Level: Intermediate
TCM Section(s)
6.4. Forensic Performance Assessment
7.2. Schedule Planning and Development
Venue: 2024 AACE International Conference & Expo
Abstract: Missing logic in project schedules has always been a challenge for analysts when it comes to assessing construction delays using a contemporaneous period or window analysis (Method Implementation Protocol (MIP) 3.3 – Observational / Dynamic / Contemporaneous As-Is and MIP 3.4 – Observational / Dynamic / Contemporaneous Split). The Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE International) Recommended Practice (RP) 29R-03 states that the preference of every analyst should be to use the contemporaneous schedules and updates as they existed during the project when implementing a contemporaneous period analysis. However, RP 29R-03 allows for corrections in schedule anomalies, including incorrect and missing logic, as defined in the validation protocols. Hence, RP 29R-03 allows the analyst the option to implement a contemporaneous period analysis with and without conducting schedule logic corrections. This paper contains a representative case study that depicts the implementation of MIP 3.3 using a native schedule with and without corrections. In addition, this paper addresses industry standards regarding missing logic when developing and maintaining project schedules, an overview of AACE International RP 29R-03 regarding schedule corrections, and the implementation of the alternatives for addressing missing logic when performing a contemporaneous period analysis.
TCM Section(s)
6.4. Forensic Performance Assessment
7.2. Schedule Planning and Development
Venue: 2024 AACE International Conference & Expo
Abstract: Missing logic in project schedules has always been a challenge for analysts when it comes to assessing construction delays using a contemporaneous period or window analysis (Method Implementation Protocol (MIP) 3.3 – Observational / Dynamic / Contemporaneous As-Is and MIP 3.4 – Observational / Dynamic / Contemporaneous Split). The Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE International) Recommended Practice (RP) 29R-03 states that the preference of every analyst should be to use the contemporaneous schedules and updates as they existed during the project when implementing a contemporaneous period analysis. However, RP 29R-03 allows for corrections in schedule anomalies, including incorrect and missing logic, as defined in the validation protocols. Hence, RP 29R-03 allows the analyst the option to implement a contemporaneous period analysis with and without conducting schedule logic corrections. This paper contains a representative case study that depicts the implementation of MIP 3.3 using a native schedule with and without corrections. In addition, this paper addresses industry standards regarding missing logic when developing and maintaining project schedules, an overview of AACE International RP 29R-03 regarding schedule corrections, and the implementation of the alternatives for addressing missing logic when performing a contemporaneous period analysis.