Brien, challenges the notion of a new visual planning aid.  If the bar graph is so well suited to construction activity, why look for another planning aid? The reason lies in the fact that the bar graph is limited in what it can present. In the preparation of the bar chart, the scheduler is almost necessarily influenced by desired finish dates, often actually working backward from the completion dates. The resultant mixture of planning and scheduling is often no better than wishful thinking.

If a bar graph is carefully prepared, the scheduler goes through the same thinking process that the CPM planner does. However, the bar graph cannot show (or record) the dependent tasks which control the project progress. Later, even the originator is often hard-pressed to explain his plan using the bar graph.

Nowadays, the Gantt Chart has many supporters.  Gantt chart has evolved to become the primary means of communicating project plans and for good reason. The Gantt chart is the primary visualization method in many of the project scheduling software options available today. Gantt chart software was created to automate the planning and scheduling process to create task dependencies, add milestones, or identify the project’s critical path.

But then a Gantt Devotee Broke Rank.  In 2012, Dave Garrett, founder of the online community ganttheads.com sent an email to his network with the subject of “Subject: Project Management is Changing (and so are we…)”.  The well-known project manager recognized the coming changes saying “…times change and many project leaders are much more focused on their KanBan Boards than on a linear schedule.”  He changed the online community name to Project Management, noting changes to tools and approaches.

“…times change and many project leaders are much more focused on their KanBan Board than a linear schedule.”

–Dave Garrett

A Century Worth of Gantt Charts

Mid-1910s Henry Gantt creates Gantt charts as a tool for production scheduling in the job shop environment

1931 Construction begins on the Hoover Dam using Gantt charts

1956 The Interstate Highway System begins construction; Gantt charts are used as the scheduling method

1957 CPM improves on Gantt charts by expressly recognizing the logic ties or task dependencies 1957 to Mid-1980s Gantt charts survive CPM as one of the formats often used to display CPM schedules

Mid-1980s Gantt charts with logic ties aka Logic Gantt charts become the CPM software graph of choice

2008 Dr. Gui introduces the graphical path method or GPM® at the PMI College of Scheduling Annual Conference in Chicago

2012 Patrick Weaver debunks the notion that Bar Graphs were invented by Gantt

Construction Gantt Chart Examples

     

Three Perspectives on Gantt Charts for Construction

1. A simple visualization of a project timeline that engenders the ability to see where project activities fall in relation to each other. They are easily understood by project executives and foremen alike. A staple of project management for many practitioners.
2. Gantt charts are subjective vs. rule-based, therefore, Gantt charts are not reliable tools for construction scheduling.  Planners are compelled not just to scope activities but also to place them on the calendar without any consistent rule to guide the sequencing of activities. The chain of activities controlling completion can only be determined subjectively, commonly by working backward through the Gantt chart.
3. Logic Gantt charts (with CPM logic ties) are not subjective. For projects involving over one hundred activities, Gantt charts with CPM logic ties fail to convey a sense of logical flow. Combining the time-scaled advantage of Gantt charts with the logic visibility of CPM networks often times yields a convoluted Gantt chart that represents neither well.

What about Excel Gantt charts?

Many project superintendents will use an Excel Gantt chart to create a project schedule. However, Excel is not an effective tool to create a Gantt chart for many reasons. A simple Gantt chart does not have the ability to communicate, track and analyze project data. For example, the project schedule will not automatically update in real-time like it would in other scheduling tools. In fact, it is nearly impossible to track changes and alter timelines within an Excel document. Most importantly there is a breakdown in logic and you cannot involve resources in the project schedule when using an Excel Gantt Chart.

GPM Alternative to the Prior Logic Gantt Charts

There are three networking alternatives: ADM, PDM, & LDM.

Summarizing the GPM Scheme of Thought

• Relies on LDM, a visualization of time that combines ADM with PDM, and that has the potential to render Gantt charts with or without logic ties redundant
• GPM software architecture relies on objects (i.e., activities, links, embedded nodes, milestones, etc.) that contain embedded rules and GPM algorithms
• Activities are scheduled on early start dates or user-selected planned dates without start-no-earlier constraints and without forfeiting drift or reducing total float
• Gaps are used to calculate drifts & floats; total floats are less useful than the combination of drifts & floats
• In response to manipulation by the planner, GPM software in real time reschedules only activities that are manipulated or affected by the manipulated activities
• When the goal is to level resources for the project, GPM software is a computer-aided process that, at each junction, amalgamates schedule context and project managers’ judgment
• Offers the flexibility of backward or pull planning, essential on some projects as well as to lean construction and critical chain planners

The Contrast: Summarizing CPM Principles

• Predominantly relies on tabular displays and logic Gantt charts developed in microsoft Excel
• Activities, logic ties and milestones are housed in an Excel database; the CPM software aka scheduling engine contains the algorithms
• Requires drift-choking constraints or drift-choking ‘manual dates’ anytime activities are scheduled after early dates
• Calculates early and late start dates, from which total floats are derived
• In response to user input (e.g., change a noncritical activity duration by one day), CPM recalculates both the forward pass and backward pass in their entirety (i.e., the CPM engine recalculates all dates, total floats, etc.)
• Levels resources through software heuristics that apply rules in a pre-established order/priority regardless of whether or not in context
• Hinders use by lean construction practitioners due to lack of backward planning capability

Is CPM with Gantt Charts Outmoded by GPM?

GPM vs CPM with Logic Gantt Charts

GPM	CPM with Logic Gantt Charts
Time-scaled LDM networks innately convey PDM logic	Gantt charts with logic ties fail to convey logical flow
Stakeholders, not the algorithm, drive activity dates	Reliance on CPM algorithms biases activities to early dates
Constraints are not needed to start activities on planned dates	Constraints are required to start activities on planned dates
GPM planned dates do not supersede early dates	SNE* constraints supersede CPM early dates, forfeiting drift
If planned start > early start and < late start, drift and float exist	Drift is always 0; If early start < late start, total float exists
Link gap measures logic tie leeway (different from free float)	Logic tie leeway is not a concept in CPM
SNE constraints are reserved for contractually-imposed dates	Does not distinguish planned dates from constrained dates
The schedule can be generated either forward or backward, or both	The schedule can only be generated forward from the project start event
Total floats are algorithmically calculated left of the data date	Total floats are only available forward of the data date
The as-built critical path is calculated left of the data date	As-built critical path cannot be calculated by CPM alone
Stakeholder strategies in context are key in resource leveling	Automated software heuristics drive resource leveling
Capable of modeling floating & pacing risks in simulation	Early dates bias does not allow modeling of floating or pacing risks

Who are the Early GPM Adopters?

• GC/CM: Gilbane Building Company, 2009
• Electric Utility: Manitoba Hydro, 2009
• Pharmaceutical: Merck & Company, 2009
• Owner/Governmental: US Army Corps of Engineers, 2009
• Academic: Virginia Tech University, 2009
• GC/CM: Walbridge, 2010
• Owner: Walt Disney Company, 2010
• EPC Contractor: Bechtel, 2010
• Pharmaceutical: Medimmune, 2011
• Pharmaceutical: Johnson & Johnson, 2011
• EPC Contractor: Jacobs Engineering, 2011
• Supplier: Invensys, 2011
• A/E Consultant: Stantec Consulting, 2011
• PM/CM Consultant: ORCAS Project Controls, 2011
• Fusion Development: ITER Organization, 2011
• Biofuels: Butamax, 2011
• GC/CM: Kenny Construction, 2012
• GC/CM: Hoffman Construction, 2012
• Producer Oil & Gas: MEG Energy, 2012
• Owner: Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, 2013

Graphical Path Method – 10 Critical Takeaways

1. Stakeholders are back in the project planning and scheduling game
2. Immediate availability of the schedule upon completion of full‐wall planning
3. Immediate visual representation and feedback of the effect of each revision on the schedule
4. Better suited for tablets and touch screens due to interactivity and graphical nature
5. Schedule can be easily understood by all team members who are not schedulers
6. Compact activity placement yields neat Level 1 and Level 2 Schedules (no more waterfalls)
7. Transparent planning and scheduling (logic overrides are visible)
8. Having drift allows schedules with realistic activity dates vs. all early‐date schedules
9. Calculation of total floats left of the data date reveals the then‐existing as‐built critical path
10. Immediate visual representation and feedback of the effect of an activity shift on the resource histogram