Planners -v- Schedulers -v- Keyboard Jockeys

Raviraj

I do not think that it is, as this is new programme that has been started. if you have done PMP, which you seem to have paid a low price to what I had to pay. Must be good to be in the East, :-)



I will check for you



By the way I do not think that using the forum for what is really a private discussion is a good thing.

You have my personal e-mail, please use that



Raf

Thanks Raf for the link,



But I believe, its exactly similar to PSP. No change and will cost you USD 520 , which is more than what I paid for PMP last year.

Raviraj



The information is on the PMICOS page, however



http://www.pmicos.org/PMI-SPHandbook0308.pdf



Raf

Raf,



The link u have shown is for PSP professional, which I believe is already in existence.



What @ the new credential system handbook. Plz share the link.



Cheers,



Raviraj, PMP

So after all the bullshitting and hitting below the belt,

The message is to take this new PMI certification regarding planning. It would be better if PMI will focus on PMP.



PMP certification is only a piece of paper, that cost an individual a sum of money (investment) hoping that by this certification, their investment will get them higher salary.



PMP certification per se will not ensure project success.



WHY????



It will take you years to know.

Raviraj



Sorry about I just copied the link from the PMICOS page

Try this one



https://www.aacei.org/certification/PSP/PSPapplic.shtml





Raf

Raf,



Link is missing. Will u plz post it again.



Cheers,



Ravi

Dear All



As I said in my previous post the PMI has announced a new project scheduling credential that will be brought to the market soon.



PMI will be launching this new credential in the second quarter of 2008. The pilot will be conducted between May 30th and July 31st 2008. The first 100 candidates to sit for the exam will receive 50% off the price of the exam and will be entered into one of the four regional drawings for a chance to win $1,000. You can find a link to the handbook here.



For information on how to become a pilot participant contact certquestions@pmi.org



I guess this should satisfy those amongst you who yearn for a qualification.

Well my PMI colleagues and I have worked hard to bring this to you so now it is your turn.



Raf

Dear All

I do not recall ever proposing to process a Critical Path manually, but on the other hand if you do not know the basics and can do the calculations manually you have a least a good chance of spotting some of the rather nasty calendar errors that both Primavera and MS Project create, even tho the arithmentic is correct the answer isn’t.



I have always used software, and have been writng various computer packages for both mainframes and PC’s since 1958. Age has nothing to with it. Knowledge is what counts and how we use that knowledge to provide our clients with the very best and correct answer.



The US government has become rather tired with the number of failed projects and is now creating legisltion forcing us to be accurate. Have a look at the new Warner Act 2007 HR5122, which insists that Cost Estimaes will be accurate and that those who provide cost estimates will be properly trained.

There will no doubt be plenty of courses now developed for that aspect of Planning and Scheduling.



Personnally I am a long time member of the PMI (one advantage of AGE)and yet we only have approximately 1700 members in the College of Scheduling.



So if you want to make a positive contribution to the Planning and Scheduling world, come and join us.



The PMICOS is right in the middle of developing a new credential for P&S. It will be called PSP. If you join the College you may get an early peek and maybe add some of your own hard gained knowledge.



Also the ISO organisation has just commenced the development of a Project Management standard. Over 22 countries are taking part and each countries Standards organisation is desparately looking for knowledgable project folk to help create tht standard. Why don’t you join, it is FREE, will only cost you time, which you will be able to plan for as you are all P&S



By the way any P&S who runs schedules of greater 1000 to 1500 tasks is kidding and killing themselves.



There are plenty of techniques to run big projects without vast numbers of tasks. But that is another story



By the way it is either Raphael or Raf



Raf

Hi Guys,



I’ve been away for a couple of days, and it looks as if I missed out on the action. Once again it has been graphically demonstrated that Charlie doesn’t bother reading a post before making his reply. Although I suppose that should be replies, since once he had started he didn’t seem to be able to stop.



Dieter and Anthony have answered more than effectively in posts #95 and #96, so I’m not going to bother. All I ask, Charlie, is that you read posts before posting your reply, failure to do so merely makes you look foolish and incompetant.



Chris Oggham

Hi

Why do we need new standards? We have PMI, Prince2, ipma, AACE, ... Details are different, of course but these standards don’t contradict each other. So the wheel exists, why there should be a need to invent it a second time.

The problem is more due to project managers who just need a planner and scheduler because a "stupid" customer - to their opinion - wants to see a schedule. This PM never would ask for quality. Customers and managers who just have a look at a nice PDF or Powerpoint and then know everything. If they pay a fortune for a so-called planner who after a 3-days crash course of Primavera (or MSP, or Open Plan....) calls himself planner or scheduler, it’s their fault, it’s their money.

In my humble opinion in this forum in general we have quite a good level of discussion. So don’t waste time for one more standard.

Regards

Dieter

Charly,



You seem to be putting quite a few posts on this forum, which means you are either unemployed or not devoting your time fully to the project managers that need your assistance. If it is indeed the latter, then crack on and stop wasting time writing endless amounts about the same point!

Hi Charly

Who is able to read, in general has an advantage. Mr. Raphael Dua wrote: "..using a piece of software does not make you a Planner and or a Scheduler...". He didn’t vote for no use of a software. As far as I know he is even the author of a package. In addition he is one of the real experts in planning and scheduling and I’m proud to have the chance to learn from him - as from others in this forum as well.

For a scheduler it is essential to know how to use scheduling software. But the sequence must be:

First learn planning and scheduling and

Second learn the software.

Otherwise you have absolutely no chance to understand how it works and to take conclusions of its results.

Regards from Germany

Dieter

Mr. Raph



We will raise the ANti here.



How will the forensic schedule analyst perform his job using manual evaluation of CPM of 5,000+ activiites.



A very simple case is a CPM schedule with a span of two years. A very simple methodology is using contemporaneous as is approach. Tell me How you will do manually the periodic evaluation 24 numbers of CPM schedule place in A1 or A0 size cross section paper. How will you compute the longest path, how will you superimpose the current and the target. Of course manually,



BUT BUT how long will you finish this exercise and come up with a forensic schedule report?????? How many resource will it take you????



Contemporaneous approach in forensic schedule analysis is peanuts. What if you will use Additive Modelling-Multi base models??????



Mr. Raph can you make a reply????



otherwise, you basic argument that planning software will not make a planning and scheduling engineer is only good for you, our forefather



this is the problem with our forefathers, they never appreciate the new toys of their children.

Mr. Raph,



That is only the tip of the iceberge.



I understand your sentimentally of the whole episode as you watch how planners evolve into suave computer gick compared to our forefather (I hope you dont belong to our forefather) struggle to ensure the i node and the j node are really logicall and how we invent dummy activities to ensure the i-j node follows the basic principle. Of course we have to look forward in such a way that the j node is always greater than the i node. BLAH BLAH BLAH.



But this is only being emotionally. We have to be objective and that means:



STOP UNDERMINING THE NEWBIES IN THE EVENT THEY TEND TO PLAY around as in KEYBOARD JOCKEYS.



The good old days is always GOOD OLD DAYS. I dont see any point to be sentimental about it.



There is always a brigther tomorrow with planning software as a must for the new generation of planning scheduling engineers.

and TODAY AND TOMORROW



Mr Raph



means: A planning and scheduling engineer (planner/scheduler) should be proficient in the basic of planning software (Primavera my choice).



Why is this so??????



Can you imagine the work involved in preparing manual CPM schdule with 5,000++ activities using cross section paper A1 or A0 size papers. How about the manual computations???? How long will it take a planning engineer to do it??????



This is only preparation of baseline schedule. How about the evaluation of the baseline schedule?????



What if there are lots of comments and changes in the baseline schedule, then you will re do again the whole proccess manually??????

Dear Raph



This statement is not realistic in the present context of planning and scheduling refering to pretigious projects, mixed developments involving towers, sckycrappers, etc.



"... the fact that using a piece of software does not make you a Planner and or a Scheduler"



Planning software skills is a must in this present world we are in. And you will only be called a planning and scheduling engineer (planner or scheduler) if you know how to handle planning software (Primavera: the best choice, MS Project for mickey mouse and donald duck, others for those who are trying hard ...)



Believe me Raph, you exposition belongs to the "GOOD OLD DAYS". But what matter most is TODAY AND TOMORROW.



Cheers,

Dear Charleston-Joseph



I hear your standard cry of poor third world v rich First worlds



Now you will have seen my postings - I don’t belong to either of those worlds.



I am Italian, which generally means I have to put up with Mafia jokes from all and sundry.



But first and foremost is that I am a professionally qualified person and I am a Planning and Scheduling Engineer



So why don’t we keep to them subject which was the fact that using a piece of software does not make you a Planner and or a Scheduler



There will be a place for a Keyboard Jockey, who I hope by patient training will grow into be a first class P & S.



So can we stop all this childiness. It has nothing to do with where you come from.



That is my very Senior view

Raf

THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH, ALA JAMES BOND 007.



Some nationalities are really pampered and pompous ass while some nationalities are struggling to be at par with superior nationanlities (USA and UK).



I belong to third world country and I did struggle to attain ......





Andy the fundamental problem with internaitonally recognize blah blah blah is that the USA of A and the UK will never agree on what to agree so at the end they agree to disagree.



So what more if the francophine, the russian, the chinese, the japanes, the iranians, etc. etc. will get involved with thie internationally recognize so and so .....



It will not happened.



So, knowing this reality, it is better to stick with the fundamentals, the reasonable planning and scheduling process, anything that is simple, explainable, understandable, logical and acceptable.



Sensei,

Successful Project Management Consultant

David,



I agree and this is precisely the strategy I am taking. I am spending as much time on site as possible, learning from the guys on the ground in relation to the existing programmes what works and what doesn’t. I find this more beneficial than working removed in an office learning from planners who are barely on site.

First a reply to John. \/



No John, have not tried that software. When you invest a few thousand dollars in a piece of software,you tend to stick with it for a while. and....dont get me started on the software vendors...I think I saw Ron Winter chime in on what thats all about.



Now Anthony. You make a very very important point. I do not know much about the rail industry, but I do know a bit about the construction industry. It is a "sink or swim" environment sorry to say. In order to get what you need you have to DEMAND IT! Now that does not mean demanding being sent somewhere else to learn from some overpriced preprogrammed training seminar. What it means is, you demand time from your superiors to show you what you feel you need to learn. This means you need to develop specific questions you need answers to on based upon your observations and absorptions, so far, then ask those individuals, whose knowledge you respect the most, to answer those questions. Ask allot of questions, good questions and seemingly stupid questions, even if it means embarrassment. When you get the "I dont have time" BS from them, use the same argument you have made on this thread with them. MAKE THEM FEEL THE GUILT!!!!!!!!!



You will be surprised how often this will work and it will pay off for you in the long run. If it does not work, then find a better boss. Its really that simple.

Just thought Id add some fuel to the fire.

I have been in planning for just over a year and am a youngster in career terms (30yrs). I have read alot of threads from senior planners who are highlighting the lack of skills from new planners coming in to the marketplace. However, junior planners cannot be entirely blamed. I feel that the training In the industry (especially by the senior planners working alongside junior planners) is not good enough. I started in Rail, and was sent on a P3e course and told to get on with it - to produce reports and layouts etc. The software is just the tool, planning principles and disiplines are what needs to be taught, and some senior planners are unwilling to share there knowledge. I have since left and joined construction, where again I am in a position where I am expected to teach myself. I am keen to get on and be the best I can be, but in order for this industry to keep growing and be passed on to the next generation, training needs to be standardised and improved dramatically.

John:



I am a P3 proponent.



Prefered scheduling methodology CPM/PDM



Preferred analysis type TIME IMPACT ANALYSIS



Secondary analysis type AS PLANNED PLUS IMPACT ANALYSIS

(only to defend against liquidated damage assessments)



I wrote a much longer response but the site did not post it and brought me back to the log in screen.............

John:



I just registered on this website today and noticed your post on this thread.



You hit the nail on the head regarding OBS being key in preparing a usable/functional schedule.



In having presented many schedule development and maintenance seminars over the years. I always ask the audience the question. "What is the first thing you do with a pizza pie when it comes out of the oven?" Slice it up!, before delving into discussion on determining and developing the organizational structure of the schedule.



And with this comes schedule purpose, a schedule suited to whose use and for what?



If the answer ranges from Executive level sumarization to Field level short term planing an resource utilization, a little more time spent on design of the organizational structure required to satisfy an "all user" scenario will produce a more usable and navigable scheduling tool than one that is "patched" together as the project progresses.

Andy



At last some cool calm collected thoughts. Watching this thread emerge over the past few months has just been amazing. Never seen such poor manners, and so many missing the point. I have refrained from responding as most postings have been juvenile and not very professional. Professional, something you all want, but patently lack the disciple to achieve.



As probably the Grandfather of Planners, Schedulers and Cost control Engineers, in Asia Pacific if not the World; I have been doing this stuff since Kelly & Walker back in 1956, which by my reckoning is now 52 years. If you have to ask who Kelly and Walker were, you don’t deserve to call yourself a planner and scheduler



I have written (with others) my own software, never trusted other peoples mathematics, My colleagues and I only went for a 100% answer, not "nearly got there" ; "Nearly achieved the budget".



That was the way we were trained, which of course was on the job, cos back then that was all there was. Veracity and Accuracy was drummed into us



Now there is a Plethora of Good Planning and Scheduling information, plenty of PM software (but only to do the hard yakka, it will not PLAN for you) expert people, planners, groups etc.exist in many countries.



It is obvious that using PM software enables a person to learn from the vendor’s manual some rudimentary Planning and Scheduling. But it takes practice, asking Senior Colleagues for help etc





In UK the PEO is actually extremely good and Gary Francis is doing a great job in trying to produce standards.



"Andy" the PMI is now doing what you want and that is an accreditation for Schedulers and Planners. It will be called PSP and you will have to work for it as ones does for a PMP



As I am intimately involved with this process I am not permitted by the rules of the process of creating PMI credentials to go into too much detail until it is released



Why not join the PMICOS, it costs a few $US and provides you with a great resource of very knowledgable professional Planners and Schedulers who want to help you get better at planning (not whinging !)



I have offered my basic CPM manual "Free" to those who want a copy and requested that if you wanted a copy, e-mail me privately. Over two thirds who did request it asked on line in the forum and not as instructed. Makes you wonder how they cope with Project Scope, Planning Information, Scheduling processes what do we do when you can’t that right.



I taught Planning and Scheduling for years at University of Melbourne and other colleagues also did the same at other Australian uni’s. In New Zealand the University of Technology in Auckland taught Planning and Scheduling.



So uni training is around and some of those folk who teach it are now looking at getting involved in the promulgation of P & S via the PMI College of Scheduling.



If people are interested I still have my basic teaching manuals, but it is structured around Micro Planner X-Pert for Windows, but if you would like a copy e-mail me raf@microplanning.com.au



Well that’s my bit for the week, have to go and plan a Mine



Raf

Andy



I don’t speak on Behalf of the Planning Engineer’s Organisation but I do talk to gary every now and again and I know he is as concerned as we all seem to be about qualifications, or tests of compitence, for planners.



Part of the development of the PEO will include such things, last we spoke he was trying to get some distance learning stuff up and running so as not to discriminate (Hi Charlie) against those that are not based, say, in the UK or near to centres of learning.



When I see him again I’ll mention it and see what, if any, progress has been made. i do know that he has an awful lot on his plate at the moment so don’t expect instantaneoyus results.

Charlie,



Presumably by "FULL BLOOD ENGINEERS" you mean someone with an engineering degree together with a suitable period of experience working as an engineer? To become a " PLANNING ENGINEER" this same person would then have to obtain a suitable planning qualification together with suitable period of experience.



Now I have no doubt that there are people who have done that, but Charlie, there aren’t very many of them. Certainly not enough to fill the demand for Planners, let alone Schedulers and Keyboard Jockeys. All that can be reasonably asked of a person going into a junior planning position is that they have the necessary physical and mental attributes to do the work. If they’ve got a bit of experience as well, wonderful! If they are willing to work hard, gain experience and expertise, marvellous! What isn’t so good, is that we should try to artificially restrict who can work in project planning and who can’t, so sorry Charlie, but your idea isn’t going to work.



As for Mickey and Donald, I’m sure they’ll be thrilled with you dedication.



Chris Oggham

Registered Engineers? That counts me out then :-(

I think what happen here is because we get on board planners, scheduler and keyboard jockeys.



Why not hire only PLANNING ENGINEERS, by that I mean



FULL BLOOD ENGINEERS



not the half bake, not the unregistered engineers



Anyway this thread is dedicated to mickey mouse and donald duck.



I got lost

Anyone else think that this is beginning to sound like a comedy sketch from The Frost Report!!!



Planner: "I look down on them because I am a Planner."



Scheduler: "I look up to him because he is a Planner, but I look down on him because he is a Keyboard Jockey. I am a Scheduler."



Keyboard Jockey: "I know my place."



Planner: "I get a feeling of superiority over them."



Scheduler: "I get a feeling of inferiority from him but a feeling of superiority over him."



Keyboard Jockey: "I get a pain in the back of my neck."



It’s good to see society has moved forward. ;)



Regards,



Darren

There is nothing confusing about the situation.

Planners, Shedulers and keyboard jockeys like to think that they are the most important guys on a project but in fact they are only a service to Project Managerment.

The Planner or Scheduler or Keyboard Jockey are part of a team of a project, The Project Manager being the Top Man followed by the bean counter then the Construction Managers.

The Planner should be the Project Manager’s right hand man feed him with information about sequence, methods, timing, delays etc.

Thats what I think so just get on and do your job as best you can

Thats utter confusion,



Just go through post # 6 of this thread. That will clarify, who is inferior and who is not.



Its not the job which is inferior, its the attitude of people who make the job look inferior.

As a former housewife with no construction or planning background experience prior to being a Planning Assistant last century, I am proud to announce that I have no relatives mafia connections to shoe horn me into a more senior planning position with corresponding terms and conditions.

I have gained my experience by planning my own career, negotiating my T&C and been lucky enough to pick and choose where and when I work.

I hasten to add I am not living on additonal stipend, divorce proceedings nor lottery winnings.

Planning? Scheduling? Keyboard Jockey? I can be all three.

Does this imply Planners are superior to Schedulers and Keyboard Jockeys whilst Schedulers are inferior to Planners but superior to Keyboard Jockeys who in turn are inferior to Planners & Scheduler?

i believe Charlie is a good (Planner?) and he didn’t literally mean what he says (sometimes?)



what i’m sure of is, he is not born from the west

Charleston,



IT IS NOT A MATTER OF PERSONAL DISGUST, I HAVE FELT DISCRIMINATION IN YOUR TONE



YOU WERE BORN IN THE WEST AND THAT IS NOT YOUR PERSONAL ACHIEVEMENT. YOU COULD WELL HAVE BEEN BORN IN MY PLACE IN PAKISTAN. AND EVEN WORST, YOU COULD HAVE BEEN THE SEVENTEENTH SON OF "USAMA BIN LADIN". UNDER HIS BROUGHT UP,YOU HAD ALL THE CHANCES OF BEING WHAT YOU DISGUST THE MOST.



WHY SPEND YOUR TIME HATING OTHERS, WHEN YOU HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY OF CREATING SOME LOVE.





NOW TO ALL FRIENDS....

GETTING BACK TO MY EARLIEST POST. FERTILIZER INDUSTRY IS DIFFERENT FROM CONSTRUCTION IN A LARGE NUMBER OF WAYS, THE STAKES ARE HIGH AND THE PROCESSES ARE ARE COMPLEX. WE PLAN HOURS AND NOT DAYS OR MONTHS. UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, I THINK IT IS A GOOD IDEA TO MAKE PICK UP PLANNERS WHO HAVE SOME TOUCH OF WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS IN THE FIELD. IT GIVES A MORE REALISTIC TOUCH TO PLANNING.



ANYHOW I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT PETROCHEMICAL/POWER INDUSTRY IS DOING IN THE REST OF THE WORLD?

Sajid



Please do keep posting on the board - especially your criticisms of Charlie. Thank-you for joining the gang that find Charlies musings meaningless, misinforming and offensive. I still believe, still hope, that if enogh of us tell him he might get the message and change his ways (but is that a false hope too?).



David

Sajid,



My email is charlieorbe@gmail.com.



I’m also sorry I disturb you equanimity.



Feel free to exhaust your emotion (negative or positive) if it will help you recover from the trauma.



I play fairly. I will take what I give.

QUITE AN OBNOXIOUS PERSON YOU SEEM TO BE FROM YOUR REPLY OF MY POST MR Charleston-Joseph.



I FEEL SORRY FOR YOUR ATTITUDE.



YOU SEEM TO HAVE QUITE A HATRED FOR US THIRD WORLD PEOPLE. I THINK YOU HAVE POOR MORALS.. AND YOU ARE BLATANT ENOUGH TO EXPRESS THEM TOO.



I WISH TO TAKE THIS NO MORE ON THIS BOARD. YOU GIVE ME YOUR EMAIL CONTACT AND ILL TELL YOU MORE OF WHAT I THINK OF PEOPLE LIKE YOU.

Anoon



Quite agree - to a point. If someone has the right sort of thinking then they can be ’trained’ to be a planner. If not then it is almost impossible. However, if you take the right guys to begin with, then the traiining/mentoring to raise their knowledge, encourage them should work.

Cheers

Nige

just bought the t-shirt from your factory and just want to add a bit..be careful when passing the knowledge, planning could be very risky (especially if not fully understood)..I still believe that Planners are born..it’s very hard/difficult to make a Planner

Hi All



Having read this post might I humbly add my two-penn’th.



The industry, (life?) in certain parts of the world, is unfair. Live with it. That’s the way it is. Managers are a pain, jobs for the boys are a pain, so be the best you can, do the best you can and who knows.



Planners, schedulers, software jockeys, they all have their roles. Like some other posters, I started on an Elephant drawing board, P3 for DOS, then Windows, used all sorts of stuff - remember Hornet and CPM? BUT I can still think out a plan without software. It’s a little thing called experience and logic. We all get it sometime but some can use/apply it.



Schedulers are useful to ’do an update’. Not necessarily to analyse it, work everything out etc., but if they work for me, they will be mentored, trained, encouraged until they become planners. Most of use old guys think the same. I have been made redundant because I trained three local guys to do my job. Was I sad? No, felt great.



Bottom line? Pass your knowledge on, treat people fairly, don’t be racist/sexist/ageist/anything-ist. Have fun by all means but realise that some things are wrong and always will be.



Signed



The guy that built the Tee-Shirt Factory

David,



I don’t know why it is, but I seem to have a habit of looking at a thread just in time to find Charlie being unpleasant to someone. I must admit I found your immediate response and those after extremely amusing but, besides not getting irony or sarcasm, I don’t think Charlie realises what a clown he made himself look.



I noticed in his post #52 one of the things Charlie looks down on is nepotism; rather interesting since Charlie admitted on this forum that he got his first planning job on a project where his dad was the project manager!



I also noticed that in post #59 he’s still referring to himself as "Sensei - Successful Project Management Consultant", maybe he does do irony after all.



Chris Oggham

David,



Bravo,



You did enlighten my mind. My sincere thank you to your post.



I usually make it a point to prepare Time Impact Report and I used TIA.



This really make a little conflict



"the current trend towards as-planned –v- as-built as opposed to the more technical methods"



The as-planed vs as-built is a static approach in delay analysis which really did not reflect the true status of the project at any point in time. I encoutered this type and it is very simplistic. This is for the lazy and of course for the "keyboard jockeys", the labourer, housewives, the cronies that becomes planners.



On the other hand TIA is a dynamic approach to delay analysis which really reflect the true status of the project at any period in time, the true nature of the project (project is dynamic).



On a higher level, using TIA periodically will enchance the practice of planning professional. Why is this so???? to be continued



Sensei

Successful Project Management Consultant

Charlie



I vow I will never get embroiled in these conversations – but then I do…



Some forensic claims specialists use TIA and some use it some of the time. The starting point for any prospective analysis is the establishment of a baseline programme. As in most things there is a question of reasonableness, intent and other stuff like practicality. That is where the opinion of ‘experts’ comes in. For instance if the baseline showed something illogical – say that the walls were to be erected before the foundations – then it might be acceptable for the analyst to ‘correct’ the illogicality before commencing the TIA. Similarly, if there is something so obviously wrong with a baseline programme as far as durations go that would render it’s use meaning less then correction of those ‘faults’ is acceptable. TIA then starts from this reasonable basis. Therefore your hypothesis ‘if the same baseline (contract) duration is unreasonable then all TIA is base on unreasonable materials hence the conclusion is unreasonable’ is not proven.



May I direct you to paragraphs 14.217 to 14.231 of ‘Delay and Disruption in Construction Contracts – 3rd edition’. Mr Pickavance has a whole section on ‘correcting the planned programme’.



TIA is not the be all and end all of delay analysis and if the baseline programme does not reflect the work subsequently carried out (for whatever reason) then maybe a more retrospective method would be more suitable. And in my very humble opinion (as always) I believe the current trend towards as-planned –v- as-built as opposed to the more technical methods is due to a few high profile cases where, TIA for example, has been used in perhaps a slipshod manner. The technique is not at fault it is the application of the technique that could be bringing it into disrepute.



What you need to understand is that generally a delay analysis is not the same as a criminal investigation. All we are trying to do is to demonstrate, let’s say cause and effect, on the balance of probabilities and to help those in a dispute come to a meeting of minds.



David



ps. But what this has got to do with Planners -v- Schedulers -v- Keyboard Jockeys I don’t know!

Dear David Bordoli,



This time it got "O". I believe name of person should not be taken for granted. My apology.



On the other hand, why discourse in this thread. I waited for your to reply on URI’s thread "CONTRACT DURATION UNREASONABLE"



Your forensic claim so please show your exemplenary discourse on claims. so far only Mr. Andrew is consistent



This is my understanding on URI thread:



Basically, forensic claims specialist use TIA and TIA use baseline schedule. So question???? How can a forensic claims specialist judged a baseline (contract) duration as unreasonable if the same baseline schedule is use in TIA????



If the same baseline (contract) duration is unreasonable then all TIA is base on unreasonable materials hence the conclusion is unreasonable.



Similar to Illogical brain giving Illogical conclusion.

Dear Chumpy



It’s Bordoli with an ’O’...



And we Brits thought it was only the Americans who do not get sarcasm and irony (or am I falling into that trap also?).