Bottom line. There are precious few planners/schedulers who have that depth of field experience, which explains the TRUTH about why so many projects run LATE and/or OVER BUDGET. https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/pmwj133-Sep2023-Giammalvo-futility-of-master-plans-prepared-with-little-or-no-hands-on-experience.pdf

When I was actively involved with the GAO as an “independent consultant” when compiling BOTH the Cost and Scheduling “best tested and PROVEN” practices, those of us contributing from the roles of CONTRACTORS are not looking at the schedule for AUDITING but as FORECASTING- as a RESOURCE ALLOCATION/MANAGEMENT TOOL and to serve as DEFENSIVE (or OFFENSIVE) purpose to protect us against claims and help to perfect or substantiate our claims against the OWNERS DELAYS and CHANGE ORDERS. VERY DIFFERENT from how the NDIA and private sector contractors need or use the CPM schedule. https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/pmwj133-Sep2023-Giammalvo-futility-of-master-plans-prepared-with-little-or-no-hands-on-experience.pdf

And IF the CPM schedule has NOTHING to do with EVM, then why do they bother with SV or SPI? Or the false and misleading claims by PMI and Walt Lipske with their claims about “Earned Schedule”? Wayne Abba and I have agreed since PMI and Lipske made that claim both Wayne and I agreed that “Earned Time” and “Earned Schedule” have always dated back to the ORIGINS of Earned Value, from the Industrial Revolution, which we still see in use today in shoes and clothing (and nearly all other factories, as well as “job shops” like Doctors, Dentists, Lawyers, Auto mechanics, Barbers, Hair Dressers, Engineers and anyone else who offers their services on a “walk-in” basis that is sold on a “Unit Completed” basis) in the form of what is known as “piecework.” https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/pmwj121-Sep2022-Giammalvo-origins-and-history-of-evm-a-contractors-perspective.pdf

Hi Alex, I would differentiate between technical issues (assessed by the DCMA and similar approaches) and quality as in ‘fit for purpose’. .

Many posts present DCMA-14 points as a GENERIC schedule QUALITY assessment, while 3 metrics (11, 13 & 14) are purely about project performance.

It is barely applicable outside the Defence Contract Management Agency portfolio. This portfolio has a huge number of contractual projects, and they need a SIMPLE set of metrics to identify which projects require deeper analysis.

Also, the recent ’14 points check’ addon to the desktop version of Primavera creates the illusion that this tool now supports the DCMA assessment, and it is not. Even well-recognised P6 gurus rushed to announce that Primavera supports the assessment only because the total number of assessments is the same and some checks have similar names.

Another point I want to make is that assessment can’t guarantee that the GREEN schedule (based on the assessment) is reliable and doesn’t have a critical quality issues. With the volume of projects, they can’t “catch” all problematic schedules, but the health assessment is sufficient to catch many of them. I would say, it is probabaly practical to apply the ‘80/20’ rule for that type of portfolio and maybe absolutely not applicable to other portfolios.

It would be great to have a white paper to review the gaps. Happy to participate.

Regards,
Alex Lyaschenko

The problem is Paul, the DCMA 14 point checklist is for evaluating CPM schedules – IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH EVM. You continue to show you lack of comprehension.

I have read the links (many times!!), and based on published research by Wayne Abba https://www.dau.edu/library/defense-atl/blog/Reboot-Earned-Value-Management and Chad Reynolds https://www.dau.edu/library/defense-atl/blog/PlanningfortheFutureofEarnedValueManagement the DAU has finally admitted that Earned Value, as being advocated by the US Government (and PMI and AACE et al.) has not worked in the past, is not working now and they are finally admitting EVM has to be changed for the future.

For 50+ years, we (and our clients) have been successfully using EVM not as the DAU advocates it but as it evolved on the factory floors of the 18th Century Industrial Revolution and as a “payment for performance” or “incentive payment system” https://pmworldlibrary.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/pmwj121-Sep2022-Giammalvo-origins-and-history-of-evm-a-contractors-perspective.pdf and under that system, the only VALID project schedule technique is what we in construction call “Rolling Wave Planning,” and our IT colleagues call “SCRUMS” or “SPRINTS.”

The “fatal flaw” in creating IMS can be found in these quotes from Helmuth von Moltke-“no plan survives first contact with the enemy”; Gen Eisenhower, who told us, “Plans are useless, but planning is essential,” and Gen. Omar Bradley’s quote- “AMATEURS study STRATEGY while PROFESSIONALS study LOGISTICS.”

Try reading the links instead of asking rhetorical questions.

And where is your proof to back up your claim that “there is an established correlation between a competently prepared schedule and project success”?

The IPMA/KPMG research from 2019 and 2020 certainly doesn’t support any claims for correlation, much less causation.