The said case Mirant vs Arup open a new dimension on the way we take a serious look in establishing standard in project planning activities.
A new term called "Window Anaylsis" against Watersheed Analysis
windows analysis, where a series of snapshots of progress and potential causes of delay on the project at periodic points in the programme is analysed. Windows analysis is usually undertaken on a monthly basis.
watershed analysis, where the snapshots are taken at critical milestones instead of regular periodic points.
This is really great. I thank Clive, I think he was the one who give hints about this topic Mirant vs Arup.
Please take note that window analysis is superior compared to watersheeds anaylsis
I think window analysis is similar to monthy progress update but this is more on Analysing DELAYs to Critical Path.
At least as a start the Great Delay Analysis Debate conducted by the SCL (see http://www.scl.org.uk/papers/papersummaries.php?PID=130&RID=439) discussed the 4 methodologies in some detail. However, the lack of clarity about process surrounding the use of these methods is still there.
It doesnt really help when judgements and pleadings refer to a delay analysis being carried out using (for example) "windows analysis" rather than "xxxx analysis in windows"
Hey ho, onwards and upwards
Member for
20 years 10 months
Member for20 years10 months
Submitted by Andrew Flowerdew on Fri, 2007-08-10 08:14
Have said it many times on here - it would be nice to have a universally accepted definition of all the methods and guidance/standards as how each is to be performed.
You may be right. For clarification, by retrospective I was meaning methods that could be employed after project completion rather than on a live project.
I have seen a number of reports and had conversations with a number of self confessed delay analysts who have spoken of performing a "windows analysis" to ascertain cause and effect. When probed a little deeper, what it actually transpires they have done is an AP-v-AB analysis in windows.
Also, the Judges ruling on Mirant will no doubt see a lot more claims of windows analysis as a methodology.
Perhaps this sort of complication is why some people see delay analysis as a "black art"!
I believe that the four methods youve mentioned can be further classified to "forward looking" methods i.e. Prospective methods: As Planned Impacted and Time Impact Analysis and "backward looking" methods or retrospective: As Planned -v- As Built and As Built but For.
However, Im afraid some people get confused and call the Prospective methods Retrospective.
is this only me or do we have an inconsistent terminology issue here?
Member for
20 years 3 monthsRE: Methods of Analysis
Hello to All,
The said case Mirant vs Arup open a new dimension on the way we take a serious look in establishing standard in project planning activities.
A new term called "Window Anaylsis" against Watersheed Analysis
windows analysis, where a series of snapshots of progress and potential causes of delay on the project at periodic points in the programme is analysed. Windows analysis is usually undertaken on a monthly basis.
watershed analysis, where the snapshots are taken at critical milestones instead of regular periodic points.
This is really great. I thank Clive, I think he was the one who give hints about this topic Mirant vs Arup.
Please take note that window analysis is superior compared to watersheeds anaylsis
I think window analysis is similar to monthy progress update but this is more on Analysing DELAYs to Critical Path.
Cheers,
Member for
18 years 3 monthsRE: Methods of Analysis
Andrew
I think you may be right!
At least as a start the Great Delay Analysis Debate conducted by the SCL (see http://www.scl.org.uk/papers/papersummaries.php?PID=130&RID=439) discussed the 4 methodologies in some detail. However, the lack of clarity about process surrounding the use of these methods is still there.
It doesnt really help when judgements and pleadings refer to a delay analysis being carried out using (for example) "windows analysis" rather than "xxxx analysis in windows"
Hey ho, onwards and upwards
Member for
20 years 10 monthsRE: Methods of Analysis
Toby,
Have said it many times on here - it would be nice to have a universally accepted definition of all the methods and guidance/standards as how each is to be performed.
Unlikely to happen though.
Member for
18 years 3 monthsRE: Methods of Analysis
Uri
You may be right. For clarification, by retrospective I was meaning methods that could be employed after project completion rather than on a live project.
I have seen a number of reports and had conversations with a number of self confessed delay analysts who have spoken of performing a "windows analysis" to ascertain cause and effect. When probed a little deeper, what it actually transpires they have done is an AP-v-AB analysis in windows.
Also, the Judges ruling on Mirant will no doubt see a lot more claims of windows analysis as a methodology.
Perhaps this sort of complication is why some people see delay analysis as a "black art"!
Regards
Toby
Member for
22 years 5 monthsRE: Methods of Analysis
Toby,
I believe that the four methods youve mentioned can be further classified to "forward looking" methods i.e. Prospective methods: As Planned Impacted and Time Impact Analysis and "backward looking" methods or retrospective: As Planned -v- As Built and As Built but For.
However, Im afraid some people get confused and call the Prospective methods Retrospective.
is this only me or do we have an inconsistent terminology issue here?