Pure Planners

In order to summrize the issue can we get the planner’s opinion in the following questions:-

1- DO we need a planner in each and every project.

2- What are the qualifications and experiances required for the planner.

3- Whate are the main duties and responsibilities of the planner.

4- can the project manager or the project engineer works as a planner.

5- What are the advantiges and dis advantages in employing a planner for eah project taking into consederation the financial issues.

Hi,



what kind of experience a planner need to work on a project with 200 MEP systems ?(like nuclear power plant, dozens of full time planners working together with hundreds of engineer s for at least 4 years)



the way of planning for small project & big project are totally different. experience of small project does not work on big project.

Dear Oscar,



Thanks for your encouraging comment. I would like to say that the Project Palnning and Cost Control are interrelated so Planner should always consider the cost factor in Planning.



Asad

some suprise that your project manager does not care about cost and that task appears to fall to you. one can but wonder what relationship takes place in project controls with regard to planning and cost control

just a thought but you appear to be more than a pure planner and may seriously consider moving into PM

Oscar

Main role of Planing Engineer is to Plan the Project by keeping the Cost Factor importance and to complete the project on contractual completion date.



Prject Planning should be done by coordinating with the Project Managers as they are the key persons for Projects but the Planner have to keep in mind the importance of cost factor.



Generally Project Managers are considering their main responsibility is to complete the project on time by ignoring the cost factor. So it is the responsibility of Planing Engineer to Prepare the Project Plan considering and giving importance to Cost Factor to make more profit.

Pure planners are doing effective planning job at the same time they get rewarding careers and satisfactory wages.



These professionals can easily be differentiated from primavera encoders, wanabee planner, alien plannger and sometimes labourers trying hard to joing the fraternity of planning engineer.



It will be very easy to spot them in there post here in PP.



Pure planners can effectively presents master schedule, time-impact analysis, etc...



I would prefer the pure planners a grauduate of engineering course.



Cheers,



Charlie

Damian,



Unfortunately, very true!

Damian,



It is true I am talking about quite a few ago in my last post. Pre being swamped by paperwork days although I maintain the general thread of thoughts in my post still hold true.



One of the reasons I swapped roles was that as a Project Manager I was starting to feel like all I did was write reports, fill in paperwork, attend meetings, fill in more reports and paperwork - actually building the job was done substantially by others on site - probably not 100% true but that’s what it began to feel like. The role of running a site has changed significantly over the last ten years and the amount of paperwork to fill in has played a big part in that. It’s certainly added more people to a site team, also alot more people visiting sites for inspections, audits and the like. I guess the $64 million dollar question is has it all added any value to the project?

Damian,



There’s alot of truth in what you say, probably the point that today so many people get involved and everyone gets pidgeon holed in their own little bit, is of great relevance - especially on the larger projects.



The result is no one gets the overall, well rounded and diverse experience that used to happen. In years gone by I’ve run smaller sites virtually by myself - visiting QS once a fortnight and a Contracts Manager that turned up for the progress meeting once a month. No Engineers, Foremen, Planners, Buyers or the like, just me. Does depend on the complexity of the job though rather than value. It gave me invaluable experience and a good insight into everything and I would highly recommend it as a way of gaining valuable experience. You’ll learn 1000% more doing 4 small jobs virtually by yourself in two years than 1 large job. Once you have that experience then it’s a execellent foundation to move to the larger jobs with.

Arno,



Quite agree everyone should be asked to have thier say and input but it usually needs one person only at the end of the day, putting all the ideas together and decide between competing suggestions. ie ideas from everyone, overall control by one person be that a dedicated planner, Project Manager or some other person.

Just my two cents here: Neither a planner or a project manager should develop the planning by their own. Getting the right support from your own project team requires you to let everybody give his/her input.



I’ve seen companies where the job of planner was to make an overall planning based on the very small plannings of the project coordinators, and really, there were some that really got it, even utilising earned value and risk analysis. But in the end, 80% came to my desk asking for help on making the planning. No prolem, that way you can teach them what you want them to do, and theyt were eager to learn too.



Ed,

does the certification Aram and Vijverberg have been working on leave an opening for us here? You might register the developer of the planning in a database, make that database accesible to new employers (charge them a little amount for it maybe?). If I had a couple of plannings on my name in that database I’d refer to it on my CV...

Damian,



I actually agree with the sentiment and on smaller jobs would totally support that the person managing the project should do the planning, if he’s capable!!!!!!!!



I’m at a loss these days that the following statement is received with a look of bewilderment on many peoples faces:



"How can you manage a project if you don’t know where you are or the size of the task left to do - knowing these things is fundamaental to successfully managing a project"



To give a further example I was told by a very senior person in a large contracting company about a year ago "we seem to have forgotten how to plan on site these days"



Whether it’s a lack of training, a perception that planning isn’t important, people jumping up the promotion ladder too quickly without learning the fundamentals of the job properly....... don’t know but it’s a worrying trend.

Damian,



I’m sure there’s a few planners which would like to have you lined up and shot for your last post but as an ex contractors project manager I will go as far as to say that the project manager should at least be closely involved in the process and not leave it all up to the planner.



I always did my own planning on smaller jobs but there comes a time when the size / complexity of a project will take up too much time and requires a full time dedicated planner if the job is to be given the attention it should be.



Unfortunately, more today than in the past, I often find that the project manager couldn’t competently carry out the planning role on a project anyway - sad reflection on todays industry I’m afraid.

Ed,



On top of CV and membership, the Planner’s PR is most important.



If the Planner is good and known for his hardwork but he is an introvert, the Planner is still considered as a lack of ability to takeover the job. To overcome this the management will assign him as an assistant to Planning Manager or Project Manager with good PR, no matter what his experience is.



So, in order to be a best Planner PR is very important and play a significant role along with CV and membership.



Regards.

Interresting topic isn’t it?



In my opinion there are to options in this matter. First in addition to a CV you could think of a "personal profile chart", being a four area’s graph showing two axes. First axes being f.i. Detailed = Overall and the second axis being f.i. Leading = Following. In this chart you could give an idea of the profile of this planner in order to fit into the project (-team).



Membership of an organisation will only benefit the individual planner is this organisation profits of "good workmanship" and thus needs to attract good planners and maintains there professional skills. I guess there are only two options 1) an organisation created by the market itself out of providers of planning engineers (so more then one and with customer intrest) and 2) an organisation like ourselfs (profit based) which benefits of good planning knowlegde. According to our planners it works both ways, planners of ARAM are well known for there knowledge and support and therefore ARAM is well known in the market. With new client this gives us advantage over other compagnies who provide, amongst other functions, planning engineers (both in changes and rates).



Both options apply,



Ed

All,



The best way to find out what someone’s like is to interview them face to face and ask the right questions, even get them to do a few simple exercises. The if you need further information actually use the references given and ring up other people that have used him or her.



I have worked with many members of various professional institutes, some very good, some not. It is a pity but I have to conclude that membership of these institutions or other bodies does not guarantee that the person can do the job well. One of the best site managers I ever worked with started life as a hairdresser believe it or not, not an exam qualification to his name. He worked his way up through the ranks though, learnt his trade and was very very good. He’s now MD of a company. Another I know joined a company as a chainboy and is now a director, again, very good at his job but he has no formal qualifications nor membership of any professional bodies - just experience and a sharp mind.

Shahzad,



If so, then why big companies are looking for RICS candidates to do QS jobs? In the sameway in future it may happen to Planners..........



Let us think positively, If you are having membership in certain organisation(recognised Organisation) will have more advantage in addition to your recognised basic degree and experience.



Cheers!!!



Daya

Raj



You are absolutely right that membership/certification and experience are entirely two different things. These two factors should not be made compulsory for the membership of this forum.



If someone have membership/certification through trial, then how much chances there are that he will get good job or selector will select him without any interview ?

Daya,Membership of any organisation does not assure persons ability and personalities . I agree it could be the criteria if you are looking for biginers. Once you fixed one criteria of education (bachelor/master)then I don’t think that it would be good practice to count number of certificates and memberships. An experience guy (with required education) can update himself studying relevant topics and books without having any memebership.And if you are filtering based on number of membership you might miss the chance of selecting best candidate.

Bill



I 100% agree with your comments which is reality



Ed,



Refer



"A CV never gives an impression about the personal skills and his personality"



Then in your opinion what should be the parameters of selection on which Selector based upon his selection apart from candidate’s CV.



I think CV gives true picture of candidate 60~75%. What do u think?

Ed,



Yes, you are right, in this case Planners should have a membership in a recognized organisation(Like PEO, AACEI.......), then most of the problems would be resolved in the beginning/filtering stage and then call for an interview and select the candidates according to their ...........



Cheers!!!



Daya

It’s good to see that this thread has been continued! After my post of 2003 (already that long?) we’ve doubled our team and are appreciated for our qualified planners and consultant. In each first introduction with a new planner I (almost) never talk about software knowlegde. Like already stated level of communication and personal skills (f.e. listening) is mandatory for good planners. Unfortunatly during every client request only a persons CV is basis for selection. But a CV never gives an impression about the personal skills and his personility! So it’s time for a change. What do you think?



Bye,



Ed

Andrew,



Your observation about people carrying out planning who don’t have the requisite experience or skills is spot on. It’s unfortunate that a number of organisations who have used the services of such people in the past, now question the validity and value of planning as a discipline in its own right. They tend to see it as expensive and of limited value.



Any project manager worth his salt will admit that in a project around 80% of management effort will be expended in planning. If he’s really honest, he’ll admit it if he can’t do it thoroughly and engage the services of a specialist who can.



Again, unfortunately, it doesn’t happen too often.



Chris Oggham

Ed,



have to agree with you, I am self employed and often working on several projects at once but for a single client - hence splitting the cost between them. There is a shortage of planners in the UK at the moment and this has led unfortunately to people being employed as planners who can draw pretty pictures with the software and prepare impressive looking reports, but don’t have the experience to interpret and use what the computers telling them.



Hey, but whats new, it’s planners in demand now, give it 12 months and it will probably be Project Managers or some other and the same will thing will happen.

It all depend on the appreciation. The management shall appreciate and assign the planner as an assitant to Project Manager and not to treat him mere as a P3 software operating guy.



As an assistant we will involve in day to day site activities while monitoring the work progress at site. We are able to answer any question raise by management and in a good position to defend the workability of the schedule.



Regards.

Gents,



It should be considered an ideal situation where the engineers and project manager are controling there own (sub-)plans. The added value of pure planners (or consultants) is to improve the level and output of there efforts. But in most cases a full-time planning engineer is regarded to expensive, only valuable on "big" projects. In most cases they forget that a number of small projects are to be considered a "big" project where they often use the same resources (or budgets) whitin a company/department.



Effort from our side has to go to plan on department or company level and structure the way the engineers and managers use planning!



Another option is to work part-time on two (max. three) projects. I know this is not the way most agency like to work, but weve found out that when you make it more attractive (lower the cost) for your client and can offer back-office support they are willing to listen.



About 20% of our staff are working in this way. It is a benefit to both sides but puts a little more pressure/flexibility to the planner and his back-up team.



Were ready for it!



Bye,



Ed van der Tak

ARAM Planning Consultants

The Netherlands

That is the problem the role of the planner is being done by others, such as engineers, site managers, etc, but they are not pure planners and so do not appreciate our function.

How I wish what you said is true about the demand for pure planners outstripping supply?. I do not know about the situation in Hong Kong but in Malaysia, its entirely diferrent. Planning is done by Engineers and Project Managers.