(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.
All,
I am attempting to schedule a number of work streams to achieve a milestone on a large infrastructure project. Half of the work streams are fully funded and some have no funding at all but I have predicted procurement, engineering and construction timescales for them. Some people in the project want to only show the funded work in the live forecast schedules and have the unfunded works in a what if schedule whereas others want to show everything in the live forecast schedules. I am of the opinion that if it is a work stream that has to be completed it should be in the live forecast schedule whether it has funding or not. This seems pretty obvious to me, but if anyone has a view backing up the unfunded offline arguement I would like to hear it.
Cheers, Tom
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
Hi Thomas
So you have entered into a series of contracts for multiple but seperate projects.
Or is it one contract for all projects?
I assume these projects are stand alone in different locations with no linkage between them - either physical or resource driven.
In which case produce detailed level 4 bottom up programmes for the funded work and level 2 summary programmes for the unfunded.
If the projects are similar then the level 2 programmes need not be guesswork but still allow a reasonable time risk contingency.
If you have completion dates for the unfunded work then be prepared for EoT claims for denial of access.
Best regards
Mike Testro
I believe Funded and Unfunded Jobs shall be included in your Portfolio. Just keep them on separate WBS Phases for filtering and reporting.
Some, all or none of the unfunded jobs might have logic links to funded jobs and you need early warning on criticality. Even if there are no logic links other issues such as financial constraints shall be considered. We all know unavailability of funds can delay some work until funds become available. In this case I would recommend software capable of handling Financial Constraints such as Spider Project, an advanced issue that cannot be solved with traditional resource leveling algorithms.
Then after you have them all under a common portfolio you can easily copy your portfolio and delete some and/or change your financial constraints to model several possible scenarios. I am not an expert on the issue of financial constraints but Spider Team is and the good thing they are easily accessible. They are active at PP Spider Project forum.
Hi Mike,
Thanks for the definitions. Are these for a single contract? I think you are looking at it from a singular contract view point. I have many contracts (projects) that make up my schedule. Some are funded some are not.
Regards,
Tom
Hi Thomas
A provisional sum is an amount of money included in the contract price for work that may or my not be required.
A defined provional sum is for work that is required but not yet finalised by way of design or specification - this work is included in the programme.
An undefined provisional sum is for work that may or may not be ordered but without any specific details - this work is left out of the programme - as in Gary's point three.
I have always argued that undefined provional work should be represented in the programme if only to create a deadline for the decision to made to proceed or not.
I would suggest therefore that the unfunded sections should be included in the overall programme and coded accordingly so that they can be easily deleted.
Best regards
Mike Testro
Mike,
I am not sure what 'Defined' and 'undefined' provisional sums are so I cant suggest if they are similar. All I mena is that the buisness has a budgeted for some projects and not budgeted for others but they are all required in order to complete the programme.
Gary,
Thanks for your input.
(1) is one of the reasons given, but this can be easily overcome by filtering out the unfunded projects out of the adherence figure.
(2) this would make sense but there is no such procedure that I am aware of. Maybe there should be...
(3) I agree totally with this, makes sense.
Tom,
Have they given any reasons for not wanting the unfunded projects included?
Three potential arguments I can think of for not including them:
1) If you're running some kind of programme-wide reports which the unfunded workstreams might interfere with (schedule adherence for example)
2) If adding the workstreams to the schedule is acting as some kind of QA gateway -e.g. a workstream doesn't get loaded onto the schedule until the baseline & EV curve have been signed of by PM & client
3) If by unfunded you mean "may not happen at all" You don't want activities that may not even happen to be artifically driving dates for actual work that must be completed and/or affecting your float calcs -Such things are better handled through the risk / scope management process. Similarly, you don't want to be making decisions based on projections for resource requirements, cashflow, etc that include a hidden level of uncertainty
Cheers,
G
Hi Thomas.
I need to understand the difference between "funded" and "unfunded" before I can respond.
Is it similar to "Defined" and "Undefined" provisional sums?
Best regards
Mike Testro
Email: PPadmin@planningplanet.com
Replies