Progress Problem - MS Project

Trevor,

you are right. I never understand how the single percent complete can show the real activity status.

Vladimir

"% Complete" is the ratio of actual Duration to Planned/Estimated/Budget/Baseline Duration, up to a limit of 100%.



"% Work Complete" is the ratio of actual Work (ie Man-Hours) to Planned/Estimated/Budget/Baseline Work, up to a limit of 100%



Also, there could be "% Cost Complete" the ratio of actual Cost to Planned/Estimated/Budget/Baseline Cost, up to a limit of 100%.



Then we come to something called "% progress".

This is often equated to "% Work Complete" when I think what is meant is not the Hours ratio above, but "how much of the Task is done", ie "% of the Task Complete" measured in terms of say 300 bricks actually laid by the Status Date, of 1000 bricks planned to be laid by the Status Date.

Of course, this measurement is different for every Task and some Tasks do not readily lend themselves to this kind of measurement, both serious obstacles.



If, in this example, all goes as planned, and if bricks, Cost, Hours and Duration are all estimated to be related linearly, then:

"% progress" = 30% of the bricks.

30% of the Duration (say planned Duration = 10 days).

30% of the Work (Hours).

30% of the Cost, which includes Labour, Material and Fixed Costs.



..but let’s say Status Date = 30% of Planned Duration

and bricks = 30% of bricks, OK.

but those 300 bricks might have been (actuallY) achieved with more or less than 30% of the planned Hours and/or Cost. The estimates may have been based on these numbers all related proportionally (linearly) but the actuals are actuals and are all independent numbers.



Assume some numbers to illustrate:

Status Date = end of Day 3, of 10 Days plannned.

Actual Work = 20% of Planned Hours, up to the Status Date.

Actual Cost = 15% of Planned Cost, up to the Status Date.



In the common "Earned Hours" calculation:

Earned Hours = "% progress" (ie, 30/100) x total planned hours.

Up to now we don’t have "total planned hours" but in this example could be 8 Hours/Day x 10 Days = 80 Hours.

So, Earned Hours = 30/100 x 80 = 24 Hours up to the Status Date.

Typically, in an S Curve plotted on Hours and EV based on Hours, this compares favourably with the planned Hours (they are equal), and there is celebration that progress is on schedule. But the reason I don’t like it is because it doesn’t tell me much and what it purports to tell me about "progress" it actually does not. The real cause for celebration should be:

Actual Work = 20%

Actual Cost = 15%



The "Earned Hours" would be the same, would be just as celebrated, and be just as pointless and uninformative if:

Actual Work = 40%

Actual Cost = 50%



ie much more/worse than estimated from the contractor’s point of view.



Happy to be contradicted

Dear Tony,



There are two types of default % progress in MSP. The one you mentioned %Complete is based on duration. What you calculated is % work progress. Check the % work progress and it will match exactly with your calculation.



Manu.

MSP will not include split time in AD / RD

check "Updating task status updates resource status", otherwise %complete may not match % work complete

Hello,

I suspect that the activities are not in schedule. MS Project includes the task split into the Actual Duration and makes AD bigger than actual work

Alexandre

Hello,

do you have on this particular task:

* several resources working at different rates?

* one single resource working non uniform?

is this task splitted?

is this task a summary task?

Alexandre