I represent a client that specifically requires limited use of lag if used at all. I have a situation where the contractor chose to delay a series of activates to improve the schedule. The schedule includes several buildings each could be considered a “phase” but the terminology is not in the contract. When I analyzed the schedule I found that to move these activities the contractor used a 150 day lag in a FS predecessor relationship. Their reasoning behind this was that there were no other logical predeccessors to tie to. This occurred in 4 different areas/buildings. So I have to make a decision.
Allow the lag? I don’t like this because it is hidden in the relationship and the contract specifically states lags must be reasonable and not used in place of realistic original durations, must not be in place to artificially absorb float, or to replace proper schedule logic.
Soft constrain the activities (Start on or After) Leaning toward this even though I hate constraints. This is allowed in the specifications only if I approve it. This was talked about in our last scheduling meeting and my response was to remove the Lag, use the soft constraints and add comments in the note tab. At least constraints are visible (*).
Another option I was considering was having them create a descriptive start milestone in the general WBS section and apply the constraint to it and then drive the other activity logic using SS tie.
I would appreciate any suggestions or comments on this.