(1) Explain your problem, don't simply post "This isn't working". What were you doing when you faced the problem? What have you tried to resolve - did you look for a solution using "Search" ? Has it happened just once or several times?
(2) It's also good to get feedback when a solution is found, return to the original post to explain how it was resolved so that more people can also use the results.
Hi,
I wish to know what's the meaning of a front loaded programme? if any body can attach some snapshot of front loaded curve and briefly explain, that will be helpful.
Also want to know which is the better approach a front loaded or back loaded programme?
Thanks
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
Hi,
I agree that Front loaded schedule is a Cost Loaded schedule in which cost are loaded at the early stage of the schedule.
There are reasons that this is done in the schedule.
1.Contractor want to be paid as much as possible in the beginning of the Project.
2. An activity suh as Supply and Install Medical Equipment for Operating Theather. Most of the Amount is collected upon delivery (if allowed in contract) and few amount upon installed. Pre-installation Construction is a separate activity.
3. An activity such as Supply and Install Generator Set. Most of the Amount is collected upon delivery (if allowed in contract) and few amount upon installed. Pre-installation Construction is a separate activity.
The opposite is applied to an activity such as when contract does not allow to pay "Materials at Site".
Regards,
I tend to agree with Ronald. Front loading is related to cost distribution throughout a programme where contractors try to allocate greater values in the begining of the programme to safeguard their financial stand.. Sould be fairly easy to check..
Thanks all for your feedbacks..
I got what i need to understand here.
Gary the options you mentioend are quite right and basically Ronald also narrate one of your option that contractor will wish to get more payed at the start of the project.
Thanks all
Thanks all for your feedbacks..
I got what i need to understand here.
Gary the options you mentioend are quite right and basically Ronald also narrate one of your option that contractor will wish to get more payed at the start of the project.
Thanks all
Ronald,
I don't claim to be an expert in the field of front loaded programmes, but your dismissal of my opinion as "guesses" feels a little insulting to me.
A quick google search reveals the term "front (end) loading" has a number of meanings. Yours is one, mine is another. A third is associated with Lean principals and/or FEED projects.
http://www.bookpump.com/upb/pdf-b/9428962b.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front-end_loading
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/business-english/front-load
Sadly, your guesses are once again incorrect. Front-loaded schedules have a distorted Schedule of Values. The costs assigned to the early activities are exaggerated to more than are actually warranted. Contractors do this for the purposes of getting more progress payments ‘up-front’ than actual work performed. Some do this to fund the material purchases. Others do this to ‘cash out’ early and leave the project unfinished. Most contracts and associations forbid this practice.
My understanding of a front-loaded programme is one where more resources and hence work are planned in the early phase of the project than would normally be considered optimal.
This can be a viable approach in a number of circumstances:
-Projects where there is a lot of risk or uncertainty, or when particuarly onerous delay penalties are in place
-When resources are required on another project sooner than you would otherwise want to release them
-When there are staged payments associated with early project milestones, and it is beneficial from a cashflow perspective to accelerate release of these payments.
-Where it is a cost-plus or sometimes a target cost type contract, where final project cost is less important to the contractor than cashflow and turnover (though the client would be fighting against this)
I've not really come across a back-loaded project before, but I suppose it could be a viable approach if you require resources which will not be available until later than you would normally want to use them, or if staged payments are arranged in such a matter that early works will generate negative cashflow, and need to be minimised.
Obviously both front and back loaded programmes will typically be less efficient than a normal programme (ie standard S curve).
Front loaded programmes, by getting more work out of the way sooner, will give you better opportunities to finish early, and also reduce the risk of finishing late
For back loaded programmes, the opposite is true.
Hi Zil
A front loaded programme is where the early tasks are artifically set to complete early - thus producing an optimistic completion date and cash flow curve.
It is also supposed to provide an edge for future EoT claims.
The system never works because when actual progress is recorded the inherent delay is exposed.
Another way of creating a distorted programme is the artifically extend the early tasks thus showing good progress in the early stages and an enhanced cash flow.
However this requires shorter periods in the finishing stages which reduce the EoT entitlement when events impact on the later tasks.
Best to keep it simple and present a realistic programme at all stages.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Email: PPadmin@planningplanet.com
Replies