PROBLEMS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SCHEDULING SYSTEMS D-8

BY

Dr. Gui Ponce-Campos

Member, AACE

Project Management Associates, Inc.,

A Subsidiary of Townsend and Bottum, :Inc.

The University of Michigan

Ann Arbor, Michigan

FOREWORD

Critical path scheduling systems have been will tend to develop network plans including
available since 1959 (5). Once referred to as basic logic as well as specific time sequencing.
"critical path programs", scheduling systems have Inadequate plans due to excessive constraining
grown to become complex information systems. and other reasons produce inflexible, difficult-
Significant growth has taken place in the areas to-use schedules, and are a common cause for
of networking techniques, resource scheduling, system failure.
sophisticated reporting and remote operations.
Above all, the implementation of a scheduling
These enhancements notwithstanding, the rate system must be aimed at the simplification of plan-
of successful utilization of scheduling systems ning and scheduling functions. This, however, can-
has not attained a comparable growth. A recent not be achieved with cumbersome input requirements,
survey of the Engineering News-Record "top 400 untimely reporting, or with output reports which
firms' (2), conducted by Harvard's E. W. Davis, attempt to make scheduling experts out of non-
established that only 13%of the 113 respondent scheduling personnel. Problems stemming from
firms actively using critical path methods and these inadequacies are,commonplace in some of to-
systems considered their results as very suc- day's more popular systems.
cessful.
Certainly, problems stemming from the impro-
The objectives of this presentation are two- per implementation of scheduling systems are a
fold. First, to highlight the more significant function of the particular organization implement-
problems which prevent systems from achieving ing the system. Different managerial attitudes
their potential usefulness. And second, to sug- and relationships between scheduling and non-sche-
gest contingency actions which will increase the duling personnel will prevent or give rise to
likelihood of successful system implementation different problems. Moreover, different problems
by all project personnel. will be encountered in construction management vs.
general contract projects; in private vs. public
This presentation is arranged into four sec- projects; or in negotiated vs. competitive projects.
tions. The next section puts forth three major
premises regarding why problems do develop. The In spite of these differences, a commonality
succeeding sections, then, identify specific pro- of problems can be established. If contingency
blems and contingency actions within each major actions are taken to prevent these problems, then
premise area. success of the system is very likely. Conversely,
should these problems not be anticipated, an early
WHY DO PROBLEMS DEVELOP? breakdown of the system is almost guaranteed.
These problems and contingency actions are dis-
Scheduling systems are designed by highly cussed in the ensuing sections under the headings:
technical personnel. Their relative merits are Managing the Transition, Adequate Planning Ap-
often judged by the sophistication of their sche- proaches, and Securing a Suitable System.
duling capabilities. Their implementation on the
other hand, involves project personnel already
performing scheduling functions (seat-of-the- MANAGING THE TRANSITION
pants, or otherwise), but with little depth of
critical path expertise. Yet, more often than Introduction of a scheduling system is both
not scheduling systems are thrust upon project a technological and organizational renewal process.
personnel with little regard given to the recon- Technological changes are numerous, and for the
ciliation of these differences. most part, evident, i.e. bar charts give way to
networks, and all the implications thereof; manual
Implementation of a scheduling system implies solutions axe replaced by computer printouts.
the development of a network plan by scheduling Organizational changes are also significant, al-
personnel. In some instances, schedulers very though not always as evident. Exhibit A below
strong in critical path theory will not possess compares the organization of planning and sche-
the experience needed to develop realistic plans. duling functions in a general contract construc-
In other instances, schedulers with substantial tion project before and after the implementation
project experience but short on planning theory of a scheduling system.
187
 BEFORE AFTER not communicated to A/E representative, sub-
contractors, etc.
Plans developed by G.C. Plans developed jointly . On EXCESSIVE WORK PRESSURE - - set up planning
by G.C. and subs meetings on days when cost control is performed.
Planning based on major Planning coordinates . On VESTED INTERESTS - - engineering attempting
phasing of various procurement tasks and to assume leadership over construction, or
trades detailed construction vice versa.
sequences
Planning usually con- Planning encompasses A planned program aimed at removing these re-
fined to current total project sistance forces may include contingency actions as
month described below:
Scheduling problems are Problems are anticipated
solved as they occur and solved in advance a. SECURE TOP MANAGEMENT - - involve top
management in the introduction of the sys-
ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGES IN PLANNING AND SCHEDULING tem; relate top management needs; insure
EXHIBIT A top management participation on a continu-
ing basis, i.e. reviewing schedules, re-
Changes in behavior will always generate if solving scheduling conflicts
in agreement with Dr. Lippit's contention (6), re-
sistance to the methodology employed to put changes b. ESTABLISH NEEDS AND BENEFITS - - needs of
into effect. The successful introduction of a (i) principal organization, (ii) support-
scheduling system, therefore, depends on identify- ing organizations, _. (iii) , owner's ornani-
ing these resistances, diagnosing them, and con- zation; benefits: interfacing of procure-
fronting them with planned change. ment and construction, knowledge of criti-
cal tasks, improved communication and
Exhibit B below identifies some of the causes commitments
for resisting the change to a scheduling system.
Potential problems arising from these causes are C. ESTABLISH PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES - - re-
also highlighted. concile objectives of (i) project manager,
(ii) job superintendent, etc.; once set,
do not violate objectives
CAUSES FOR RESISTANCE POTENTIAL PROBLEMS a. INVOLVE OPERATING PERSONNEL - - establish
their present roles and skills; do not
Lack of top management Importance not perceiv- violate decision making prerogatives nor
support ed established hierarchy positions; begin
Purpose and need not Uncooperative relation- with personnel of least resistance; in
established ship with change agent preliminary planning, do not propose net-
Personnel affected by Support from users will works, rather, work breakdowns
system not given due falter; lack of
consideration commitment e. ASK PERSONNEL FOR VIEWPOINTS - - encourage
Work patterns are Work will proceed as personnel to point out inconsistencies in
ignored usual, regardless of plans; establish comparisons between pre-
system sent system and new system, seek criticism,
There is poor communi- Secondary, but neces- be ready to answer; implement suggestions
cation about the sary data, will be where feasible
system difficult to acquire
Excessive work pressure Quality will be impair- f. ESTABLISH COMMITMENT - - planning infor-
is involved ed; information will mation, i.e. times, dates, resources, etc.
not be timely must be provided by due party; secure re-
Lack of trust in the Analysis and conclu- view and approvals prior to issuing final
initiator (i.e. sions may not be schedules
change agent) accepted
Costs are too high System will be discon-
g. MAKE ONLY ESSENTIAL CHANGES - - differen-
tinued tiate between "must-have" and "want-to-
Vested interests are Lack of cooperation; have" information; secure new reports
involved sabotage which are similar to previous documents;
always minimize number of reports
POTENTIAL PROBLEMS WILL DEVELOP IF . . .
EXHIBIT B
h. EDUCATE THROUGHPUT - - first must: ex-
Some examples of these causes for resistance plain new terminology and relate to pre-
may be given as follows: sent concepts; insure that personnel
thoroughly understand report(s); train
. On NEEDS - - spec's call for CPM; therefore, personnel in gathering of feedback infor-
must prepare one. mation; insure that scope of each network
. On PERSONNEL INVOLVEMENT - - schedules are activity is properly understood
handed out to engineers, field personnel,
etc., actually doing the work. 1. CREATE TRUST IN THE SYSTEM - - do not
. On WORK PATTERNS - - construction schedules oversell system, be careful to point out
not matching crew assignments its limitations; change agent must have
. On POOR COMMUNICATION - - purpose and roles some experience with the type of project
188
 being planned; admit ignorance where Lack of monitoring and Unrealistic progress
applicable, chance for drawing feedback guidelines data; obsolete
schedules
j. PROVlDE ADEQUATE MOTIVATION - - meaning-
ful reward based on performance; high- POTENTIAL PROBIEMS WILL DEVELOP IF . . .
light everyone's relationship to the EXHIBIT C
total effort; impress importance of ef-
fort; be ready to assume failures and to Further interpretation of some of these flaws
distribute success may be given as follows:

Some final comments regarding these contingency . On CONSTRAINING - - excessive inclusion of

actions. Although involving considerations for top want relationships such as: foundations B
management support, they are primarily aimed at preceded by foundations A; south wall preced-
securing the support of the people who must use the ed by north wall, etc. as opposed to must
system results, and turn them into reality. Inter- relationships (e.g. wall preceded by a
estingly enough, Professor Davis's survey establish- footings; stru&ural steel preceded by foun-
ed that the largest percentage of nunsuccessful dations). Constraining is an effort to sche-
users" (64%) placed the reason for failure precise- dule within the plan.
ly on the "lack of support from people who must use . On EXCESSIVE DETAILING - - Unnecessary break-
the system". On the positive side, successful downs of definitely non-critical tasks, i.e.
users cited "good training of personnel" as the site work, some interior finishes; activity
most crucial reason for their successful implemen- breakdowns beyond crew assignments, i.e. begin
tation of critical path methods. footings, continue footings, complete foot-
ings, etc.
ADEQUATE PLANNING APPROACHES . On INSUFFICIENT DETAILING - - failure to dis-
tinguish between similar work performed by
No scheduling system can rise above the quality distinct Crews and/or performed at different
level of the network plan(s) it is to process. Al- times; failure to breakdown sub-contracted
though a sound planning approach does not guarantee work on the basis of interfacing with other
successful implementation, an erroneous approach sub-contractors.
is a certain cause for failure. . On TIME ESTIMATING - - excessive "guesstima-
tion" of critical tasks; inclusion of float
Lest it is assumed that scheduling theoreti- times into duration estimates; failure to
cians and practitioners have not been doing their consider cost estimates when assigning time
homework in this regard, I should point out the durations.
various refinements in planning technology intro- . On EXZ?,RNAL CONSTRAINTS - - failure to con-
duced in the last decade, such as: precedence sult vendors regarding delivery times; impro-
networking (8,g) multi-network integration (4), per consideration of weather restrictions on
resource allocation (7,1-O), etc. And also, refer work sequencing; failure to include needed
to the many articles written on the subject in regulatory approvals; failure to incorporate
recent conference proceedings (1,ll). Further manpower availability.
evidence of this concern for proper approaches . On MONITORING/UPDATING - - failure to prior-
to project planning may be found in a recent itize the upcoming work as imminent, possible,
AACE Cost Engineer's Notebook publication by and so forth; lack of progress notations for
A. L. Dellon (3). use in upcoming updates; failure to review
external contributions when updating, e.g.
Certainly, proper approaches to project plan- vendors.
ning are closely related to the type of project Contingency actions aimed at avoiding these
under consideration, i.e., design vs. construction; potential problems may be identified as follows:
as well as to the project delivery method, i.e.
construction management vs. general contracting. a. DEVELOP FIEXIBLF: PLANS - - minimize
These differences notwithstanding, several common number of constraints, i.e. want rela-
planning flaws can be brought out, and are pre- tionships, especially for la= work;
sented in Exhibit C, below. build in priorities and manpower avail-
abilities in the computation of sche-
PLANNING FLAWS POTENTIAL PROBIEMS dule dates
Network plans are too Added costs from con- b. MAKE PIANS FIT WORK - - level of detail
constrained tinuous renetworking should consider: crewing assignments,
Network plans too de- Tend to be constrained; continuity in work, experience of per-
tailed hard to work with sonnel, tightness of schedule, criti-
Network plans too con- Relationships not re- cality of tasks (from past experience);
densed presentative; little activity breakdown should consider:
control patterns of work, interfacings between
Time estimation hap- Schedules will be re- dependent organizations, scheduling
hazard cognized as faulty objectives
No contingency allowances Likely schedule overruns
External constraints not Unrealistic dates for C. VALIDATE PLANS AND SCHEDULES - - compa-
properly established key milestones risons between resources (i.e. labor) as
Proper summations not Lack of involvement by estimated vs. as called for by schedule;
provided for top management analyze potential problems: resource
189
 availability, material deliveries, sen- for characters used in plots; cumbersome
sitivity to weather; secure review of abbreviations, etc. etc.
schedule by all project elements, i.e. . On REPORTING - - scheduling "debugging" in-
owner, consultants, subcontractors, etc. formation scattered over several reports;
lack of "editing" reports; field reporting
a. PROVIDE ADEQUATE SUMMATIONS - - involve which consists of either: to many reports,
all members of management team in the or unnecessary information, or do not serve
determination of milestones; provide functions of previous "accepted": reports,
schedule summations on the basis of sub- i.e. bar charts.
contractors, buildings, systems, cost . On DATA SELECTION - - inability to reduce
control breakdowns, etc. output to a particular portion of the pro-
ject, i.e. subcontractor, time period,
e. ESTABLISH SCHEDULE CONTROLS - - develop criticality, etc.
"target" schedule for purposes of com- . On INCOMPATIBILITY - - in vital areas where,
paring revised schedules; establish previous system being replaced, surpasses
daily monitoring procedures; review new system.
"imminent" procurement items for upcom-
ing two-to-three months SYSTEM INADEQUACIES POTENTIAL PROBLEMS

f. ORGANIZE FOR UPDATING - - provide updat- Insufficient technologi- Costly alternate ap-
ing reports, assign responsibilities, cal capabilities proaches; frustrated
establish procedures between update, and schedulers
release of updated reports Demanding input proce- Excessive work by sche-
dures dulers; lengthy turn-
SECURING A SUITABLE SYSTEM arounds
Cumbersome field input Unreliable progress
Selection of a suitable scheduling system guidelines data; trial-and-error
ranks a definite third as a consideration for a updating
successful scheduling effort. The scheduling sys- Lack of standard termi- Confusion; misuse
tem software market has been, and still is, devoid nology
of "perfect" systems, yet successful scheduling Cumbersome reporting Inefficient scheduling;
experiences have been documented. In Professor non-use by field
Davis' survey, only 22.7% of the unsuccessful users personnel
gave 'poor computer programs" as a reason for fai- Data selection minimal Too much paperwork; no
lure. Conversely, 53.3% of successful users management by excep-
attributed "good computer programs" as a reason tion
for success. Incompatability with pre Resistance; slow accept-
vious system ance; potential (cost-
Perhaps a discussion of what makes a system ly) changes
unsuitable will be of assistance in establishing Slow turnaround under Obsolete documents; un-
some criteria for selecting a suitable system. fast response needs timely decisions;
Exhibit D below highlights potential problems due abandonment
to lesser resirable properties of systems in
general. POTENTIAL PROBLEMS WILL DEVELOP IF . . .
EXHIBIT D
These system inadequacies may be further ex-
plained as follows: Recommendation for a planned program leading
to the adoption of a suitable system may be given
as follows:
. On TECHNOLOGICAL FACTORS - - the absence of
network interfacing (to allow for effective
project fragmentation); resource specification a. ESTABLISH PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE - - net-
(not enough resources, etc.): resource allo- work orientation, i.e. arrow vs. prece-
cation (to constraint schedules by available dence; advanced methods, i.e. resource
resources)* target scheduling (to control allocation, interfacing, etc.; reports
deviations I; or faulty computations, and so on most frequently used; pros and cons of
. On INPUT PROCEDURES - - such as the necessity previous system (whether critical path
for having to directly input: related changes or otherwise)
(i.e. delete an activity and also delete re-
lationshins); having to input common changes b. ANALYZE COSTS - - add-on personnel, i.e.
to similar activities on an individual basis schedulers , programmers, etc.; system
(i.e.increase costs to all activities using leases; computer charges; necessary
electricians, or decrease duration of all enhancements
critical activities by 2%, etc.).
. On FIEID INPUT REQUIREMENTS - - primarily in C. TEST SYSTEM PERFORMANCE - - develop
regard to ability to classify activities by test schedules; benchmark against other
their expected progress; requirements for alternatives, i.e. answers, speed; pur-
percent complete as a means of computing re- posely introduce erroneous data
maining durations, etc.
. on TERMINOLCCY - - more than one term used a. SIMPLIFY INPUT - - for schedulers: edit-
for same variable, i.e. early date, expected ing reports highlighting erroneous con-
date, possible date, etc.; lack of legends ditions, adequate options in changing/
190
 deleting data, language input; for field References
personnel: secure input gathering report,
provide default conditions 1. AACE, 1974 Transactions, proceedings of Eight-
eenth National Meeting, Los Angeles, California,
e. SIMPLlFY OUTPUT REPORTS - - standardize (1.974).
terminology; eliminate non-relevant data;
simplify column headings; tailor new 2. Davis, E. W., CPM Use in Large Construction
reports to prevailing reports; secure Firms. A Top Management Survey, proceedings
chart printouts, i.e. networks, bar of the Third International Congress on Project
charts, allow for blueprinting; provide Planning by Network Techniques, Stockholm,
for "reduced reports" where applicable, (1972).
e.g. schedule listing with only early
dates and float explanations 3. Dellon, A. L., Pre-Planning Project Control,
Cost Engineer's Notebook, AACE Bulletin,
f. MANAGE THE TURNAROUND - - on-line up- (December, 1974).
dating/reporting; on-line updating/
batch reporting; batch updating/report- 4. Eardley, V. J. and Murphree, E. L. Jr., Produc-
ing; secure computer time, establish tion of Multi-Level Critical Path Method Net-
interim reports works, Construction Research Series No. 13,
Dept. of Civil Engineering, Univ. of Illinois,
g. SECURE STANDBY SUPPORT - - knowledgeable Urbanna, Illinois, (1969).
scheduling personnel; readily available
programming support for: report face- 5. Kelley, J. E. Jr. and Walker, M. R., Critical
lifting, linkage to other control systems Path Planning and Scheduling, Proc. Eastern'
Joint Computer Conference, Boston, (1959).

6. Lippit, G. <L., Organization Renewal, Appleton-

Century-Crofts, New York, (1969).

7. Moder, J. J. and Phillips, C. R., Project

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Management with CPM and PERT, Van Nostrand
Reinhold Company, New York, (1970).
The implementation of a scheduling system is
a technological and organizational renewal process. 8. Ponce-Campos, G., Extension to the Solutions
Problems which may arise in the implementation of of Deterministic and Probabilistic Project
a particular system are the result of: resistance Networks, Ph.D. Dissertation, Civil Engineering
to change methodologies, flaws in the basic plan- Department, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor,
ning approaches, and unsuitable systems themselves. Michigan (1972).
Successful scheduling programs are so because, 9. Ponce-Campos, G., Precedence Network Based -
first, they have achieved support from all levels CPM: An Introduction, Tciwnsend and Bottum,
of management, from top management to the "people Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan, (1970).
down below", i.e. field. personnel, through planned
change. Second, they rely on "change agents", 10. Project Management Associates, Inc., TRACE
i.e. project managers, schedulers, etc. with an User's Manual, Ann Arbor, Michigan, (m.
optimal balance of planning theoretical knowledge
and practical experience. And lastly, they have 11. Project Management Institute, Summary of
managed to acquire a sound, competent system, Papers, 4th Annual Seminar Symposium, Phila-
which is yet simple to operate. delphia, (1972).