I review many schedules. I used to make many schedules. I have been noticing that many contractors prefer to enter costs as resource units instead of costs. I recall it was better, but I cannot remember why it is easier - any insights into why this is common? I can, and eventually will ask the contractors but I like to be prepared.
Why putting costs in as units instead of cost is easier...
Forum Sponsor
Top Posters
Julian Pegg
1 posts
Peter Nagy
2 posts
Raymund de Laza
17 posts
Syed_Asad
0 posts
Tony Greyvenstein
0 posts
Ahmed Al-Jubouri
13 posts
Umar Alvi
3 posts
Sibusiso Mahlalela
0 posts
Michael Samanyayi
3 posts
Simon Gumede
0 posts
John
I think that one of the main reasons for doing so is for cost loading a schedule where you just have a lump sum per activity. So you just assign a cost as a unit. This makes it easier to adjust the cost if necessary for billing purposes. If it is listed under the cost category it is harder to adjust. This is especially true of you are using the Recalculate Actual units and Cost when duraiton % complete changes. However if you want to use earned value you have to use physcial % complete.
This is especailly true if a contractor is getting paid for stored material. He can bill agasint this activity without any real physcial progress.
[mistake]